Publication 9355.6-06
September 1993
ROD ANNUAL REPORT
FY1992
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
"£&• Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
NOTICE
The policies and procedures set forth here are intended as guidance to the Agency and
other governmental employees. They do not constitute rulemaking by the Agency, and
may not be relied on to create a substantive or procedural right enforceable by any other
take action that is at variance with the policies and
Additional copies of this document can be obtained from:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 487-4600
Document Number PB93-963349
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTIC
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
vm
)N
Introduction and Exhibits .,
Record of Decision Abstracts
Record of Decision Summary Table FY 1992
Record of Decision Keyword List FY 1992
RODs Signed to Date FY 1982 - FY 1992
ROD Amendments and Explanations of Significant Differences (ESDs)
Description of Treatment Technologies and
Other Actions for Source and Ground Water Control
Suoerfund Acronyms
PAGE
1
. 57
323
421
469
495
. . . 499
505
111
EPA Headquarters Library
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND EXHIBITS
Superfund was created by Congress with the passage of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). On October 17. 1986. the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA) was enacted. SARA reflected EPA’s experience in administenng the
complex Superfund program during its first six years and made several important changes and additions to the
program. SARA stressed the importance of permanent remedies and innovative treatment technologies in
cleaning up hazardous waste sites, required Superfund actions to consider the standards and requirements found
in other Federal and State environmental laws and regulations; provided new enforcement authorities and
settlement tools; increased State involvement in every phase of the Superfund program; increased the focus on
human health problems posed by hazardous waste sites; and encouraged greater citizen participation in making
decisions on how sites should be cleaned up.
The Superfund remedial program has modified its approach to site cleanups to reflect the mandates in CERCLA,
as amended by SARA For example, Section 121 of CERCLA mandates the selection of a remedial action that
is protective of human health and the environment, complies with applicable or relevant and appropriate Federal
and State requirements (ARARs), is cost-effective, and utilizes permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent practicable In addition, CERCLA
includes a preference for remedies that employ treatment that permanently and significantly reduces the volume,
toxicity, or mobility of hazardous wastes as a principal element.
The Records of Decision (RODs) highlighted in this annual report document compliance with SARA mandates
for the remedial program in FY 1992. Each ROD discusses the remedy decision for a site or operable unit,
certifies that the remedy selection process has followed the requirements of CERCLA and the National
Contingency Plan (NCP), discusses the major technical components of the remedy, and provides the public with
a consolidated source of information about the site. Once the Regional Administrator or the Assistant
Administrator of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response signs the ROD, it is made available for
informauon purposes and placed in the administrative record for the site. One thousand one hundred and
seventeen (1,117) RODs have been signed since the Superfund program began (see Exhibit 7)
FY 1992 RODs
One hundred sixty-four (164) RODs and eight (8) ROD Amendments, including Fund-, Enforcement-, and
Federal Facility-lead RODs were signed during FY 1992, The lead breakdown for the RODs is as follows 53
Fund-lead plus 65 Enforcement-lead, equals 118, 118 plus 46 Federal Facility-lead equals 164 RODs The eight
ROD Amendments consist of 3 Fund-lead and 5 Enforcement-lead RODs. The data in this annual report are
based on these 172 RODs and ROD Amendments, for clarity, these are collectively referred to as RODs
throughout the remainder of the report
119 of the 172 RODs addressed source control remediation, and 28 RODs addressed ground-water-only
remediation. The remaining 25 RODs were no action/no further action remedies Of the total 119 source
control RODs, 85 addressed a final source control remedy, and 34 addressed an interim source control remedy
76 of the 119 source control RODs selected both source control and ground water remediation components
In keeping with CERCLA Section 121 and the NCP program expectations to treat highly toxic, highly mobile
wastes and contain low level wastes or large volumes of waste, ‘treatment technologies’ were used for 78 (66%)
of the 119 source control remedies (see Exhibit 3A) ‘Treatment technologies’ are those selected source control
technologies listed at the top of Exhibit 2, as opposed to other types of treatment In a further breakdown,
source control treatment technologies plus the other types of treatment, were selected for 60 (7 1%) of the 85
‘final’ source control RODs (see Exhibit 3B) A historical overview of the increase in treatment selected for
source control and ‘final’ source control RODs since 1982, is shown in Exhibits 3A through 3C Exhibits 3A
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND EXHIBITS (Continued)
and 3C show the percentages of Superfund source control remedies which have chosen all types of treatment.
while Exhibit 3B shows the percentages of ‘final’ source control remedies since 1987 that have used treatment
technologies. It was not until after SARA, in 1986. that more data on the ‘final’ source control remedies became
available for comparison.
Exhibits
Exhibits 1-13 summarize various data from the 172 FY 1992 RODs, and similar data comparisons for all RODs
signed since FY 1982. To assist in understanding the data presented in Exhibits I through 6, a description of
each source control and ground water treatment technology is provided in Section VII.
Exhibit I provides an overview of the types of remedial action selected for all FY 1992 RODs. Exhibit 1A
provides the same overview for all RODs FY 1987 - FY 1992.
Exhibit 2 provides a quantitative summary of remedial action components by the number of occurrences in
RODs. Occurrences means the count of one or more technologies, which may be associated with a remedial
action described in the ROD. For example, a ground water remedy may consist of air stripping, aeration, and
carbon adsorption. as part of a treatment train, which would consist of three occurrences This exhibit
demonstrates that occurrences of the use of treatment technologies (107) for the 119 source control remedies
exceeded that of containment only remedy occurrences (30) by a factor of 3.6. Of the 107 occurrences of source
control treatment technologies, Immobilization (37) and In-situ Vacuum/Vapor Extraction (20) were selected
most frequently, followed by both Bioremedialion and other unspecified treatment technologies (13).
Exhibit 3 compares the selection of source control remedies with treatment only; treatment as a primary
component with containment in separate areas, and containment as the pnmary component. Exhibit 3A shows
the percent and total number of all source control RODs that used some type of treatment, as a percent of all the
source control RODs for each year. For example, there were 119 source control RODs in FY 1992, and of those
119 RODs, 86 (72%) selected remedies with treatment only, or treatment as a primary component with
containment in separate areas. The remainder (32) of the source control RODs in FY 1992 used containment or
other actions for the source control remedy Exhibit 3B shows the percent and total number of ‘final’ source
control RODs signed from FY 1987 through FY 1992, which employed some type of treatment Exhibit 3B
shows that in FY 1992, 60 (7 1%) of the ‘final’ source control RODs (85) used treatment remedies. The
remainder (25) of the ‘final’ source control RODs in FY 1992 used other types of remedies. Exhibit 3C shows
out of all the RODs each year, what percent of remedies have used treatment technologies for source control,
versus the percent utilizing containment only and other actions. Exhibits 3 through 3C indicate that the
percentage of treatment technologies used for Superfund remedy selection has remained near constant for the
past five years between FY 1988 and FY 1992.
Exhibit 4 illustrates the occurrences of treatment technologies in FY 1992 source control remedies by type of
treatment technology. Immobilization was the main treatment technology category, followed by
Separation/Recovery technologies Exhibit 4A shows the same data for all occurrences of technologies since FY
1982
Exhibit 5 shows the types and occurrences (112) of remedies employed in FY 1992 ground water treatment
RODs. Of the 112 FY 1992 RODs addressing ground water, 76 also contained a source control component
Exhibit 5A depicts the types and occurrences of treatment technologies employed in FY 1992 ground water
RODs, and Exhibit 5B compares the number and percentage of RODs that addressed a ground water remedy
against the total number of RODs since 1982. The majority of ground water treatment occurrences were
chemical/physical treatment technologies (78%) The most frequent remedy occurrences (see also Exhibit 2)
were for air stripping (35), carbon adsorption (24), and precipitation (21). Biological treatment was employed in
2
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND EXHIBITS (Continued)
5% (10 occurrences) of the treaunents, and the remaining 17% (30 occurrences) of ground water remedies used
other technologies to restore ground water to its beneficial uses within a reasonable timeframe.
An index of site remedies for all the FY 1992 RODS is provided in Exhibit 6. This Exhibit presents RODs
grouped by the specific type of source control and/or non-source control remedy selected RODs which selected
two or more types of remedy technologies or measures, are listed in each respective remedy group. No
Action/No Further Action RODs are listed on the last page of this exhibit.
Historical Overview FY 1982 - FY 1992
The passage of SARA strengthened and extended the Superfund program while maintaimng the overall
framework for implementation. These new requirements under CERCLA, as amended by SARA, were intended
to ensure protective clean-up standards, permanent remedies, and the use of alternative technologies where
applicable A historical overview of FY 1982 - FY 1992 RODs is provided in Exhibits 7 through 10 to show
annual progress in achieving these statutory mandates
Exhibit 7 depicts the number of RODs signed per fiscal year, both overall and by region Exhibit 8 is a
quantitative overview of the occurrences and type of treatment technologies that have been selected in source
control treatment technology RODs (FY 1982 - FY 1992).
Comparative data on the number of RODS and number of occurrences of treatment technologies and ‘innovative’
technologies selected for source control RODs (FY 1987 - FY 1992) are presented in Exhibit 9 These data
demonstrate that there has been: (I) an increase since 1987 in the percentage of RODs selecting treatment as a
principal remedy for source control, and (2) an increase since 1987 in the percentage of innovative treatment
technologies selected. The use of innovative treatment technologies declined somewhat dunng FY1992.
Exhibit 10 provides a list of all source control RODs FY 1982 through FY 1992 by treatment type, and by fiscal
year of ROD signature
Exhibits 11 and 12 illustrate and list the information for FY 1992 treatment train RODs, i.e, RODs that employ
a sequence of treatment technologies to address a single medium or constituent. Exhibit 13 provides a
comparison of FY 1982 - FY 1992 ROD data on estimated remedial action costs.
FY 1992 ROD Annual Report
The FY 1992 ROD Annual Report is designed to provide the Regions, Headquarters, and the public with
summary information on the FY 1992 RODs and historical information on all of the FY 1982 - FY 1992 RODs
in addition to the above mentioned exhibits, this volume contains the FY 1992 ROD abstracts, summary table,
keyword list, a List of all RODs signed since FY 1982, and a list of ROD Amendments and Explanations of
Significant Differences (ESDs). Separate sections of the volume provide useful background information to assist
the reader in technical understanding of selected remedial options (Section VII) and interpretation of commonly
used Superfund acronyms (Section VIII). Please note that the combined summary tables for FY 1982 - FY 1990
and FY 1991 have no longer been included in the report. but are in the publication ROD Annual Report FY
1991 and the reports for each previous year.
3
-------
EXHIBIT 1
FY 1992: RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) OVERVIEW
This exhibit presents an overview of all remedial actions selected for 172 RODs signed in
FY 1992, including 46 Federal Facility RODs and 8 ROD Amendments.
Otherd (7)
REMEDY
NUMBER
PERCENT
Source Control
Ground Water Only
NoAction
119
28
25
69
16
15
TOTAL
172
100%
SOURCE
CONTROL
(119)
Treatment as a principal
component and containment
of separate areas (36)
8 Includes treatment trains for source actions.
b Many treatments yield a residual that may require further management.
C Includes containment, institutional controls, restoration, and alternate water supply remedies.
d Includes institutional controls, monitoring, or relocation remedies.
NO I
ACTION I
( 25L1
GROUND
WATER
REMEDY ONLYC
(28)
Treatment with or
without onsite or off site
containment of
treatment residuals a,b
(50)
Containment as
a primary component
(26)
4
-------
EXHIBIT IA
FY 1987 - FY 1992: RECORDS OF DECISION OVERVIEW
This exhibit presents an overview of all remedial actions selected for RODs signed from
FY 1987 through FY 1992 (post-SARA), based on a total of 903 RODs’, including 34
ROD amendments.
r
Containment as
a primary component
(168)
GROUND
WATER
REMEDY ONL
REMEDY
NUMBER
PERCENT
Source Control
Ground Water Only
No Action
635
192
76
70
21
9
TOTAL
903
100%
a Total number of RODs does not include data from 2 confidential sites.
b Includes treatment trains for source actions.
C Many treatments yield a residual that may require further management.
d Includes containment institutional controls, restoration, and alternate water supply remedies.
e Includes institutional controls, monitoring, or relocation remedies.
NO
ACTION
(76)
Othere
(15)
Treatment with and without
onsite or offslte containment
of residuals; or treatment as a
principal component with
containment of separate
5
-------
EXHIBiT 2
FY 1992: ROD REMEDIAL ACTION SUMMARY TABLE 8
This exhibit presents a summary of the occurrences of remedial actions for 94 fInal and
49 interim action RODs, 4 RODs with both final and interim components and 25 RODs
that selected no action/no further action. More than one occurrence per remedial action
may be associated with the primary and contingent remedies selected in a ROD.
TYPE OF REMEDY
OCCURRENCES
SOURCE CONTROL REMEDIATION
Treatment Tectinologyb (Total) 107
Immobilization 37
In-situ VacuumNapor Extraction 20
Incineratiorjthermat Destruction 10
To Be Determined/Unspecified Treatment Technologies 13
Thermal Desorption
BioremediationC 13
Dech lonnation 0
Soil Flushing 4
Soil Washing
Volatilization/Aeration 0
In-situ Vitrification 0
Solvent Extraction 1
Chemical Treatment 1
Other Treatment (Total) 59
Decontamination 18
Surface Water Treatment 20
Recovery/Recycling 9
NAPLS Treatment 8
Gas Flaring
Containment Only ffot l)d
Onsite 21
Otfsite 8
Other Actions (e.g., Institutional Controls)
CONTAMINATED GROUND WATER REMEDIATION
Active Restoration (Total) 179
PhysicaVChemtcal 139
To Be Determined/Unspecified Treatment 18
porw 12
Biological C 10
Alternate Water Supply
Leachate Treatment 10
Natural AttenuatIon 12
Other Actions (Institutional Controls) 5
Containment (includes management of migration) 8
NO ACTION 25
Based on 172 FY 1992 RODs, including 42 federal facility RODs and 8 ROD Amendments
b Data reflect occurrences of technologies as selected in the RODS that addressed source control.
C includes in-situ and ex-situ processes
d Includes three sites with both onsite and otfsite containment.
6
-------
EXHIBIT 3
FY 1992: SOURCE CONTROL REMEDIES
This exhibit presents an overview of 119 FY 1992 RODS that addressed source
contamination as all or part of the remedial action. The exhibit compares the selection of
remedies with treatment only, treatment as a principal component with containment in
separate areas, and containment as the primary component for source control RODs.
Treatment and/or containment may be onsite or offsite.
Other Actions
(7 RODs)
Treatment with or
without containment
of treatment
residuals
(50 RODs)
NUMBER OF
SOURCE CONTROL REMEDY RODs
PERCENT
Treatment with or without containment of treatment residuals
Treatment as a principal component and containment of separate areas
Containment as a primary component
Other actions (i.e., Institutional Controls, etc.)
50
36
26
7
42
30
22
6
TOTAL
119
100%
Containment as a
primary component
(26 RODs)
Treatment as a principal
component and containment of
separate areas
(36 RODs)
7
-------
EXHIBIT 3A
FY 1982 - FY 1992: SOURCE CONTROL RODs USING
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
This exhibit displays the percentage and total number of final and interim source control
RODs selecting treatment technologies. Source contamination has been addressed by
treatment technologies in 478 RODs, from a total of 780 source control RODs. This
represents 43% of 1,117 RODs signed.
150 141
Final and Interim Source Control RODs 7
125 ‘77 7j 119
99777//J
ioo
75.
6O // /
1 50 .
_ I”
2: _
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Fiscal Year
Percentage and Total Number of RODs With A Treatment Technosogy
150 V7/21 Final and Interim Source Control RODs 141
Source Control RODs with a Treatment Technology 125
125 7 119
oioo
75, / ØØ
____ I I.
( 33k) ( 45%) ( 51% ( 70%) ( 72% ( 51% ) (70%) ( 66% )
U -r -r -r -, 7 -r
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1q87 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Fiscal Year
8
-------
EXHIBIT 3B
FY 1987 - FY 1992: FINAL SOURCE CONTROL RODs SELECTING
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
This exhibit displays the percentage and total number of RODs selecting treatment
technologies for final only source control RODs signed from FY 1987 through FY 1992
(post-SARA).
120 Final Source Control RODs 114
106
100 95 95
80 /
60
.0
E
20
0 — — ______________ _____________ _____________ —
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Fiscal Year
Percentage and Total Number of Final Source Control RODs Selecting A
Treatment Technology
F//A Final Source Control RODs
‘ZZ 5J Final Source Control RODs Selecting A Treatment Technology
120 114
106
100 95 95
(n
O 80
6 60
__I_I__Id _I__I
40 7
z
2O _ _ _ _ _
27 66
(61%) _______ ( 72%) : (73%) _______ ( 72% ’ ______ ‘ (68%) ( 71% )
0 -= S4.4 ______ ____ ______ ___ ______ . -. ______ ____
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Fiscal Year
9
-------
EXHIBIT3C
FY 1982- FY 1992: SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT VERSUS OTHER
SELECTED REMEDIES IN ALL RODs
This exhibit compares, on a percentage basis, the use of treatment technologies with the
use of containment only, or other non-source control remedies in all RODs.
Total Number of RODS
Fiscal Year
a,
C)
a)
C.)
a)
0
100
80
60
40
20
0
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Treatment Technologies
F Z’ 4 Containment Only
Other Remedies (Includes other non-source control remedies and other actions.
including management of migration, institutional controls and monitoñng)
I I Containment Only tm and Other Remedies combined. No specific data was
available on whether containment plus any other other remedy was included.
10
-------
EXHIBIT 4
FY 1992: TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN SOURCE CONTROL
REMEDIES
This exhibit displays the types and occurrences of treatment technologies selected in 119
FY 1992 final and interim source control RODs. The summary information for a total of
107 technology occurrences is presented by technology category. Total occurrences of
each technology are in (). More than one technology (occurrence) may be associated
with a remedy.
Unspecified
Incineration!
Thermal
Destruction
(10)
Bioremediation
(13)
p
(1) —
Sod flushing , pl
(4)
Soil Washing
(4) Thermal
Desorption
(4)
VacuunWapor
Extraction
(20)
Solidification!
Stabilization
(11)
Solidification
(10)
SOURCE CONTROL REMEDY
NUMBER OF
OCCURRENCES
PERCENT
Immobilization
Separation/Recovery
Destruction/Detoxification
Unspecified Treatment Technologies
37
33
24
13
35
31
22
12
TOTAL
107
100%
Chemical
Treatment
(1)
Treatment Stabilization
Technologies (16)
(13) P
Solvent
Extraction
-------
EXHIBIT 4A
FY 1982- FY 1992: TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN
SOURCE CONTROL REMEDIES
This exhibit displays the types and occurrences of treatment technologies selected in
RODs from FY 1982 thçough FY 1992. The summary information for a total of 621
technology occurrences is presented by technology categories. Total occurrences of
each technology are in 0. More than one technology (occurrence) may be associated
with a remedy.
In-situ Vitrification
Solid lfication/
StabiIization/- ..
Immobilization
(154)
Solvent
Extraction
(8)
Volatilization/
Aeration (21)
Soil
Flushing/Washing
(45)
Bioremediat lon
(48)
DechlorInation (5)
Chemical
Treatment
(1)
Vacuum/Vapor
Extraction
(102)
SOURCE CONTROL REMEDY
NUMBER OF
OCCURRENCES
PERCENT
Destruction/Detoxification
Separanon/Recovery
Immobilization
Other/Unspecified Treatment Tectinologies
207
196
154
64
33
32
25
10
TOTAL
621
100%
OtherlUnspecifled
Treatment
Technologies
(59)
Incineration!
? Thermal
P Destruction
(153)
,1
Thermal
Desorption
(20)
12
-------
EXHIBIT 5
FY 1992: GROUND WATER REMEDIES
This exhibit displays the types of remedies selected in FY 1992 ground water treatment
RODs. Of the 112 ground water remedy RODs, 76 also contained a source control
component.
Alternate water supply and
Plume containment only
using physical barriers
(no pump and treat)
(3)
Natural attenuation!
natural restoration only
(11)
No Action
(16)
extension of existing supply
system only
Pump and treat
remedies
- (75)
GROUND WATER REMEDY
NUMBEROF
PERCENT
Pump andTreat
No Action
Natural Attenuation/Restoration Only
Plume Containment Only
Alternate Water Supply Only
Other Ground Water Remedies Only a
75
16
11
3
2
5
67
4
10
3
2
4
TOTAL
112
100%
a her ground water remedy category includes ground water use restrictions, closing wells, ground water
monftoring, and 3 FY 92 ROD Amendments with no changes in selected technology.
(2)
Other ground water
remedies only’
(5)
13
-------
EXHIBIT 5A
FY 1992: TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN GROUND
WATER REMEDIES
This exhibit displays the types and occurrences of treatment technologies employed in 76
ground water remedy RODs. The number of RODs includes only those that specified
one or more technology in the remedy. More than one technology may be associated
with a remedy.
In-situ Bioremedjation
(5)
Ex-sftu ..
Bioremediat ion
(5)
Ion Exchange(6) - .
Neutralization ____
(pH Adjustment) (5)
Aeration (3) —
Sedimentatiori/ .
Clarification (5)
UV/Oxidation (7)
Coagulation/Flocculation (5)
Granular Activated
Carbon (9)
P01W
(12)
I
In-situ
Chemical
. (2)
Chemical
(4)
Carbon
Adsorption
(24)
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
NUMBER OF
OCCURRENCES
PERCENT
Chemical/Physical
Bidogical
Other/Unspecified Treatment
139
.10
30
78
5
17
TOTAL
179
100%
Other/Unspecified
Treatment
Technologies
(18)
Air
/ Stripping
fr’ (35)
Filtration (13)
Precipitation (21)
14
-------
EXHIBIT 5B
FY 1982 - FY 1992: GROUND WATER RODs VERSUS
TOTAL NUMBER OF RODs
This exhibit compares the number of RODs that selected a ground water remedy against
1,117 RODs signed.
Number of RODs
Fiscal Year
Percentage and Total Number of RODs With A Ground Water Component
VZA Source Control Only
Ground water and source control, and ground water only
remedies
84
69
38
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
(I)
0
0
0)
.
E
z
1172 I Total Number of RODs
200 -
V/A Source Control Only
Ground Water And Source Control
Ground Water Only
84
69
100.
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
200
U)
0
0
0
0)
E
z
150
100
50
Fiscal Year
15
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES
This exhibe presents an Index of site remedies grouped by treatment and containment,
and source control and non-source control categories. One site may be listed under
several categones, because the remedies contain one or more technologies, non-
technological treatments, or combinations of remedial components. The total number of
sites at which the remedies were selected are in o.
TECHNOLOGIES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
So lidificationlStabiliza l ion/ 1 PSC Resources, MA
Immobilization (37) 2 Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
2 Facet Enterprises, NY
2 Preferred Plating, NY
3 AbexVA
3 C & D Recycling, PA
3 Fike Chemical, wv a
3 Paoli Rail Yard, PA
3 Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA
3 Tonolli, PA a
4 Agnco Chemical, FL
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL a
4 Florida Steel, FL
4 JFD Electronics/Channel Masters, NC a,b
4 Marine Corps Logistics Base, GA
4 Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC
4 Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL b
5 Electrovoice, Ml a
5 H Brown Company, Ml b
5 Peerless Plating, Ml a
5 Savanna Army Depot, IL a
5 Spickler Landfill, WI
5 TarLake,Ml
6 Cal West Metals, NM
6 Double Eagle Refinery, OK a
6 Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK
6 Guit Coast Vacuum Seivices (Operable Unit 1), LA
6 Oklahoma Refining, OK a
8 Broderick Wood Products, CO a
8 Denver Radium (Operable Un 8), CO
8 Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT
8 Rocky Flats (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO
8 Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT
9 Rhone•PoulenclZoecon, CA
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID a,b
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID a
10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable
Unit 22), ID
a ROD selected two or more source control treatment technoIog es.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected onsite and oflsite containment remedies.
d In-situ ground water treatment sites.
16
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
VacuurnNapor 1 Tibbetts Road, NH
Extraction (20) 2 Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY a,b
3 Raymark, PA
3 U.S. Detense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5),
VA
4 Carner Air Conditioning, TN
5 American Chemical Services, IN a
S City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI
5 Clare Water Supply, Ml
5 Electrovoice, Ml a
5 Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI a
5 Peerless Plating, Ml a
6 Prewdl Abandoned Refinery, NM a
7 29th & Meaci Groundwater Contamination, KS b
8 Rocky Flats (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO b
9 Hassayampa Landfill, AZ
9 Lawrence Livermore National Lab, CA b
9 Pacific Coast Pipelines, CA
9 Punty Oil Sales, CA
9 Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA
10 Eielson Air Force Base, AK a
Incineration/Thermal 2 Ellis Property, NJ b
Destruction (10) 3 Fike Chemical, WV a
4 Alabama Army Ammunition Plant (Operable Unit 1), AL
5 American Chemical Services, IN a
5 Savanna Army Depot, IL a
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1), LA
8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT
9 Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID a
10 U S DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable
Unit 23), ID
Unspecitied Treatment 2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division (Operable Unit
Technologies (13) 2), NY
2 Preferred Plating, NY
2 Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY b
3 Eastern Diversified Metals, PA
3 Fike Chemical, WV a
4 Benlield Industries, NC a,b
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL 8
4 Florida Steel, FL
4 Potters Septic Tank Service Pits, NC b
a ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
b ROD sele ed two non-source control measures
C ROD seleded onsite and oflsite conlainmerit remedies.
d In-situ ground water treatment sites.
17
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
Unspecified Treatment 6 Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM a
Technologies (13) 8 Ogden Delense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT
(continued) 8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT
10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit5), ID
Thermal Desorption (4) 2 Industrial Latex, NJ
3 Browns Battery Breaking, PA b
4 Potters Septic Service Pits, NC b
5 American Chemical Services, IN a
Bioremediation (13) 4 Benhield Industries, NC a.b
4 Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL b
5 South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN
6 Oklahoma Refining, OK a
6 Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM a
7 Pester Refinery, KS a
8 Broderick Wood Products, CO a
8 Idaho Pole, MT a
9 Jasco Chemical, CA a,b
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID a.b
10 Eielson Air Force Base, AK a
10 McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA
10 Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR
Soil Flushing (4) 1 Tibbetts Road, NH a
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ b
7 Pester Refinery, KS a
8 Idaho Pole, MT a
Soil Washing (4) 4 Benfield lridustnes, NC a.b
4 Whilehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL b
9 Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA
10 Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Sub Base), WA a
Solvent Extraction (1) 10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit 5), ID
Chemscal Treatment (1) 4 JFD Electronics/Channel Masters. NC a,b
a ROD selected two or mare source control treatment technologies.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected onshe and oflsne containment remedies.
d In-situ ground water treatment sites.
18
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGiES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
OTHER TREATMENT
(Includes De ntamination, 1 PSC Resources, MA
Gas Aanng, NAPLS 2 Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
Treatment, Recycling, and 2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division (Operable Unit
Surface Water 2), NY
Treatment) (48) 2 Imperial OilfChampion Chemicals, NJ b
2 Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Un 7), NJ b
3 Abex,VA
3 C & D Recycling, PA
3 Eastern Diversified Metals, PA
3 Fike Chemical, WV a
3 MW Manufacturing, PA b
3 Paoli Rail Yard, PA
3 Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA
3 Tonolli, p a
3 Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA b
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL a
4 Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 1), SC
4 Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2), SC
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN
4 Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL b
5 American Chemical Services, IN a
5 City Disposal Sanitary LandfilL WI
5 H. Brown Company, Ml b
5 Muskego Sanitary Landfill, Wj a
5 Savanna Army Depot, IL a
5 TarLake,Ml
5 Tn County Landfill, IL
6 Cal West, NM
6 Double Eagle Refinery, OK a
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA
6 Oklahoma Refining, OK a
6 Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM a
7 Pester Refinery, KS a
8 Broderick Wood Products, CO a
8 Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO
8 Rocky Flats (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO b
8 Rocky Flats (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO
8 Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT
9 Iron Mountain Mine. CA
9 Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallui ical Complex, ID a,b
8 ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected onsite and offsite containment remedies
d In-situ ground water treatment sites
19
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
OThER TREATMENT 10 Eietson Air Force Base, a
(Includes Decontamination, 10 Elmendort Air Force Base, AK b
Gas Flaring, NAPLs 10 Joseph Forest Products, OR
Treatment, Recycling, and 10 McChord AFB (Wasl’ RacklTreatmenl), WA
Surface Water 10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID a
Treatment) (48) 10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
(continued) Unit 2), ID
10 U.s DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable
Unit 22), ID
CONTAINMENT ONLY
Off site (8) 2 Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ b
4 Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC b
4 Standard Auto Bumper, FL
5 Butterworth #2 Landfill, Ml C
5 Central Illinois Public Service, IL b
5 Torch Lake (Operable Units 1 and 2), Ml C
8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1). UT
10 Wycoff/Eagle Harbor, WA
Onsite (21) 1 Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME b
2 Endicott Village Well Field, NY
2 lslip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY b
2 Plaltsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY
2 Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY
2 Ramapo Landfill, NY
3 Lirdane Dump, PA
3 Strasburg Landfill, PA
3 USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville. MD
4 Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
5 Botors Nobel (Amendment), Ml
5 Butlerworth#2 Landfill, Ml C
5 Canneflon Industries, Ml
5 Kohler Landfill, WI
5 La Grande Sanitary Landlill, MN
5 Torch Lake (Operable Units 1 and 2), Ml C
6 Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX
6 Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK
8 Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO
8 Hill Air Force Base, UT
10 Wycoff/Eagte Harbor, WA
a ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures
C ROD selected onsite and ofisite containment remedies.
d ln’situ ground water treatment sites.
20
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES
REGION
SITE NAME. STATE
OThER ACTIONS
(Includes Institutional
Controls, Monitoring,
Relocation, and ROD
Amendments with No
Changes to Remedial
Technologies) (7)
NON-SOURCE CONTROL
3
4
5
5
5
5
6
Pump and Treat and/or
In-situ Treatment in Addition
to a Source Control
Remedy (52)
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
S
5
5
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME b
Tibbetts Road, NH b
Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
Ellis Property, NJ b
Endicott Village Well Field, NY
Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ b
Facet Enterpnses, NY
General Motors/Central Foundry Division (Operable Unit
2). NY
Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY b
Naval Air Engineering Cenler (Operable Unit 7), NJ b
Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY a,b
Ramapo Landfill, NY
Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY b
Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA b,d
Lindane Dump, PA
Paoli Rail Yard, PA
Strasburg Landfill (Operable Unit 3). PA
Tonolli, PA a,d
Bent ield Industnes, NC a.b ,d
Carner Air Conditioning, TN
Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC b
JFD Electronics/Channel Masters, NC a,b
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
New Hanover County Airport Bum Pit, NC b
Potters Septic Tank Service Pits, NC b
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL b
American Chemical Services, SN a
Botors Nobel (Amendment), MI
Central Illinois Public Service, IL b
City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI
a ROD selected two or more source control treatment technolo 9 ies.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected onsrte and otfsute containment remedies
d In-situ ground water treatment sites.
U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1),
VA
New Hanover County Airport Bum Pit, NC b
Aisco Anaconda, OH
MIDCO I (Amendment). IN
MIDCO II (Amendment), IN
Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN
Koppers (Texarkana Plant) (Amendmenl), TX
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
21
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Contlnued)
TECHNOLOGIES
REGION
SITE NAME STATE
Pump and Treat and/or
In-situ Treatment in Addition
to a Source Control
Remedy (52)
(continued)
Pump and Treat and/or
In-situ Treatment Only (23)
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
Clare Water Supply, Ml
Electrovoice, MI a
H. Brown Company, Mt b
Peerless Plating, MI 8
Oklahoma Refining, OK a,d
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM a
29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS b
Broderick Wood Products, CO a.d
Idaho Pole, MT a,d
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2), Co b
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT
Hassayampa Landfill, AZ
Jasco Chemical, CA a.b
Lawrence Livermore National Lab, CA a,b
Pacific Coast Pipelines, CA
Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Sub Base), WA a
Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID a,b.d
Eielson Air Force Base, AK a
Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK b
McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME b
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI b
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards (Operable Unit
2), MA
Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ
Higgins Farm, NJ
Impenal Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ b
Robinlech/National Pipe. NY
Butz Landfill, PA
Chem-SoIv, DE
Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA b
Dublin Water Supply (Operable Unit 1), PA b
MW Manufacturing, PA b
Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA b
Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN
National Electric CoiVCooper Industries, KY
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC
USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC b
Haqen Farm, WId
New BrightorvArden Hills, MN b
Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN b
Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN b
8 ROD selected two or more source cenirol treatment technologies.
b ROD selected two non-sour ntrol measures.
C ROD selected ensue and oflsite containment remedies.
d ln-trtu ground water treatment sites
5
5
5
5
6
6
7
8
8
8
8
B
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
1
1
1
22
-------
EXHiBiT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES REGION SITE NAME. STATE
Pun ’ arid Treat an&or 10 N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field. WA b
In-situ Treatment Only (23) 10 U S DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
(continued) Unit 2), ID b
OThER GROUND WATER
REMEDIES
Alternate Water Supply (7) 3 CherwSolv, DE
3 Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA b
3 Dublin Water Supply (Operable Unit 1), PA b
3 MW Manufacturing. PA b
5 Central Illinois Public Service, IL b
5 Skinner Landf I, 0 1 - I
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID a,b
Leachate Treatment (10) 2 Endicott Village Well Field, NY
2 Ramapo Landfill, NY
3 Lindane Durrp, PA
3 Strasburg Landfill (Operable Unit 3), PA
3 Tonolli, PA a
5 Kohler Landfill, WI
5 Spickler Landfill, WI
5 Tn County Landfall, IL
10 Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Sub Base), WA a
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID a,b
Natural Attenuation (12) 1 PSC Resources, MA
1 Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH
2 Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY b
2 Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ
4 Yellow Water Road. FL
5 AIsco Anaconda, OH
5 Tn County Landfill, IL
5 Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1), LA
6 Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK
7 Farmers Mutual Cooperative, IA
8 Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO
Ground Water Containment 1 Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME b
(Includes Management of 1 Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI b
Migration) (8) 2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division (Operable
Un 2), NY
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN b
5 TarLakeMI
9 Jasco Chemical, CA a,b
a ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected orisrte and otfsite containment remedies
d In-situ ground waler treatmeni sites.
23
-------
EXHIBIT 6
FY 1992: INDEX OF SITE REMEDIES (Continued)
TECHNOLOGIES REG 1ON $JTE NAME. STATE
Ground Waler Containment 9 Rhone•PoulenclZoecon, CA a
(Includes Management of 9 Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
Migration) (8) (continued)
OThER ACTIONS
(Includes Institutional 5 La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN
Controls, Monitoring, 5 MIDCO I (Amendment), IN
Relocation and ROD 5 MIDCO II (Amendment). IN
Amendments with No 5 South Andover (Operable Unit 1) (Amendment), MN
Changes to Remedial 6 Koppers (Texarkana Plant) (Amendment), TX
Technologies) (5)
tI0 ACTION/NO FURTHER 1 Darling Hill Dump, VT
ACTION (25 ) 1 Revere Textile Prints, CT
2 Action Anodizing, Plating and Polishing, NY
2 Bioc lsnical Laboratories, NY
2 FAA Technical Center, NJ
2 Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 5), NJ
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 6), NJ
2 North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY
2 Witco Chemical (Oakland Plant), NJ
3 Dixie Caverns County Landfill, VA
3 Route 940 Drum Dump, PA
3 Suffolk City Landfill, VA
4 Chem-form, FL
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 18). TN
4 Wilson Concepts of Florida, FL
4 Woodbury Chemical (Princeton Plant), FL
5 Columbus Old Municipal Landfill, IN
5 Grand Traverse Overall Supply, Ml
5 Metal Working Shop, Ml
7 Des Moines TCE, IA
7 Hydro-Flex, KS
10 Ari om (Drexler Enterprise), ID
10 Fort Lewis (Landfill No. 5), WA
10 Mountain Home Air Force Base (Operable Unit 4), ID
10 Pesticide Lab - Yakima, WA
a ROD selected two or mote source control treatment technologies.
b ROD selected two non-source control measures.
C ROD selected onsrte and ottsite containment remedies.
d In-situ ground water treatment sites.
24
-------
EXHIBIT 7
FY 1982 - FY 1992: RODs SIGNED BY FISCAL YEAR
This exhibit displays the number of RODs signed since 1982. The top graph presents the
totals for each fiscal year and the bottom graph presents the fiscal year totals by region.
200
175
150
U)
0
o 125
1oo
Z 50
25
153
I
4RZLI
168
I
143
I
172
I
.
- - —-- -
,
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Fiscal Year
-
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991 1992
1
1
3
3
7
6
4 /i
11
11/i
7
10
9
2
1
2
7
13
15
15
22
23
32
36/27
3
1
2
5
10
15
5
26/
18 A
23,
34 ,4
23
4
1
0
0
5
13
11
12
15,4
20/3
24,/2
26/
5
0
2
9
20
16
14
25
32/3
31,4
40 A
6
0
0
4
5
6
11
21
7
11 A
2
10/2
7
0
1
2
1
2
3
12
11
12
12/
5
8
0
0
1
2
7 ,t
7
4
5
18
12
9
0
2
5
3
0
6
13
18
10,420/ 1O
10
0
1
2
3
/i
/
3
7 A
18,4
TOTALS
4
13
38
69
/2
fl/ 2
l 53 i
14
168 , 19
172 A
Total number of RODs
Number of ROD Amendments (included in total RODs)
Total RODs= 1.117
25
-------
EXHIBIT 8
FY 1982 FY 1992: SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY FISCAL YEAR
The top exhibit compares occurrences of source control treatment technologies against
total treatment technology RODs. The lower exhibit breaks down the occurrences of
indMduat technologies by fiscal year. More than one technology may be associated with
a ROD.
U 10O
D
0
75
a)
E
50
z
Fiscal Year
Occurrences of Selected Source Control Treatment Technologies Per Fiscal Year
N
83
85
1996
87
88
89
9O
1991
1992
Ia rL ’ThemiaI
Treatment ft
0
0
3
7
12
13
26
30
34
34
15
immobdizalion
1
0
0
0
1
2
9
9
18
18
24
35
37
VacuumNapor
Extract lont
0
1
0
1
10
17
19
34
20
Vo4atihzation?Aeratiortf
0
0
0
2
4
2
6
6
4
1
2
0
S IWast 1 nW
SodFh htngf
0
0
0
2
2
2
—
6
10
9
8
Bioremediaten
and4ppflcat i ont
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
3
0
1
0
6
10
5
8
1
13
1
SoNenlEztractionf
—
0
—
6
0
Olheriunspecifiedff
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
9
16
23
13
TOTALS
1
0
5
15
30
32
76
100
109
146
107
t Denotes innovative tecflnologies
tt Denotes categories that contain both innovative and non-innovative technologies.
Total Occurrences = 621
1 50•
125
Occurrences of Treatment TechnologIes
Source Control Treatment Technology RODs
148
109
100
107
25
30
15 14
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
26
-------
EXHIBIT 9
FY 1987 - FY 1992: OVERVIEW OF SOURCE CONTROL
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
The top chart provides the number and percentage of RODs selecting source control
treatment technologies. The lower chart provides the total number of occurrences of
individual technologies selected for source control.
SOURCE CONTROL RODS SELECTING TREATMENT AND
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
Data Represent a Subset
ol Prevrnus Column
RODs Selecting One or More
Treatment Technologies for
Source Control
Data Represent a Subset
of Previous Column
RODs Selecting Innovative
Treatment Technologies for
Source Control
SOURCE CONTROL OCCURRENCES OF TREATMENT AND
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
FY RODS
Signed
87
77
88
153
Pr
Number
Percentage of
RODs
27
35%
69
45%
76
53%
76
45%
99
51%
78
45%
89
143
90
168
91
196
92
172
Number
Percentage of
Treatment
Technology RODs
7
26%
28
41%
40
53%
42
55%
57
58%
37
47%
Percentage of RODs
Signed Selecting
innovative Technologies
for Source Control
9% (70177)
18% (2801153)
26% (40 of 143)
25% (42 01168)
29% (57 of 196)
22% (37 of 172)
FY
Number of
Source Control
RODs
87
50
88
100
—N
Data Represent a Subset
of Previous Column
Occurrences of Treatment
Technologies Selecled (or
Source Control
32
76
100
109
146
107
89
105
90
125
91
141
92
119
Data Represent a Subset
of Previous CoLumn
Occurrences of Innovative
Treatment Technologies
for Source Control
7
30
45
47
69
47
27
-------
EXHIBIT 10 -
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY
This exhibit presents an index ol individual sites that selected treatment technologies by
treatment type. The names of some technologies may have changed since the issuance
of the ROD. The number of sites at which these treatments occur are in .
FISCAL YEAR OF
TEcHNOLOG IE Sa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
So l idificationlStabiliza t ,onf FY82 Bruin Lagoon, PA 3
Immobilization (154)
FY83
FY84 BiD-Ecology Systems. TX 6
FY85 Wide Beach Development, NY 2
Davie Landfill, FL 4
FY86 Marathon Battery, NY 2
Bruin Lagoon, PA 3
Mowbray Engineering, ALb 4
Peppers Steel & Alloys, FL 4
Sapp Battery Salvage, FL 4
Burrows Sanitation, Ml 5
Fields Brook, OHC 5
Forest Waste Products, Ml 5
Queen City Farms, WA 10
FY87 Chemical Control, NJ 2
Geiger (C&M Oil), SC•.C 4
Gold Coast Oil, FL 4
Independent Nail. SC 4
Liquid Disposal, Ml 5
Norihem Engraving, W1 5
Gurley Pit, ARC 6
M d-Sou1h Wood Products, AR 6
Sand Springs Petrochemical 6
Comp’ex, OKC
FY88 Love Canal (93rd Street). NY 2
Marathon Battery, NYC 2
Yo 11 Oil, NYC 2
Aladdin Plating, PA 3
Fike Chemical, WV 3
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementatcn of one ol two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at t he s ie was retracted in a ROD Amendment
a ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of Incmerat,on/Thermal Treatment
28
-------
EXHIBIT 10 —
FY 1982. FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
So lidificahon/Stab ijizationl FY88 Chemtronics, NC’,d 4
immobilization (154) Flowood, MS 4
(continued) Mid-State Disposal Landtal, WI 5
Velsicol Chemical, IL 5
Bailey Waste Disposal, TX 6
Industrial Waste Control. AR ’ 6
Arkansas City Dump. KS 7
Midwest ManufacturingfNorth Farm, IA 7
Selrr Treating, CA’ 9
Commencement Bay. 10
NearshorelTidetlats (0U3), WA
Frontier Hard Chrome 10
(12/30/87), WA
Gould, OR’ 10
Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling, Wk 10
FY89 Sullivan’s Ledge. MA 1
WR. Grace (Acton Plant), MA’.C 1
De Rewal Chemical, NJC 2
Marathon Battery, NY 2
Craig Farm Drum, PA 3
Hebelka Auto Salvage Yard, PA 3
Ordnance Works Disposal Areas 3
(Amendment), WV.C
Amnicola Dump, TN 4
Celanese Shelby Fiber 4
Operations, NC,C
Kassouf-Kimerling Battery, FL 4
Smith’s Farm Brooks, KYC 4
Auto Ion Chemtcals, M1 5
MIDCO I, lN.C 5
MIDCOII, 1N 5
Pesses Chemical, TX 6
Coast Wood Preserving, Ck 9
Koppers (Oroville Plant), CA,C 9
Punty Oil Sales, CA 9
FY90 New Bedford, MAC 1
Roebling Steel, NJ 2
C&R Battery. VA 3
Enforcement-lead RODs
ROD may contain non-source remedialion measures.
b ROD aikiws for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment.
29
-------
EXHiBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TEcHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
So lidthcatiowStabilizatiofV FY90 Greenwood Chemical, VAC 3
Immobilization (154) MW Manufactunng, PAC 3
(continued) 62nd Street Dump, FL 4
Cabot/Koppers, FLC 4
Coleman-Evans Wood 4
Preserving (Amendment), FLC
Kassouf-Kimerhng Battery Disposal, FL 4
Schuylkill Metal, FL 4
Yellow Water Road, FL 4
Zeliwood Groundwater Contamination 4
(Amendment). FL
Oconomowoc Electroplating, WI 5
U S DOl Sangamo/Crab Orchard 5
NWR, lLb
Spnnglield Township Dump, MIC 5
Wayne Waste Oil, INC 5
Jacksonville Municipal Landfill, ARC 6
Rogers Road Municipal Landfill, ARC 6
Hastings Groundwater 7
Contamination (East Industrial), NEC
Shenandoah Stables, MOC 7
Martin Marietta, Denver 7
Aerospace, COC
Rocky Mountain Arsenal (0U17), CO 8
J.H Baxter, CAC 9
Teledyne Wah Chang Albany 10
(TWCA), OR
FY91 Silresim Chemical, Mk,a,c I
Sullivan’s Ledge, MA 1
Union Chemical, MA.,a,C 1
Asbestos Dump, NJ 2
NL Industries, NJ 2
Nascolite, NJ,C 2
Roebling Steel, NJ 2
Waldick Aerospace Devices, NJaC 2
Eastern DivGrsified Metals, PAaC 3
First Piedmont Quarry 719, VA 3
Haby Chemical, DE 3
Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, MD,a 3
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows br implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD se’ected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of lnc,neratoniThermal Treatment
30
-------
- - —EXHIBITIO _________________
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOCtES8 ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGlQj
So liddication/Stabilization/ FY91 Saunders Supply, vAa.c 3
Immobilization (154) Whilmoyer Laboratories (0U2), PAC 3
(continued) Whitmoyer Laboratories (01)3), PM,e 3
Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps 4
(Amendment). NCC
Arlington Blending & Packaging, TNa.c 4
Carolina Transformer, NCa,c 4
Golden Strip Septic Tank, SC 4
Interstate Lead (ILCO), Aja 4
Maxey Flats Nuclear Disposal, KV 4
Oak Ridge Reservation (US DOE) 4
(01)3), TNc
Smiths Farm Brooks (Amendment), KYc 4
USAF Robins Air Force Base, GA a,c
Wngley Charcoal, TNC 4
Acme Solvent Reclaiming, IL,a,c,f 4
Berlin & Farro, Ml 5
Carter Industrials, MIC 5
Cimnarron Mining, NM 6
E.l. DuPont DeNemours (County 7
Rd X23), 1A
Mid-Amenca Tanning, IA 7
Shaw Avenue Dump, 1k 7
Anaconda Smelter, MT 8
FMC (Fresrio Plant), Ck,a.c.e 9
Valley Wood Preserving, CA,a 9
FY92 PSC Resources, MA 1
Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ 2
Facet Enteipnses, NY ’ 2
Preferred Plating, NY 2
Abex, VA’ 3
C & D Recycling, Pk 3
Fike Chemical, WV C 3
Paoti Rail Yai , Pk 3
Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump. VA 3
Tonolli, PA ’,C 3
Agnco Chemical, FL’ 4
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL,C 4
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected Iwo types of lncpnerationfrherrna l Treatment
3
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHP4OLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE LTE NAME. STATE REGPQfl
Soli dificalionJStabiljzatj / FY92 Florida Steel, FL’ 4
Immobilization (154) JFD Electronics/Channel Masters, 4
(continued) NC ’.c,e
Manne Corps Logistics Base, GA 4
Savannah River (USDOE)(OU1), 4
SC
Whfte house Waste Oil Pits 4
(Amendment), FL
Electrovoice, M 1,C 5
H. Brown Company, Ml e 5
Peerless Plating, Ml C 5
Savanna Army Depot, IL C 5
Spickler Landfill, WI’ 5
TarLake,Mr 5
Cal West Metals, NM 6
Double Eagle Rehnery, OK C 6
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, 6
OK
Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (OU1), 6
LA
Oklahoma Refining, OKC 6
Broderick Wood Products, C0.C 8
Denver Radium (0U8), C0 8
Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), 8
UT’
Rocky Flats (USDOE)(OLJ4) , 8
Co
Silver Bow CreeWButte Area, MT 8
Rhone.Poulencfzoecon CA’ 9
Bunker Hill Mining and MetalIui icaI 10
Complex, 1D.c.e
Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling 10
(Amendment), (DC
U S DOE Idaho National Engtneering 10
Lab (0U22), ID
Incinerat iOnjrhermal FY82
Destruction/Treatmem (153)
FY83
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may ntain non-source remodiation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of tw source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected Iwo types of Incineratioritrhermal Treatment
32
-------
EXHIBif 10
FY 1982 FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STAI REGION
incineration/Thermal FY84 Be in & Farro, Ml 5
Destruction/Treatment (153) LaskirvPoplar Oil, OH 5
(continued) Western Processing, Wk 10
FY85 Bog Creek Farm, NJ 2
Bndgeport Rental & Oil Servèce, NJ 2
Swope Oil & Chemical, NJ 2
Acme Solvent Reclaiming, IL 5
Motco,TX 6
Triangle Chemical, IX 6
Woodbury Ctiernica , CO 8
FY86 Baird & McGuire, MA 1
Hooker-Hyde Parl ’, NY 2
Drake Chemical, PA 3
Wesiline, PA 3
Coleman -Evans, FL 4
Mowbray Engineering, AL 5
Arrowhead Relineiy. MN 5
Fields Brook, OHC 5
LaSalle Electrical Ulildies, IL 5
Metamora Landfill, MI 5
Sp egelberg Landfill, Mi 5
Sikes Disposal Pits, TX 6
FY87 Davis Liquid Waste, RIC I
Ottati & Goss/Kingston Steel 1
Drum, NH,C
Wiliiams Property, NJ 2
Geiger (C&M Oil), SC•.C 4
Martin Manetta-Sodyeco DivIsion, NC 4
Tower Chemical, FL 4
LaskinfPoplar Oil, OH 5
Rose Township Dump, Ml 5
Bayou Bonfouca, LA 6
Cleve Reber, LA 6
Gurley Pit, AR.C 6
Hardage/Criner, 0K 6
Sand Springs Petrochemical 6
Complex, OK
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracled in a ROD Amendment.
G ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected Iwo types of Incineration /Thermal Treatment.
33
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FtSCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOG1ES ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
Incinerat lorL’mermal FY88 Rose Disposal Pit, MA I
DestructiorilTreatment (153) Brewster Well Field, NY 2
(continued) Ewan Propeny, NJ 2
Lipari Landfill. NJ 2
Love Canaj, NY 2
Reich Farms, Wb 2
YorkO I, NYC 2
BerIs Sand P , PA 3
Delaware Sand & Gravel, DE 3
Douglassville Disposal, PA 3
Drake Chemical, PA 3
Fike Chemical, WVb 3
Ordnance Woi1 s Disposal Areas, WV,d 3
Southern Maryland Wood Treating, MD 3
Wildcat Landfill, DE 3
Zellwood Groundwater
Contamination, FLC 4
Forest Waste Products, Ml 5
Fort Wayne Reduction Dump, IN 5
LaSaIle Electrical Utilities, IL 5
SurnmU National Liquid Disposal 5
Service, OH
Bno Refinery, TX 6
Midland Products, AR 6
MinkerfStoutjRornairie Creek, MO 7
Syntex Facility-Products Verona, MO. 7
Times Beach, MO 7
Broderick Wood Products, CO. B
FY89 Baird & McGu ire, MA I
Pinetle’s Salvage Yard, MEC 1
WeI lsG&H, MAC 1
W R. Grace (Acton Plant), MA,C 1
Bog Creek Farm, NJ 2
De Rewal Chemical, NJC 2
FAA Technical Center, NJ,C 2
Fuhon Terminals, NY 2
Douglassville Disposal, PA 3
MW Manufaclunng, PA 3
Wh moyer Laboratones, PAb 3
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control trealmeni technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the she was retracted in a ROD Amendment
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
34
-------
EXHIBIT 10 —
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESO ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
lncineratiort /Therma l FY89 Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps (0U2), NC 4
Destruction/Treatment (153) Amencan Creosote Works, mc 4
(continued) Ceianese Shelby Fiber 4
Operations, NC.c
Newsom Brothers/Old Reichhold, MS 4
Smith’s Farm Brooks, KYC 4
Aisco Anaconda, 0H,C 5
Big D Campground 0H 5
Cliff/Dow Dump, M1,C 5
Cross Brothers Pail Recycling, ILC 5
lonia City Landfill, Mi’ 5
LaskiWPoplar OH, OH 5
New BrightorirArden Hills 5
(TCAAP), MN
Ninth Avenue Dump, IN 5
Outboard MarinefJohnsori 5
(Amendment), Lb
Wedzeb Enterpnses, IN 5
Vogel Paint & Wax, k b, 0 7
Sand Creek Industrial, C0.C B
Woodbury Chemical, CO. 8
Northwest Transformer-Mission 10
Pole, WA
FY90 Beacon Heights Landfill, CT 1
Kearsat9e Metallurgical, NH 1
New Bedford, MAC 1
FAA Technical Center, NJ 2
Hooker-lO2nd Street, NY 2
Hooker Chemicat/Ruco Polymer, NJ 2
Mattiace Petrochemicals, NY 2
Sayreville Landfill, NJ 2
Sealand Restoration, NY 2
Greenwood Chemical, VAC 3
MW Manufacturing, PAC 3
Bofors Nobel, MIC 5
Fisher Cab Chem, lNb 5
Pristine (Amendment), OHC 5
• Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediatton measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source conirol treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retrac ed in a ROD Amendment
ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
1 ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
35
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Conflnued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES 8 ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STA1 REGION
Incineration/Thermal FY90 Spnngfield Township Dump, MC 5
Destruction/Treatment (153) St. Louis River. MN 5
(continued) Hardage/Cnner (Amendment), OKC 6
Jacksonville Municipal Landfill, ARC 6
Rogers Road Municipal Laridlifl, ARC 6
Texarkana Wood Preserving, TX 6
Vertac,AR 6
Fairfield Coal Gasification Plant. IA 7
Hastings Groundwater Contamination 7
(East Irtdustnal), NEC
Missouri Electric Works, MO 7
Shenandoah Stables, MOc 7
Ogden Defense Depot, UT 8
Sand Creek Industrial, COC 8
FMC Yakima Pa, WA 10
FY91 Circuitron, NYC 2
Curcio Scrap Metal, NJ 2
Mafliace Petrochemicals, NY .C 2
Brodheaci Creek, PA.C 3
Dixie Caverns County Landfill, VA 3
Eastern Diversified Metals, Pk.a.c 3
Whitmoyer Laboralones (0U2), PAC 3
Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps 4
(Amendment), NCC
Ciba-Geigy. AL,C 4
Wrigley Charcoal, TNC 4
Acme Solvent Reclaiming, 1L,a,C.I 5
Allied Chemical & lronton Coke, 5
oH..a c
Main Street Welt Field, lN C 5
Summit National Liquid Disposal 5
Service (Amendment), OH
Thermo Chem, Mla,C 5
Ellisville Area, MO 7
ElIisville Area (Amendment), MO 7
Kern-Pest Laboratories, MOa 7
People’s Natural Gas. lA .C 7
Broderick Wood Products 8
(Amendment), C0
• Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retraced in a ROD Amendment.
selected Iwo or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of lncinerationfThermal Treatment
36
-------
— EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES8 ROD SIGNATURE 1IE NAME. STATE RtGION
Incineration ’Therrna( FY91 Hill Air Force Base, ula 8
Destruction/Treatment (153) Advanced Micro Devices 901 9
(continued) (Signetics)(TRW Microwave), CA,a
Commencement Bay-Nearshore/ 10
Tideflals, WA
Northwest Transformers-Mission 10
Pole (Amendment), WA
FY92 Ellis Property, NJ° 2
Fike Chemical, WV C 3
Alabama Army Ammunition Plant 4
(OU1), AL
American Chemical Services, IN.C 5
Savanna Army Depot, IL C 5
Guli Coast Vacuum Services (OU1), 6
LA
Ogden Defense Depot (003), 8
UT
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale 9
Plant), CA
Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling 10
(Amendment), ID C
U.S. DOE Idaho National 10
Engineering Lab (0U23),
ID
Biodegradation/Land FY82
ApplicationfBioremediation (48)
FY83
FY84 Old Inger Oil Refinery, LA 6
FY85 Byron Salvage Yard, IL 5
FY86 Tinkham Garage, NHb 1
Leetown Pesticide, WV 3
Burlington Northern, MN 5
FY87 Renora, NJ 2
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remedtation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
0 ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of lncinerat,onfThermal Treatment
37
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES ROD SiGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
Biodegradation/Land FY88 Iron Horse Park, MAC I
Application/Bioremediation (48) Clarke, L A. & Son, VA 3
(continued) Brown Wood Preserving, FL 4
AT&SF (Clovis). NM’ 6
French Limited, TX 6
North Cavalcade, TX 6
FY89 Ordnance Works Disposal Areas 3
(Amendment), WV,C
Whitmoyer Laboratones, PAb 3
Amencan Creosote Works, FL 4
Cliff/Dow Dump, MI.C 5
Koppers/Galesburg, IL 5
Sheridan Disposal Services 6
(12/29/88), TX
Vogel Paini & Wax, IA ’,be 7
Burlington Northern (Somers Plant), MT 8
Libby Groundwater, MT 8
Koppers (Oroville Plant), CA’.C 9
FY90 Cabot/Koppers, FLC 4
Dubose Oil Products. FL 4
Moss-Amencan Kerr-McGee Oil, WIC 5
Onalaska Municipal Landfill, WI 5
J H. Baxter, CAC 9
FY91 Applied Environmental Services, NY 2
General Motors/Central Foundry 2
Division, NY
Swope Oil & Chemical, NJ,C 2
Whrtmoyer Laboratones (0U3), PAa,C 3
Allied Chemical & Ironton Coke, OH’. .C 5
MacGillis & Gibbs/Bell Lumber & 5
Pole, MN’.a
People’s Natural Gas, Ik,a,C 7
Wasatch Chemical (Lot 6), UT’,a,C 8
FY92 Benfield Industries, NC ce 4
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits 4
(Amendment), FLO
South Andover (0U2), MN 5
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
°ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
38
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE ShE NAME. STATE REGION
Biodegradation/Land FY92 Oklahoma Refining, OKC 6
ApplicationlBioremediation (48) Prewitt Abandoned Ref inery, NM ’.C 6
(continued) Pester Refinery, KS C 7
Broderick Wood Products, CO.C 8
Idaho Pole, MTC 8
Jasco Chemical, CA.C e 9
Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical 1 0
Complex, 1D,C,0
Umatitla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR 10
McChord AFB (Wash Rack/ 10
Treatment), WA
Eielson Air Force Base, AKC 1 0
Volatilization/Soil Aeration/ FY82
Aeration (21)
FY83
FY84
FY85 McKiri, ME 1
mangle Chemical, TX 6
FY86 Tinkham Garage, NHb 1
Calciwell Trucking, NJ 2
Metaltec/Aerosystems, NJ 2
Holhngswoilh Solderless Temiinal, FL 4
FY87 Ottati & GosslKungston Steel I
Drum, NH,C
Waldick Aerospace Devices. NJ 2
FY88 Cannon EngineeringlBridgewater, MA 1
Marathon Battery, NYC 2
Reich Farms, N.P 2
Bendix Flight Systems, PA’ 3
Wamchem, 8C 4
Long Prarie Groundwater 5
Contamination, MN
Enlorcement-fead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted rn a ROD Amendment.
e ROD selected two or more nan-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of lnc*nerationIThermal Treatment.
39
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (ContInuedj
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STA g REGION
VoIatjIjzationJSo Aerationl FY89 Fairchild Semiconductor fMt. 9
Aeration (21) View (OU1), CA,C
(continued) Fairchitri Semiconductor /Mt. 9
View (0U2), CAC
Intel (Mt View Plant). CA,C 9
Raytheon, Ck,C 9
FY90 Howe Valley Landfill, KY 4
FY91 MOnoI,t 1 ic Memories (Advanced Micro 9
Devices - Arques) (National
Semiconductor), CA..a.c
National Semiconductor 9
(Monolithic Memories), CA.a.c
FY92 7
Soil Washing/Flushing (45) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85 Goose Farm, NJ 2
Commencement Bay-South Tacoma 10
Channel IOU1), WA
FY86 Tinkham Garage. NHb 1
United Chrome Products. OR 10
FY87 Davis Liquid Waste, RIC 1
Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC 4
FY88 Clarke, L A & Son, VAC 3
Zeliwood Groundwater 4
Contamination, FL
United Scrap Lead, OH 5
US Aviex,Ml 5
Koppers (Texarkana Plant), TX 6
South CavaLcade Street, TX 6
• Enlorcemerit-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for Implementation of one of Two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source comrol treatment technologies
o Use of this treatment at the site was ratrai ed in a ROD Amendment
o ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of Incinerat,onTrherma l Treatment
40
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Contlnued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE fl GlON
SOH Washing/FlushIng (45) FY89 Byron Barrel & Drum, NY 2
(continued) Vuneland Chemical, NJC (Soil Flushing) 2
Vineland Chemical, NJC (Soil Washing) 2
Cape Fear Wood Preserving, NC 4
Cross Brothers Pail Recycling, ILC 5
FY90 Koppers (Oroville Plant), CA,C 9
King of Prussia, NJ 2
Myers Property, NJC 2
U.S. Titanium, VA 3
Cabot/Koppers, FLC 4
Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving 4
(Amendment), FLC
Jadco-Hughes, NCC 4
Moss-Amencan Kerr-McGee Oil, WIC 5
Wayne Waste Oil, INC 5
Arkwood AR 6
Sand Creek Industrial, COC 8
FY91 Naval Air Engineering Center 2
(OU1), Wa
Naval Air Engineering Center 2
(0U2), NJa
Naval Air Engineering Center 2
(0U4), NJa
Brodhead Creek, PA,C 3
Rasmussen’s Dump, MIa 5
Zanesville WeIlfieId, 0H.a.c 5
Lee Chemical, MO.a 7
FMC (Fresno Plant), CA.a,c,e 9
Union Pacific Railroad Yard, lD, 10
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation 01 one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more sour control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
selected twp types of Jncinaratcnimormai Treatment.
41
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ifOD SIGNATURE LTE NAME. STATE REGION
Soil Washing/Flushing (45) FY92 Tibbetts Road, NHC I
(continued) Naval Air Engineering Center (0U7), 2
we
Benhield tndustrtes, NCC,e 4
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits 4
(Amendment), FLO
Pester Refinery, KS C 7
Idaho Pole, MTC 8
Sacramento Army Depot (0U4) , 9
CA
Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Sub 10
Base), WAC
VacuumNapor Extraction (102) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85 Verona Well Field, MI 5
FY86
FY87 Seymour Recycling, 1N 5
FY88 Groveland Wells, MA 1
Keete Environmental Services, NH 1
Bendix Flight Systems, PA’ C 3
Tyson Dump #1 (Amendment), PA.d 3
Airco Carbide, KY 4
B F Goodnch (Calvert City), KY 4
South Valley (PL-83), NM 6
Hastings Groundwater Contamination 7
(09/28/88), NE
Haslings Groundwater Contamination 7
(09/30/88), NE
Motorola (52nd Street Plant), AZ 9
FY89 Kellogg-Deering Well Field, CT 1
South Municipal Water Supply Well, NH 1
Wells G&H, MAC 1
Enforcement lead RODs —
a ROD may contain non-source remedialion measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source conirol treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
42
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES 8 ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
VacuumNapor Extraction (102) FY89 FM Technical Center, NJ’,c 2
(continued) Kysor Industrial, MI 5
Miami County Incinerator, OH 5
MIDCOI, 1N 5
Wausau Groundwater Contamination 5
(9/29/89), WI
Hastings Groundwater 7
Contamination, NE
Sand Creek Industrial, C0.C 8
Fairchild Semiconductor /Mt. 9
View (OUI), CA,c
Fairchild Semiconductor /Mt. 9
View (0U2), CA,c
Fairchild Camera (South San 9
Jose Plant), CA
IBM (San Jose Plant), CA,C 9
Intel (Mt. View Plant), CA 9
Phoenix-Goodyear Airport Area, AZ ’ 9
Raytheon, CA,C 9
FY90 Stamina Mills, R I 1
Vestal Water Supply 1-1. NY 2
Lord Shope Landfill. PA 3
Jadco-Hughes, NCC 4
SCRDI Bluff Road. SC 4
Fisher Cab Chem. lNb 5
Hagen Farm, WI 5
Pristine (Amendment), OHC 5
Spnngfield Township Dump, MIC 5
Wayne Waste Oil, INC 5
Hardage/Cnner (Amendment). OKC 6
Tinker AFB (Soldier Creek/Bldg 6
3001), OK
Lindsay Manulacturinçj, NE 7
Waverly Groundwater Contamination, NE 7
Martin Manetta, Denver Aerospace, COC 8
Rocky Mountain Arsenal (0U18), CO 8
Intersil, CAC 9
Solvent Service, CA 9
Watkins Johnson (Stewart Division), CA 9
Enforcement4ead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retraced in a ROD Amendment.
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types of lncsnerahonflherma Treatment.
43
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
T CHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
VacuumNapor Extraction (102) FY91 Mottolo Pig Farm, NI-ta 1
(continued) Silresim Chemical, Mk,a 1
Union Chemical, MEC 1
AO. Polymer, NJa 2
Applied Environmental Services, NY .a.C 2
Circuitron, NYC 2
Garden State Cleaners, NJa 2
Genzale Plating, NYa c 2
Mattiace Petrochemicals, NY .c 2
South Jersey Clothing NJa 2
Swope Oil & Chemical, NJC 2
Arrowhead Associates/Scovill, VA a
Cryo-Chem, PA 3
Charles Macon Lagoon & Drum 4
Storage, wca
Medley Farms, SC,a 4
USAF Robins Air Force Base, GAa,C 4
Acme Solvent Reclaiming, 1L,a,C.f 5
Chem-Central, M 1,ae 5
Enviro-Chem (Norlhside Sanitary 5
LandfIIJ)(Amendment) lN
Main Street Well Field, lNa.C 5
Slurgis Municipal Wells, Ml 5
Thermo Chem, Mla c 5
Verona Well Field, MIa 5
Zanesville Well Field, OH.a.C 5
Petro-Chemical (Turtle Bayou), TX 6
Chemical Sales (New Locatcn) 8
(OU1), COa
Indian Bend Wash Area (OUs 1,4,5,6), AZ 9
Mesa Area Ground Water 9
Contamination, ftZ ’,a
Monolithic Memones (Advanced Micro 9
Devices - Arques)(National
Semiconductor), CA..a.c
National Semiconductor (Monolithic 9
Memories), CA.ac
Signetics (Advanced Micro Devices 9
901)(TRW Microwave). CA.a
Spectra-Physics (Teledyne 9
Semiconductor) CA..a
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures
ROD selected two types ol Incineration/Thermal Treatment
44
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982- FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Conilnued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SLTE NAME STATE REGION
VacuumNapor Extraction (102) FY92 Teledyne Semiconductor (Spectra. 9
(continued) Physics), CA.a
Van Waters & Rogers, CA’a 9
Tibbetts Road, NH I
Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY•C.e 2
Raymark,PA 3
U.S. Defense General Supply Center 3
(0U5), VA
Carrier Air Cond ioning, TN 4
American Chemical Services, 1N,C 5
City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, Wló 5
dare Water Supply, M1 5
Elecirovoice, M 1.C 5
Muskego Sanitary Landfill, W1,C 5
Peerless Plating, MI C 5
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM 6
29th & Mead Groundwater 7
Contamination, KS.°
Rocky Flats (USDOE)(OLt2), 8
Co a
Hassayampa Landliu, AZ 9
Lawrence Livermore National Lab, 9
CA a
Pacific Coast Pipelines. CA ’ 9
Punty Oil Sales, CA 9
Sacramento Army Depot (0U3), 9
CA
Eietson Air Force Base, AKC 10
Solvent Extraction (8) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85
FY86
FY87
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more sourco control treatment technologies.
d Use ot this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
0 ROD salectød iwo or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of lncinerat niThermaI Treatment.
45
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
Solvent Extraction (8) FY88
(continued) FY89 Norwood PCBs, MA 1
O’Connor, ME •1
Pinette’s Salvage Yard, MEC i
Ewan Property, NJ 2
Outboard Marine/Johnson 5
(Amendment), IL
United Creosoting, TX 6
FY90
FY91 Carolina Transformer, NC3,C 4
FY92 US DOE Idaho National Engineering
Lab(0U5),IDC 10
In-situ Vitrification (5) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85
FY86
FY87
FY88
FY89
FY90 Anderson Development, Ml 5
U.S. 001 SangamofCrab Orchard 5
NWR, IL
Crystal Chemical, TX 6
Rocky Mountain Arsenal (0LJ16). CO 8
FY91 Wasatch Chemical (Lot 6), UT,a,c 8
FY92
• Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contatn non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control trealment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
a ROD selected two or more non-source czrntrol measures
ROD selected Iwo types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
46
-------
EXH!BFT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE lTE NAME. STATE REGION
Dechlorination (5) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85
FY86
FY87
FY88
FY89
FY90 Myers Property, NJC 2
Tenth Street Dump/Junkyard, OK 6
FY91 Saunders Supply, VAa.C 3
Mington Blenchng & Packaging, TN C 4
Smith’s Farm B, oks 4
(Amendment), KY.C
FY92
Olher/Unspecified Treatment FY82
Technologies (59)
FY83
FY84
FY85
FY86
FY87 Re-Solve, MA I
Palmerton Zinc Pile, PA 3
West virginia Ordnance, WV 3
Central Cny-Clear Creek, CO 8
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
selected two or more non•source control measures.
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
47
-------
EXHIBIT 10 =
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECIINOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE flIE NAME. STATE REGION
Other/Unspecified Treatment FY88 GE Wiring Devices, PR ’ 2
Technologies (59) Pristine, OH 5
(continued) Sot LynMndustrial Transformers 6
(03125/88), TX
Fulbright Landfill, M0 7
FY89 Saco Tannery Waste Pus, ME 1
Claremont Polychemical, NY 2
SMS Insirumerits, NY 2
Havertown PCP, PA 3
Publicker/Cuyahoga Wrecking Plant, PA 3
Amencari Creosote Works, INC 4
Aisco Anaconda, OH’ C 5
Doepke Disposal (Holliday), KS 7
Findett, MC 7
FY90 Kearsarge Metallurgical, NCC I
Matliace Petrochemicals, NYb 2
Radium Chemical, NYC 2
Roebling Steel, NJC 2
Samey Farm, NYC 2
Solvent Savers, NY 2
Aviex Fibers, VA 3
Jacksonville Municipal Landfill, ARC 6
Rogers Road Municipal Landfill, ARC 6
lntersil,CAc 9
FY91 Union Chemical, ME’.a.c 1
Genzale Plating, NYa c 2
Mattiace Petrochemical, NY 2
Nascxilite, NJ.C 2
Sinclair Refinery, NY.a 2
Whfle Chemical, NY 2
Brodhead Creek, PA,C 3
Greenwood Chemical, VAa 3
USA Letterkenny Southeast 3
Area, PAC
Arlington Blending & Packaging, TNa,c 4
Ciba-Geigy, AL,C 4
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD alkws for implementalioi, ot one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the sne was retracted in a ROD Amendment
e ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
1 ROD selected Iwo types of lncunerai n/Thorma1 Treatment
48
-------
EXHiBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FiSCAL YEAR OF
_____________ ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
Other/Unspecified Treatment FY91 Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) 4
Technologies (59) (0U3), TNC
(continued) Sangamo/TweIve.MileIHa ( 4
PCB, SC.a,c
Sm h’s Farm Brooks 4
Amendment), KY,C
Carter lndustnals, MIC 5
Fadrowski Dn,sm Disposal, WI e 5
G&H Landfill, MI 5
Themio Chem, Ml C 5
Yakirna Plating, WA 10
FY92 General Motors/Central Foundry 2
Division (0U2), NY
Preferred Plating, NY 2
Rowe Industries Groundwater 2
Contamination, NY
Eastern Diversified Metals, Pk 3
Fike Chemical, WV 3
Benfield Industries, NC 4
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), ALC 4
Florida Steel, FL 4
Potters Septic Tank Service Pits, NC e 4
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM,C 6
Ogden Defense Depot (0U3), 8
UT
Ogden Defense Depot (0U4), 8
UT
U S DOE Idaho National Engineering 10
Lab (0U5), ID
Thermal Desorplion (20) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85
FY86
FY87
Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may ntain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies.
C ROD selected two or more sour control treatment technologies.
d Use o this treatment at the sue was retracted in a ROD Amendment.
5 ROD selected two or more non-sour control measures.
1 ROD selected two types of lncineralonITherrnal Treatment
49
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982 - FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIESa ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME. STATE REGION
Thermal Desorption (20) FY88
(continued)
FY89
FY90 American Thermostat, NY 2
Claremont Polychemical, NY 2
Sarney Farm, NY 2
Bofors Nobel, Mlb.C 5
University of Minnesota, MN 5
Martin Manetta, Denver 8
Aerospace, COa,b
FY91 Union Chemical, ME.,a,C I
Watdick Aerospace Devices, NJac 2
Saunders Supply, 3
USA Letterkenny Southeast Area, PAC 3
Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps 4
(Amendment), NCC
Arlington Blending & Packaging, NCa,C 4
Sangamo/Twelve-Mile/Hartwel l 4
PCB, sc.,a,c
Acme Solvent Reclaiming, IL’,a,C,f 5
Anderson Development 5
(Amendment), M1
Carter Industnals, MIC 5
FY92 lndustnal Latex, NJ 2
Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA e 3
Potters Septic Service Pits, NC a 4
American Chemical Services, lN,C 5
Chemical Treatment (1) FY82
FY83
FY84
FY85
• Enforcement-lead RODs
a ROD may contain non-source remediation measures
b ROD allows for implementation ol one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Am indment
o ROD selected two or more non-source control measures.
ROD selected two types of Incineration/Thermal Treatment
50
-------
EXHIBIT 10
FY 1982. FY 1992: INDEX OF SOURCE CONTROL TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES BY TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY (ContInued)
F 1SCAL YEAR OF
TECHNOLOGIES 8 ROD SIGNATURE SITE NAME STATE REGION
Chemical Treatment (1) FY86
(continued)
FY87
FY88
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92 JFD Electronics/Channel Masters, 4
NCCM
• Enforcemerit4ead RODs
8ROD may contain non-source remediation measures.
b ROD allows for implementation of one of two source control treatment technologies
C ROD selected two or more source control treatment technologies.
d Use of this treatment at the site was retracted in a ROD Amendment
8 ROD selected two or more non-sourco control measures.
ROD selected two types of lncineratcnfThermal Treatment.
51
-------
EXHIBIT 11
FY 1992: TREATMENT TRAINS IN SOURCE CONTROL AND GROUND
WATER TREATMENT RODs
This exhibit presents the number of FY 1992 source control treatment and ground water
treatment RODs that selected treatment trains. A treatment train is a sequence of
treatment technologies used to remediate a specific medium. Non-treatment RODs are
not included in the total number.
Total Number of
Treatment RODs
132
Source Control Ground Water
Treatment Only Treatment Only
109 Occurrences 184 Occu J
Total Treatment Total Ground Water
Trains for Source Control Treatment Trains
14 RODs 37 RODs
52
-------
EXHIBIT 12
FY 1992: INDEX OF RODs USING TREATMENT TRAINS
This exhibit is an index of treatment trains selected in ground water and source RODs for
FY 1992. Treatment trains employ a sequence of technologies to address a specific
medium or constituents for source and ground water control.
SOURCE CONTROL
TREATMENT TRAINS ( 14) REGION SITE NAME.STATE
1 Tibbetts Road, NH
3 FIke Chemical, WV
4 Bent ield Industries, NCa
4 JFD Electronics/Channel Masters, NCa
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL
5 Electrovoice, Ml
5 Peerless Plating, Mi
6 Double Eagle Refinery. OK
6 Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK
6 Gull Coast Vacuum Service (Operable Unit 1), LA
7 Pester Refinery, KS
B Idaho Pole, i rra
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID
10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit 5), ID
GROUND WATER TREATMENT
TRAiNS ( 37 REGION SITE NAME. STATE
I Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME
1 BrunSwick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME
1 Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI
1 Tibbetts Road. NH
2 Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
2 Ellis Property, NJ
2 Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ
2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division (Operable
Unit 2), NY
2 Higgins Farm. NJ
2 Imperial OiVChampion Chemicals, NJ
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ
2 Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY
2 Rowe Industries Groundwater Contaminabon, NY
3 Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA
3 MW Manufacturing. PA
3 Paoli Rail Yard, PA
4 Benfield Industries, NC
4 JFD ElectrontcslChanflel Masters, NC
H ROD selected treatment trains for both source and ground water remedies.
53
-------
EXHIBIT 12
FY 1992: INDEX OF RODs USING TREATMENT TRAINS
GROUND WATER TREATMENT
TRAINS 137) ( continued) REGiON SITE NAME. STATE
4 Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
4 Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN
4 New Hanover County Airport Bum Pit, NC
4 Potters Septic Tank Service Pits, NC
4 USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC
4 Whitehouse Waste OH Pits (Amendment), FLa
5 Central Illinois Public Service, IL
5 City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI
5 Electrovoice, Mia
5 H. Brown Company, Ml
5 New Brighton/Arden HiHs, MN
5 Peerless Plating, Mia
5 Reilly Tar Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN
6 Oklahoma Refining, OK
B Brodenck Wood Products, CO
8 Idaho Pole, ç a
10 Etmendort Air Force Base, AK
10 N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Auft FieId WA
10 U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit 2), ID
a ROD selected treatment trains for both source and ground water remedies.
54
-------
EXHIBIT 13 ___________
FY 1982 - FY 1992: ROD REMEDY COSTS
This exhibif provides a companson of remedial action costs as specified in FY 1982
through F? 1992 RODs. These figures are estimates based on present worth costs,
when available, at the time the ROD was written. Operation and maintenance costs are
included in the present worth costs.
I
I
C
L 1
\
0-
$2M
2.1M-
$SM
5.1-
SIOM
10.1.
S20M
20.1-
530M
301M
+
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF RODs
SIGNED
FISCAL YEAR
1982
2
1
1
0
0
0
4
1983
8
2
2
1
0
0
13
19B4
18
12
3
3
2
0
38
1985
23
16
11
9
4
6 a
1986
31
14
11
13
6
5
9
Ma
1987
26
22
12
6
5 b
a.b
1988
43
44
31
15
14
6
153
1989
44
23
23
20
7
19
143 a
1990
47
33
30
24
11
17
168 a
1991
51
48
33
27
14
15
196 a.c
1992
54
30
30
31 8
10
172 a
TOTAL
347
245
187 [
149 71
84 b
1,117 ’
a Data are fb i available for tour FY 1985 RODs, one FY 1986 ROD, one FY 1987 ROD, eight FY 1989 RODs. SIX
FY 1990 Federal Facility RODs, four F? 1991 RODs, and nine F? 1992 RODs
b Includes a combined remedial cost for the Er,v,rochern, IN and Northside, IN, which are both presented in one
ROD
C Includes combined remedial costs for the following sites, Lernberger Landfill, WI arid Lemberger Transport &
Recycling, WI, Advanced Micro Devices 901, CA, Signelics, CA, and TRW Microwave, CA. Monolithic Memories,
CA, and National Semiconductor, CA, Spectra-Physics, CA, and Teledyne Semiconductor. CA.
55
-------
SECTION
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS
Record of Decision (ROD) surnxnanes are arranged alphabetically by Region; however, not every State may
have a ROD signed in FY 1992
Each ROD summary consists of the following information elements.
• Site History/Description — summarizing site location and background information relevant to the.
remedial operable unit, scope of the operable unit within the site cleanup plan, contaminated media, and
key contaminants
• Selected Remedial Action — providing the principal elements of the selected remedial action, present
worth or capital cost, and operations and maintenance (O&M) cost.
• Performance Standards or Goals — describing qualitative/quantitative cleanup criteria
• Institutional Controls — describing ordered site restnctions
• Keywords — highlighting treatment technologies, contaminated media, key contaminants, and major
keyword categories for each ROD A quantitative list of RODS, by keyword, is presented in Section IV
A list of RODS signed in FY 1992 and corresponding page numbers precedes the abstracts in this section.
57
-------
SECTION II
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS (Continued)
RegIon 1
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME 63
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME 65
Darling Hill Dump, yr 66
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI •. 67
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA 69
PSC Resources, rv t 70
Revere Textile Prints, CT
Tibbetts Road, NH 73
Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH 75
RegIon 2
Action Anodizing, Plating, and Polishing, NY 76
Bioclinical Laboratones, NY
Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ 78
Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ 80
Ellis Property, NJ 81
Endicott Village Well Field, NY 63
Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ 85
FAA Technical Center, NJ
Facet Enterprises, NY 87
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY 89
Higgins Farm, NJ 91
Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ 92
Industrial l..atex, NJ 94
Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY 96
Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ 98
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 5), NJ 100
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 6), NJ 101
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ 102
North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY 104
Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY 105
Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY 106
Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY 107
Preferred Plating, NY - 108
Ramapo Landfill, NY
Robintech/National Pipe, NY 111
Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY 112
Witco Chemical (Oakland Plant), NJ 113
Region 3
Abex,VA 114
Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA 116
Butz Landfill, PA 118
C&D Recycling, PA 119
Chem-Solv, DE 121
58
-------
SECTION II
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS (Continued)
Region 3 (Continued)
Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA 122
Dixie Caverns County Landfill, VA 123
Dublin Water Supply, PA 124
Eastern Diversified Metals, PA 126
Fike chemical, WV 127
Lindane Dump, PA 129
MW Manufacturing, PA 131
Paoh Rail Yard, PA 133
Raymark, PA 135
Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA 137
Route 940 Drum Dump, PA 139
Strasburg Landfill, PA 140
Suffolk City Landfill, VA 141
Tonolli, PA 142
U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA 144
U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA 145
USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD 147
Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA 148
Region 4
Agnco Chemical, FL 150
Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL 151
Benfield Industries, NC 153
Carrier Air Conditioning, TN 155
Chem-Form, FL 157
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL 158
Florida Steel, FL 160
Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC 162
JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC 163
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL 165
Marine Corps Logistics Base, GA 167
Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN 168
National Electric Coil/Cooper Industries, KY 170
New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC 171
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC 173
Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 1), SC 175
Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2), SC 177
Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 3), SC 179
Standard Auto Bumper, FL 180
USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN 181
USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 18), TN 182
USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC 183
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL 184
Wilson Concepts of Flonda, FL 186
Woodbury Chemical (Princeton Plant), FL 187
Yellow Water Road Dump, FL 188
59
-------
SECTION Ii
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS (Continued)
Region 5
Alsco Anaconda, OH 190
American Chemical Services, fl J 191
Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI 193
Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI 195
Canneltort Industries, Ml 196
Central illinois Public Service, IL 198
City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI 200
Clare Water Supply, MI 202
Columbus Old Municipal Landfill, IN 204
Electrovoice, MI 205
Grand Traverse Overall Supply, MI 207
H. Brown Company, MI 208
HagenFarm,WI 210
Kohier Landfill, WI 212
La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN 213
Metal Working Shop, MI 214
MIDCO I (Amendment), IN 215
MIDCO II (Amendment), 217
Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI 219
New Brighton/Arden Hills, 4J ..J 221
Peerless Plating, MI
Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN 225
Redly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN 227
Savanna Army Depot, IL 228
Skinner Landfill, OH 229
South Andover (Operable Unit 1) (Amendment). MN . 230
South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN 231
Spickler Landfill, 232
TarLake ,MI 231
Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), MI .- 236
Tn County Landfill, 238
Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN 240
Region 6
Cal West Metals, NM 241
Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX 242
Double Eagle Refinery, OK 243
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK 245
Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1), LA 246
Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA 248
Kopper (Texarkana Plant) (Amendment), TX 250
Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK 251
Oklahoma Refining, OK 252
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM
60
-------
SECTION!! __________________________
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS (Continued)
Region 7
29th and Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS
Des Moines ICE, 258
Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative, LA 259
Hydro-Flex, KS 260
Pester Refinery, KS 261
Region 8
Broderick Wood Products, CO 262
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO 264
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO 266
Hill Air Force Base, UT 267
Idaho Pole, MT 268
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT 270
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT 272
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT 274
Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), liT 276
Rocky Flats Plant (tJSDOE) (Operable Unit 2), CO 277
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 4), CO . 279
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT 281
Region 9
Hassayarnpa LartdfW ,
Iron Mountain Mine, CA 284
Jasco Chemical, CA 285
Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA 287
Pacific Coast Pipeline, 289
Punty Oil Sales, CA 290
Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, 292
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA 294
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4). CA 295
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA 296
Region 10
Arrconi (Drexier Enterprise), ID 298
Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Submarine Base), WA 299
Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID 301
Eielson Air Force Base, AX 34)3
Elmendorf Air Force Base, 305
Fort Lewis (Landfill No 5), WA
Joseph Forest Products, OR
McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA 34)9
Mountain Home Air Force Base, H) 310
N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA 311
Pacthc Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID 312
61
-------
_________________________ SECTION II
RECORD OF DECISION ABSTRACTS (Continued)
Region 10 (contInued)
Pesticide Lab - Yakima, WA ... .313
Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR 314
U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID 315
U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID 317
U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID 318
U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID 319
Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA 320
62
-------
BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION (OPERABLE UNIT 1), ME
June 16, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 3,094-acre Brunswick Naval Air Station (NAS
Brunswick) site is an active military facility located
south of the Androscoggin River between Brunswick
and Bath, Maine. The primary mission of the Base is
to operate and maintain P-3 Orion aircraft for the
U.S Navy antisubmarine warfare operations in both
the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Land use
in the area surrounding the Base is primarily
residential, with an elementary school, hospital, and
college located I mile west of the site boundary The
southern edge of the Base borders coves and estuanes
of Harpswell Cove. Ground water underlying the site
is described as a potential source of drinking water,
but NAS Brunswick currently is serviced by a public
water supply system. NAS Brunswick, which first
became active in the 1940’s during World War II, has
many areas onsite that were used for disposal of
hazardous materials Two former landfill areas,
known as Sites 1 and 3, are in the central portion of
the Base and were used for the disposal of waste oil,
food waste, solvents, pesticides, petroleum products,
paint wastes, and isopropyl alcohol Site 1 was
utilized from 1955 to 1975 and Site 3. from 1960 to
1973 Since 1983, the Navy and EPA have conducted
several investigations regarding the past usage and
disposal of hazardous substances. These revealed
contamination of the soil, sediment, and ground water
in Sites 1 and 3 with VOCs and metals This ROD
addresses containment of the buried wastes at the Site
I and 3 areas and recovery of contaminated ground
water to prevent further migration Future RODs will
address additional ground water plumes and other
source OUs The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, and ground water are
VOCs, including benzene, toluene, methylene
chlonde, and DCE, other organics, including PAHs,
and metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes the
constructing a low permeability RCRA cap over the
landfills and a slurry wall around the waste to divert
clean water away from the landfills, conducting
treatability tests before designing the treatment
system, pumping and onsite treatment approximately
16 million gallons of contaminated ground water,
which is contained by the cap and slurry wall, using
chemical oxidation, flocculation, clarification, and
filtration to remove the metals and ultraviolet
oxidation to destroy VOCs in an onsite system
concurrent with the Eastern Plume ground water
(discussed as part of another ROD) to be most cost
effective: discharging the treated water offsite to the
local PC)TW once the water meets pretreatment levels,
and then into the Androscoggin River under a CWA
NPDES permit; monstonng system ground water to
confirm that the containment system is functioning
properly, and implementing institutional controls
including land, deed, and ground water use
restrictions to prevent future use of the landfills or
ground water. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $7,842,000, which includes a
net present worth O&M cost of $1,432,000 over a 30-
year period.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil/sediment clean-up goals were
not provided, as the risks presented by these media
are within the acceptable range established by EPA
A target clean-up level for mercury in soil/sediment
is specified at 1 mg/kg based on a food-web analysis,
as mercury was the only contaminant identified which
demonstrates a propensity to bioaccumulate in
terrestrial food chains Chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goals are based on SDWA MCLs and
include arsenic 50 ug/l; vinyl chloride 2 ug/l,
methylene chlonde 5 ug/l, 1,2-cis-DCE 70 ug/l; 1,2 -
trans-DCE 100 ug/1: chromium (total) 100 ug/l, lead
15 ugh (action level), and nickel 100 ug/I
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS
Deed and ground water use restrictions will be
implemented at the site to prevent future use of the
land or ground water affected by the former landfills
KEYWORDS
Arsenic, Capping, Carcinogenic Compounds,
Chromium, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground Water
Treatment, Institutional Controls, Landfill Closure;
Lead, MCLGs, MCLs, Metals, O&M, Offsite
Discharge, Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal:
Onsite Treatment, Plume Management, Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (P01W): RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act: Sediment, Slurry Wall: Soil,
63
-------
REGiON I
BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION (OPERABLE UN 1), ME (Continued)
June 16, 1992
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations; Surface
Water Collection Diversion; Surface Water
Monitoring, Treatabihty Studies; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria;
Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
Ground Water - Interim
64
-------
BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION (OPERABLE UNIT 2), ME
June16, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 3,094-acre Brunswick Naval Air Station site
(NAS Brunswick) is an active military facility located
south of the Androscoggin River between Brunswick
and Bath, Maine. The primary mission of the Base is
to operate and maintain P.3 Orion aircraft for the
U.S. Navy’s antisubmarine warfare operations in the
Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Land use in
the area surrounding the Base is primanly residential,
with an elementary school, hospital, and college
located I mile west of the site boundary. The
southern edge of the Base borders coves and estuaries
of Harpswell Cove. Ground water underlying the site
is described as a potential source of dnnlung water,
but currently NAS Brunswick is serviced by a public
water supply system. NAS Brunswick, which first
became active in the 1940’s during World War 11, has
many areas onsite that were used for past disposal of
hazardous materials. Investigations were conducted
by the U.S. Navy and EPA beginning in 1983 to
determine the contaminated site areas including, Sue
4, an acid/caustic pit used from 1969 to 1974 for
disposal of liquid wastes, Site 11, a former fire-
training area, used over a 30-year penod until 1990,
where fuels, oils, and degreasmg solvents were used
in the fire-training exercises; and Site 13, the Defense
Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) area,
consisting of three underground storage tanks
containing oils, waste fuels, and solvents which were
removed in the late 1980’s Extensive
hydrogeological data from a 1990 study delineated a
plume of VOC-contaminaied ground water extending
north to south along the eastern boundary of the site,
known as the Eastern Plume This ROD addresses an
interim remedy for Site 2, the Eastern Plume, the
source of which has been traced to Sites 4, 11, and
13 An additional 1992 ROD specified containment
of onsite buried wastes and ground water plume
management A future ROD will address a final
remedy for the ground water at NAS Brunswick The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water are VOCs, including PCE and TCE
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extracting and treating contaminated ground water
onsite using precipitation and filtration processes to
remove metals such as iron and manganese, and
UV/oxidation to remove VOCs, with offsite discharge
of the treated water to a local POTW for final
treatment; conducting treatability tests prior to design
of the treatment system, and implementing a Navy
monitoring program to ensure that the system is
effective. Extracted ground water for this OU will be
combined with ground water from OU1, the subject
of a previous ROD, and treated concurrently in a
single system The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $4,223,000, which includes an
O&M cost of $1,845,000 over 5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
C mical-specific ground water clean-up goals for
this site were based on SDWA MCLs and health-
based standards and include l,l,1-TCA 200 ugh; TCE
5 ug/l, PCE 5 ug/l, trans-l,2-DCE 100 ug/l, cis-l,2-
DCE 70 ugh, l,1-DCA 3,500 ug/l, and l,l-DCE
7 ugh The intenm action is intended to contain the
Eastern Plume and prevent further migration to
Harpswell Cove pending final remedial actions.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Water Act, Direct
Contact, Ground Water; Ground Water Monitonng,
Ground Water Treatment, Interim Remedy, MCLs;
O&M; Offsite Discharge, Offsite Treatment; Onsite
Treatment, PCE, Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(P01W), RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Solvents,
State Standards/Regulations; TCE; Treatability
Studies, Treatment Technology; VOCs, Water Quality
Criteria, Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06116/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - lntenm
65
-------
DARLING HILL DUMP, VT
June 30, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 3.5-acre Darling Hill Dump site is an inactive
solid waste disposal facility in the town of Lyndon,
Caledonia County, Vermont Land use in the area is
characterized by open woodland, agricultural, and
residential land. Steep slopes and the presence of
wetlands makes it unlikely that the land in the
immediate vicinity of the Dump will be further
developed for residential uses. In addition, the site
lies within the floodplain of the Passumpsic River
Approximately 3,200 residents withm the area are
served by the Lyndonville Municipal Well Field,
located within 0.5 mile to the southwest From 1952
to 1972, the site was operated by the Village of
Lyndonville as a disposal area accepting municipal
and industrial waste. During this time, the Darling
Hill Dump was never formally regulated or permitted.
From 1972 to 1989, Ray 0. Parker and Sons operated
the Darling Hill Dump and accepted primarily
construction debris and white goods. Approximately
100,000 cubic yards of material are contained within
the dump. As a result of detecting low levels of
VOCs in the ground water at the Lyndonville
Municipal Wellfield, a number of investigations were
performed by EPA and the state, which revealed
VOCs and metals in the ground water and soil at the
site Subsequent investigations have revealed that the
pumping of the municipal wells inhibits flow of
contaminants past the wellfield and that the site is
neither contaminating area surface waters nor posing
a significant physical hazard to area residences This
ROD addresses ground water, surface water, and
sediment at the Darling Hill Dump site. The results
of the RI show that the levels of organic compounds
and metals do not appear to pose an unacceptable risk
to human health or the environment, therefore, there
are no contaminants of concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action because significant levels of
contaminants are not present at the site EPA.
however, will continue to monitor the ground waxer,
surface water, and sediment for a 5-year period to
ensure the protectiveness of the no action remedy.
The estimated net present worth for the 5-year
monitoring program is $292,000. which includes an
annual monitoring cost of approximately $77,000
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Floodplain; Ground Water Monitoring; No Action
Remedy; 0&M; Surface Water Monitoring: Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
66
-------
NEWPORT NAVAL EDUCATION/TRAINING CENTER, RI
September 29, 1992
REGION I
SITE H1STORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 85-acre Naval Education and Training Center
(NETC) is a training facility and tank farm located on
Aquidneck Island, Middletown, Rhode Island. The
NETC facility is situated along 6 miles of shoreline
bordering Narragansett Bay. There are currently four
areas of contamination and six study areas, with
NETC Newport under investigation Tank Farm Five
consists of 11 underground storage tanks (USTs),
numbered 49 through 59, which were constructed
between 1942 and 1943 for fuel storage and used
until 1974. Between 1975 and 1982, Tanks 53 and 56
contained used oil for alternate use as heating fuel as
part of an oil recovery program In 1982, the state
adopted hazardous waste regulations, which were
applicable to the waste oils contained in Tanks 53 and
56 In 1983, sampling of the water, oil, and sludge in
the tanks was conducted, and results indicated
significant levels of lead, cadmium, chromium,
barium, mercury, and silver The water sample
collected from Tank 56 contained various
hydrocarbons In 1985, analytical results collected
from the monitoring wells installed in the ring drains
of Tanks 53 and 56 revealed the presence of several
chlorinated and aromatic hydrocarbons and traces of
mercury. In 1985, the state ordered the Navy to
remove and close Tanks 53 and 56 In 1990, oil was
observed to be leaking out of Tank 53 Subsequently,
the state required the Navy to remove the contents of
Tank 53, remediate the contaminated ground water
and soil surrounding the tanks, and investigate the
extent of oil contamination in the vicinity of Tanks 53
and 56 Later in 1990, the Navy performed removal
activities of the sludge, water, and oil layers from
Tanks 53 and 56 for treatment at an offsite facility
and steam-cleaned the tank walls to ensure that no
contamination was left pnor to tank demolition This
interim ROD addresses management of the ground
water in the vicinity of Tanks 53 and 56 to control or
prevent further migration of contaminated ground
water and remediation to begin to reduce the
concentration of contaminants until a final remedy can
be chosen Future RODs will address the final
remedy for the site, including both ground water and
source operable units. The pnmary contaminants of
concern affecting the ground water are VOCs,
including benzene and TCE, and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing an extraction system around Tanks 53
and 56 to contain the contaminated ground water
plume and prevent migration and potential discharge
to surface water bodies; treating ground water onsite
with a precipitation process that involves a
coagulation/filtration to remove metals, followed by
using UV/oxidation to treat VOCs, conducting a
treatability study dunng the final design of the
UV/oxidation treatment system to determine the
appropriate oxidant and concentration necessary to
destroy we VOCs, disposing of the filtration solids in
accordance with federal and state regulations,
discharging the treated ground water offsite to either
the local wastewater treatment facility, recycling
treated water back into the aquifer upgradient, or
onsite to surface water if the treatment facility is
unable the accept the pretreated water; and monitoring
ground water. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $3,500,000. which includes a
present worth O&M cost of $2,000,000 over 5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Interim chemical-specific clean-up goals axe based on
the MCLs and MCLGs and include arsenic 50 mg/kg
(MCL). benzene 5 mg/kg (MCL), chromium
100 mg/kg (MCLG), and lead 15 mg/kg (based on
EPA action level).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Benzene, Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean
Water Act, Direct Contact, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitonng. Ground Water Treatment, interim
Remedy, Lead, MCLGs, MCLs, Metals, O&M,
Offsite Discharge; Offsite Treatment, Onsite Disposal,
Onsite Treatment, Plume Management, Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (P01W), RCRA, Safe
Dnnking Water Act, Solvents, State Standards!
Regulations, Treatability Studies, VOCs; Water
Quality Cnteria
67
-------
REGION I
NEWPORT NAVAL EDUCATION/TRAINING CENTER, RI (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Intenm
68
-------
OTIS AIR NATIONAL GUARD/CAMP EDWARDS, MA
May 20, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 22,000-acre Otis National Guard/Camp Edwards
sue is a former military vehicle maintenance facility
on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, within the
Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR). The
Area of Contamination Chemical Spill Area Number
4 (AOC CS-4) plume extends 11,000 feet and is
located 1.1 miles from the southern boundary of
MMR. L.and use surrounding MMR is predominantly
residential and light industrial Ground water beneath
Cape Cod has been classified as a Class I, Sole
Source Aquifer under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
From 1940 to 1984, the site was used by the Federal
Government for vanous purposes. From 1940 to
1946, the U.S Army operated the site for
maintenance of nulitazy vehicles, and from 1955 to
1973, the USAF operated the vehicle area. Wastes
and equipment handled at AOC CS-4 included oils,
solvents, antifreeze, battery electrolytes, paint, and
waste fuels. Additionally, the northern portion of
AOC CS-4 was used as a storage yard for wastes
generated by shops and laboratories operating at
MMR Liquid wastes were stored in containers or
underground storage tanks (USTs) in an unbenned
area or deposited in USTs designated for motor
gasoline The UST waste storage contents were
removed in 1984, and the AOC CS-4 site has been
inactive srnce 1986 Since 1986, the DOD’s
Installation Restoration Program staff conducted
several investigations at MMR, which revealed that
ground water was contaminated with VOCs and may
migrate off of the MMR to the south. This ROD
addresses 0U2, the interim action for MMR AOC
CS-4 ground water to prevent further down gradient
migration of the contarninarns Future RODs will
address a final remedy for the AOC CS-4 plume upon
completion of the AOC CS-b ground water plume
study, while contaminated soil will be addressed as
pan of a removal action The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the ground water are VOCs,
including PCE and ICE
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remeiiial action for this site includes
onsue pumping and treatment of 790 million gallons
of coni.anunared ground waler using carbon adsorption
to remove VOCs, monitoring the influent and effluent
of the carbon absorption treatment, and discharging
the treated water to an onsiie infiltration trench, and
monitonng ground water. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action ranges from $2J 13.000
to $4,528,000, which includes a present worth O&M
cost ranging from $472,000 to $1,012,000 for 5 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for ground water are
based on SDWA MCLs and state standards and
include PCE 5 ugh; TCE 5 ugh); DCE 70 ugh), and
PCA 2 ugfl (10 nsk-based standard).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds,
Clean Air Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment, Interim
Remedy; MCLs; O&M; Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Treatment, PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act,
Sole-Source Aquifer, Solvents; State Permit; Siate
Standards/Regulations, ICE: VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - lntenm
69
-------
PSC RESOURCES, MA
September 15, 1992
REGION I
SITE IIISTC)RyIDESCRIPTION :
The 21.5-acre PSC Resources site is a former waste
oil and solvent reclamation facility located in Palmer,
Hampden County, Massachusetts. The PSC
Resources Property is composed of approximately
20 acres of surrounding residential, commercial,
recreational, woodland, and wetlands areas, mcluding
the Quaboag River. Site features include a concrete
and brick frame building. a garage. multiple concrete
tank cradles, storage tank pads, and a lagoon The
site is bordered by a recreational field, mixed woods
and wetlands, residential and commercial property.
and to the south by the Quaboag River. The PSC
property is also located within the 100-year floodplain
of the Quaboag River. which is part of the Chicopee
River Basin. The site overlies a ground water aquifer
that currently is not used for drinking water purposes.
Since 1898, there have been several owners of the
PSC property. most involved in oil industry functions.
In 1974, PSC Resources. Inc., purchased the property
to operate an oil storage and processing facility, and
in 1976, the company name was changed to Ag-Mel
Oil Services, Inc. The company began accepting
solvents and lacquers for collection and disposal In
late 1976, the company began operaung under the
name Newtown Refining Corporation; however, the
state denied their permit renewals Several state
inspections conducted between 1974 and 1976
revealed improper maintenance along with waste oil
and hazardous inatenals spills. In 1978, the facility
was closed, and the state required Newtown Refining
to begin removing 1.5 million gallons of waste oils
and sludge from the site. By 1982, little of that waste
bad been removed and an estimated 500,000 gallons
of waste remained onsite Oil had discharged to
adjacent wetlands and sampling of soil, sediment, and
surface water revealed contamination by VOCs,
metals. PAl-Is, and PCBs In 1986, the state initiated
two interun remedial measures (IRMs) to secure the
property and remove oils, sludge, drums, tanks, and
associated piping offsite. In 1991. EPA initiated a
removal action, which involved construction of a new,
full enclosure fence around the PSC property and the
adjacent spill area in the wetland This ROD
addresses the final remedy for the site, which includes
both source control and management of migration
components The pnmary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, debris, ground water, and
surface water are VOCs, including benzene, PCE, and
TCE; other organics, including PAils and PCBs; and
metals, including arsenic and lead.
SELECFED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action includes
decontaminating, demolishing, and offsite disposal of
debris and property structures at a RCRA landfill,
consolidating the contaminated soil with lagoon and
wetlands sediment onsite, and treating these materials
using stabilization; constructing a permeable cap over
the stabilized matenal; restoring affected wetlands;
treating lagoon surface water onsite using filtration
and a r.-anular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption
unit, followed by discharging the treated water into
the Quaboag River or to an ofisite facility, using
natural attenuation to achieve ground water clean-up
levels; morutonng ground water; conducting sediment
and surface water sampling; and implementing
institutional controls including deed, ground water and
land use restrictions. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $3,420,747, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $731,913
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil and sediment (lagoon only)
clean-up levels are based on health-risk standards and
SDWA MCLs, respectively, and include benzene
I mg/kg/3 mg/kg, TCE 2 mglkg/4 mg/kg, PCE
2 mg/kg/12 mg/kg, lead 500 mglkg/l5 mg/kg; total
PAHs 151 mg/kg; and total PCBs 1 mg/kg.
Chemical-specific wetlands sediment clean-up levels
are based on health-risk standards and include total
PAHs 10 mg/kg; total PCBs 1 mg/kg, arsenic
12 mg/kg; and lead 375 mg/kg Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up levels are based on SDWA
MCLs and state standards and include benzene 5 ug,
ICE 5 ug/l, PCE 5 ugh; and lead 15 ugh. An
ARAR waiver will be issued for certain requirements
of the chemical waste landfill regulations. which
require construction of chemical waste landfills in low
permeable clay conditions, the use of a synthetic
membrane liner, and that the bottom of the landfill be
50 feet above the historic high water table.
70
-------
REGION I
PSC RESOURCES, MA (Continued)
September 15, 1992
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed, ground
water, and land use restrictions will be implemented
to ensure that future use of the ground water and
future development of the land are prohibited until
clean-up standards have been attained.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver; Arsenic; Benzene; Capping, Carbon
Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris; Decontamination;
Direct Contact; Dredging; Excavation; Filling;
floodplain; Ground Water, Ground Waxer Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment, Institutional Controls;
Landfill Closure, Leachabthty Tesis, Lead, MCLGs,
MCLs, Metals; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite
Disposal. Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment,
Organics; PAHs; PCBs; PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Sediment; Soil; SolidjficatioriJ
Stabilization, Solvents, State Standa risfReguIaxions
Surface Water, Surface Water Monitoring; Surface
Water Treatment, TCE, Toxic Substances Control
Act, Treacability Studies, Treatment Technology,
VOCs; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment,
GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
71
-------
REVERE TEXTILE PRINTS, CT
September 30, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 15-acre Revere Textile Prints site is an industnal
facility, located in Sterling, Windhani County,
Connecticut- Land use in the area is a mix of rural
residential, industrial, and ‘agricultural, with
interspersed woodlands and grassland meadows. The
Moosup River and Sterling Pond are located
southwest and southeast of the site, respectively. The
property was originally developed in 1809 as a cotton
mill and was used continually for this purpose until
1879. From 1879 to 1980, several textile processing
facilities used the site to pnnt colored and patterned
fabrics, which involved using pigments. dyes, and
solvents Throughout the site’s history, process nnse
water and leftover pnnting pigments were disposed of
into floor drains that drained into Moosup River. In
1980, a fire forced the facility to shut down. A
subsequent state inspection revealed over 1,500 drums
of waste material at the site as well as stained or
colored soil near the former drum storage areas In
1980, the state ordered the PRP to dispose of the
1.500 drums offsite along with an unspecified amount
of stained soils, the action was completed in 1983.
Between 1982 and 1983, W.F. Norman Company
purchased the site for metal stamping operations, and
subsequently abandoned the site. In 1988. the Town
of Sterling acquired the site for its current use as a
light industrial park. In 1990, EPA ordered the Town
of Sterling to remove and dispose of several 55-gallon
drums and 5-gallon cans containing waste matena)
This ROD addresses site soil, sediment, ground water,
and surface water The results of the RI have shown
no evidence of significant site contamination, and
where contaminants were detected, the levels were
usually significantly below the federal MCLs
Therefore, there are no contaminants of concern
affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action, with implementation of a 5-year
sediment and ground water monitoring program. EPA
has determined that the previous intenm remedial
activities have eliminated the need to conduct
additional remedial acuons and are adequate to protect
human health and the environment The estimated net
present worth of this remedial action is $263,000 for
the site monitonng activities
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy.
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
SITE SUMMARY
72
-------
TIBBET S ROAD, NH
September 29, 1992
REGION 1
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFTION :
The 2-acre Tibbetts Road site is a former waste
storage and disposal facility in Barrington, Strafford
County, New Hampshire. Land use in the area is
predominantly indusinal with one unoccupied
residence onsite and five occupied residences located
within 200 feet of the site. The residents within one-
half mile of the site used ground water as their
pnmary source of drinking water. From the 1940’s to
present, the site was used as a storage area for
industrial wastes from automobile production and
painting In 1982, state investigations revealed that
improper storage techniques had led to many of the
storage barrels discharging their contents to the
ground, resulting in contamination of the ground
water In 1984, EPA conducted a removal action that
involved removing barrels and contaminated soil from
the site for offsite treatment and disposal A second
removal action was conducted by EPA in 1986, which
included excavating 405 cubic yards of soil containing
dioxins, PCBs, VOCs, and SVOCs, baekfilling and
capping the area, shipping PCB- and VOC-
contaminated soil offsite, and storing dioxin-
contaminated soil onsite, to be destroyed by infrared
incineration at a later date In 1987. EPA and the
state constructed a drinking water treatment plant to
provide an alternate water supply to local res dents
lliis ROD addresses a final remedy for debris and
ground water at the site The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the debris and ground water are
VOCs including, benzene, PCE. TCE. and xylenes,
other orgamcs. including PAHs. and metals, including
chromium and lead.
SELECTED REMEDLAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
removing and disposing buildings and debris offsite to
access the areas of contamination more efficientiy,
disposing of 15 barrels of incinerator ash residue and
spent carbon filters from a previous removal action
offsite, using trenches or wells to intercept ground
water in the bedrock aquifer. designing and
constructing a ground water dewatenng and extraction
system in the overburden aquifer, and treating air
emissions using granular activated carbon; treating the
contaminated ground water in an onsite treatment
plant using metals precipitation, chemical additives,
and UV/oxidation, with discharge of the treated
around water to intection wells onsite to promote
flushing of weathered bedrock: disposing of the
resulting sludge offsite; conducting a treatability study
to determine the appropriate oxidant and concentration
needed to destroy VOCs, upgrading and expanding
the water supply, as needed, monitonng ground water
and surface water; modifying or abandoning wells, if
necessary; and implementing institutional controls,
including deed and ground water use restrictions to
prevent the use of contaminated ground water The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $3,776,000, which includes a net present worth
O&M cost of $2,047,000 for 30 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS ;
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and MCLGs and state
standards and include PCE 5 ugll; toluene 1,000 ugh,
naphthalene 1.4.60 ug/l, arsenic 50 ug/l: manganese
3,650 ug/l; bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 4 ug/l; benzene
5 ug/l; xylenes 10,000 ug/l. TCE 5 ugh; and
chromium 100 ugIl.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
lnstitutional controls in the form of deed and ground
water use resmctions will be implemented to prevent
the use of the bedrock and overburdened aquifers
during the clean-up period
KEYWORDS :
Alternate Water Supply; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds. Chromium, Clean
Air Act, Clean Water Act. Debns, Direct Contact,
Drinking Water Contaminants, Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitonng, Ground Water Treatment.
Institutional Controls, Lead, MCLGs, MCLs, Metals,
O&M. Offsite Disposal, Onsite Discharge; Onsite
Treatment, Orgaracs, PAHs, PCE: RCRA: Safe
Drinking Water Act, State Standards/Regulations.
Surface Water Monitoring, ICE, Treatability Studies.
Treatment Technology. Vacuum Extraction, VOCs,
Water Quality Cntena, Xylenes
73
-------
TIBBET1S ROAD, NH (Continued)
September 29, 1992
REGION I
SITE SUMMARY
Date of prnious RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
74
-------
TOWN GARAGE/RADIO BEACON, NH
September 30, 1992
REGION I
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Town Garage Radio Beacon, NH, site includes
the Holton Circle residential development of 23
homes, a town garage area, and an undeveloped
hillslope and wetlands area in Londonderiy, New
Hampshire. Excluding the town garage. land use in
the area is predominantly residential. Drinking water
is obtained via private bedrock wells, with the
exception of nine residents on Holton Circle and
residents of the adjacent Isabella Drive development
who are connected to a public water supply. The
underlying aqwfer is a Class llb aquifer, a potential
source of drinlung water. From 1940 to 1968, the
area was owned by the Department of Defense
(DOD), who reportedly used it as a radio beacon
facility from 1940 and 1947. In 1968, the property
was transferred to the Town of Londonderry. Eight
acres of the property were used as a garage to store
town vehicles, along with road sand and salt, and to
perform routine maintenance on the vehicles; 12 more
acres were given to the Londonderry Housing and
Redevelopment Authority Site contamination was
discovered in 1984 when Holton Circle residents
requested that the state sample their bedrock wells
Resulting investigations showed VOCs at levels above
federal and state dnnking water standards The state
has continued to monitor the wells onsite and notes
that decreasing concentrations of 1,l,l-TCA and
increasing concentrations of 1,1-DCE and l,l-DCA
demonstrate that a degradation process is occumng
This ROD addresses a final remedy for the
contaminated ground water onsite. No other remedial
actions are anticipated for the site The primary
contaminants affecting the ground water are VOCs
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
allowing the contaminated ground water in the
overburden and bedrock aquifers to naturally
attenuate, implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions to prevent future use of
ground water; monitonng ground water, and
implementing a conugency remedy to provide an
alternate water supply to affected residences in the
event that contaminants into the drinking water wells
reverse their historical trend and concentrations begin
to increase beyond the clean-up levels. There are no
capital costs associated with this remedy; however the
estimated present worth O&M cost for this remedial
action is $1,250,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS
Chemical-specific interim ground water clean-up
levels are based on SDWA MCLGs and state
standards and include l,1-DCE 7 ug/l; l,l,1-TCA
200 ug/l; antimony 6 ugh; beiylhum 4 ugh; chromium
100 ugh; and barium 2,000 ughL Three years ai er
these levels have been achieved, a nsk assessment
will be performed to deternune whether the levels are
protective and, therefore, should be final.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of property deed
restrictions or local zoning ordinances will be
implemented to restrict future ground water use in the
town garage and undeveloped hillslope areas. A
drainage restriction also will be employed at the town
garage to prevent future releases to the ground water
KEYWORDS :
Alternate Water Supply, Carcinogenic Compounds.
Chromium, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act,
Contingent Remedy: Direct Contact, Drinking Water
Contam nants, Ground Water, Ground Water
Monitoring, Institutional Controls, MCLGs, MCLs,
Metals, O&M. Safe Drinking Water Act; State
Standards/Regulations, VOCs, Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
75
-------
ACTION ANODIZING, PLATING, AND POLISHING, NY
June 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 1-acre Action Anodizing, Plating, and Polishing
(AAPP) site is an active metal finishing shop located
in Babylon, Suffolk County, New York. Land use in
the area is primarily residential and commercial. An
estimated 1 million residents use public wells within
3 miles of the site for their drinking water supply.
From 1938 to 1968, a commercial laundry facility
operated onsite; subsequently, AAPP has operated at
the Site as a small metal-finishing plant. Site features
include the AAPP operating facility, an adjacent
storage area, and a residence. Onsite operations
involve sulfuric acid anodizing of aluminum parts for
the electronics industry, cadmium plating, chromate
conversion coatings, metal dyeing, and vapor
degreasing. Liquid wastes from these operations
include rinses of spent caustic and acidic solutions
contaminated with cadnuum, chromium, zinc, and
sodium cyanide. Prior to 1980, these spent solutions
and rinses flowed from a concrete waste-holding
trough to a septic tank and several leaching pits for
tank overflow. In 1980, the county identified elevated
levels of cadmium, chromium, and nickel in the onsite
leaching pus. That same year at the direction of the
county, AAPP removed the contaminated substances
from the leaching pits, backfihled. and closed the pits.
This ROD addresses OUl, which includes the whole
site Samples of ground water, soil, and sediment
taken from onsite and offsite areas during the RI
showed that contaminant levels were generally well
below state and federal standards and risk levels
Therefore, the AAPP site does not pose an
unacceptable risk to human health or the environment.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action, with the implementation of a ground
water monitonng program for I year to ensure that
the remedy is protective of human health and the
environment.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Background Levels; Ground Water Monitoring; No
Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
76
-------
BIOCUNICAL LABORATORIES, NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 2.6-acre Biochnical Laboratories (BCL) site is
located in Bohemia, Suffolk County, New York.
BCL occupied 1 unit in a l0-umt building, leased by
various tenants. Land use in the area is mixed
commercial, industrial, and residential. The nearest
residential development is found approximately
1,000 feet from the site, and most residents are
connected to the public water supply system. The
two aquifers underlying the site, the Upper Glacial
and the Magothy, represent the main source of
potable water for the area. From 1972 to 1984, BCL
used the site to formulate and repackage industrial
chemicals for wholesale distribution to manufacturers.
Dunng this process. indoor sinks that were used for
washing chemical mixing vessels drained to the east
sanitary sewer system In 1981, a fire partially
destroyed BCL’s chemical inventory and resulted in
surface water runoff of hazardous waste. The county
ordered BCL to clean out the sanitary system and
submit a plan for installing a ground water monitoring
system, however, no wells were ever installed lii
1984, the business was sold and moved to another
location: in 1990, It ceased operation entirely. An
additional source of contamination has been partially
attributed to another tenant at the site, the Panatone
Finishing Corporation Their metal fin:shing
operations were connected to the west sanitary sewer
system Numerous sanitary code violations by
Panatone led to a limited ground water investigation
by the county in 1981 that revealed 1,1,1-TCA and
1,l-DCA at concentrations above state drinking water
standards In addition to the west sanitary sewer
system, Panatone utilized a leaching pool on the north
side of the building to dispose of effluent In 1985,
this leaching pool was pumped out, cleaned, and
removed from service. Sampling performed by the
county in 1991 revealed no contamination in the east
sewer system and minor contamination in the west
sewer system. in 1992, the property owner and
current tenants cleaned out the contamination in the
west sewer system and were ordered to halt future
potentially hazardous discharges This ROD will
determine the nature and extent of contamination to
ensure protection of human health and the
environment and is the only OU planned for the site
As a result of previous clean-up activities, risk
assessment results indicate that contaminant levels do
not exceed risk-based standards; therefore, there are
no contaminants of concern affecting the site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action. The risk assessment results indicate that the
levels of contamination present in the soil, air,
sediment, and ground water present risks which fall
within or below EPA’s allowable risk range There
are no costs associated with the no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
77
-------
COSDEN CHEMICAL COATINGS, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HiSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 6.7-acre Cosden Chemical Coatings site is a paint
formulation and manufacturing facility in Beverly,
Burlington County, New Jersey. Land use in the area
is predominantly residential, with some light indusny.
An estimated 800 people reside within a 1-mile radius
of the site. During the manufactunng process,
pigments were mixed with resins and solvents in both
ball and sand mills prior to adding other ingredients
in mixing tanks to produce the final coating products.
Mixing tanks were then washed out with solvents, and
the rinsate was transferred to drums Until 1974,
organic solvents used in the manufactunng process
were recycled; thereafter, drums containing spent
solvents were stored onsite. Some of these drums
leaked onto the ground and caused soil and ground
water contamination. Additionally, solvents were
stored in underground storage tanks (USTs), which
may have leaked In 1980, a grass fire onsite
prompted stale investigations that revealed the
presence of surface spills and several hundred
unsecured drums. In 1985, the state ordered Cosden
to clean up the site, however, Cosden abandoned
clean-up efforts after 88 of 695 drums were removed
In 1986, the state undertook emergency removal of
the drummed material and clean-up of surface spills
around the drum storage areas Paint manufacturing
continued onsite until 1989, resulting in additional
drums accumulating onsite. In 1989. EPA initiated a
second removal action by constructing a fence around
areas of soil contamination and removing the
remaining drums, paint cans, pigment bags, mixing
tanks, and UST contents. However, as the removal
action neared completion in 1990, a fire occurred
inside the process building, which consumed a
majority of the building. This ROD addresses the
final remedy for the cleanup of contaminated soil.
ground water contamination in the underlying aquifer,
and the Cosden building The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil, debris, and ground water
are VOCs, including benzene. TCE, toluene. and
xylenes. other organics. including PAHs and PCBs,
metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead, and
inorganics, including asbestos.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating 8.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil onsite
using in-situ solidification, and disposing of a small
pile of concentrated PCB-contanunated soil offsite,
disposing of sludge generated during the treatment
process offsite; decontaminating and demolishing the
contaminated building onsite, and removing and/or
recycling decontaminated debris and equipment
offsite; removing asbestos and PCB-contazninated
debris offsite for disposal in an appropnate offsite
facility; treating ground waler onsite using
precipitation to remove inorganic contaminants,
followed by air stripping to remove VOCs. with
recharge of treated ground water to the underlying
aquifer, treating air emissions using carbon
adsorption, if determined to be necessary during
remedial design; and implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$15,172,800. which includes an annual O&M cost of
$585,500 for 1 year.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are risk-based
and include PCBs 1 mg/kg; chromium 390 to
78,000 mg/kg, and lead 500 mgRcg Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals are based on
state standards and SDWA MCLs and include toluene
1,000 ug/l; xylenes 44 ug/l; chromium 100 ug/l; and
lead 15 ugh
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to prevent
disturbance of the solidified soil
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Asbestos, Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Closure; Debris; Decontamination;
Direct Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment. lnorganics;
Institutional Controls: Laad: MCLs; MCLGs; Metals,
O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onstie Discharge, Onsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics, PAHs, PCBs,
RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; Solidificationl
Stabilization; Solvents; State Standards/Regulations;
ICE; Toluene; Toxic Substances Control Act,
Treatment Technology; VOCs; Xylenes
78
-------
REGION 2
COSDEN CHEMICAL COATiNGS, NJ (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
79
-------
DOVER MUNICIPAL WELL 4, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWTION :
The Dover Municipal Well 4 (DMW-4) site is located
within the 500-year floodplain of the Rockaway
River, in the Town of Dover, Moms County, New
Jersey. Surrounding land use is mixed residential and
commercial/light industrial. Ground water in the area
is classified as Class Il-A, a current source of
dnnking water. In the portion of the valley close to
DMW-4, two silt layers separate permeable sands into
a “shallow aquifer,” an “intermediate aquifer,” and a
“deep aquifer,” all of which are connected
hydraulically. Drilled in 1962, Dover Municipal Well
4 commenced pumping ii ’ 1965, as one of the Town’s
primary water supply wells. In 1980, sampling and
analysis of ground water from DMW-4 identified the
presence of VOCs —specifically, chlorinated
solvents—above federal and state dnnkmg water
standards Subsequently, DMW-4 was voluntarily
removed from service by the Town, and standby
Well 3 was activated as a potable water production
well. The sources of VOC contamination have been
traced to the Howmet Turbine Components
Corporation (Dover Casting Division) and the New
Jersey Natural Gas Company, both of which are under
state administrative consent orders to remediate their
individual properties. This ROD addresses
remediauon of the contaminated ground water in the
shallow, intermediate, and deep aquifers at the DMW-
4 site, as OUl. Future RODs will address any
additional ground water contamination onsite and the
potential source(s) of contamination The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water
are VOCs, including beuzene, PCE, and TCE, and
metals, including lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
onsite pumping and treatment of contaminated ground
water from both the intermediate and deep aquifers
using air stripping to remove VOCs. discharging the
treated water offsite to the public water supply system
to be used for potable waler, with reinjecuon of
surplus quantifies; performing a preliminary
assessment of air stripper emissions and discharge
requirements to determine if vapor phase treatment
using activated carbon will be necessary, and if so,
disposing of or recycling the spent carbon offsite,
monitoring air emissions; and monitoring ground
water to ensure effectiveness of the treatment system
and to determine if pretreatment for inorganics is
necessary. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $1,985,000, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $106,000 for 21 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on federal and state MCLs, including PCE
1 ug/l (state); TCE 1 ugh (state); toluene 1,000 ug/l
(federal), 1,1,1-TCA 26 ug/l (state); and lead 15 ug/l
(federal). Ground water will be treated to meet all
applicable drinking water standards prior to offsite
discharge to the public water supply. Any regulated
equipment used in the selected remedy will be
designed, constructed, and operated to meet state Air
Pollution Control and Noise Pollution Control Act
requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng, Air Stripping, Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants,
Floodplain. Ground Water: Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment: Lead, MCLs, Metals,
O&M, Offsite Discharge. Offsite Treatment, Onsite
Treatment; Safe Drinking Water Act, Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations. ICE. VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
80
-------
ELLIS PROPERTY, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 36acre Eths Property site is located in Evesham
Township, Burlington County. New Jersey Land in
the area immediately surrounding the site is pnmarily
agncuUural, and approximately 60 residences are
located within mile of the site A wetland area is
located to the east of the property, and the northeast
corner of the site lies within the 100-year floodplain.
Drainage from the wetland area flows to Sharps Run,
which is the nearest free-flowing surface water. The
site overlies part of the New Jersey Coastal Plain
aquifer, which has been classified as a potential
drinking water source. From 1968 to 1978,
approximately 4 acres of the property were used to
store and recondition drums Site features included a
two-story building, with severai washing tanks and
troughs, three sheds, a storage area, and a boiler.
Troughs from within the building drained into ditches,
then into the adjacent wetland Site reconditioning
operations ceased after a fire damaged some of the
buildings, however, onsite storage of drums continued
into the 1980’s State investigations in 1980 identified
stained soil, areas devoid of vegetation, and hundreds
of drums containing various unknown liquids, some
of which had corroded and were leaking into the
onsite soil Soil sampling and analysis revealed
contamination by hydrochloric acid, organic
compounds, metals, grease, and PCBs. in 1983 arid
1989 removal actions were conducted by EPA and the
state that addressed the sources of contamination, the
proper identification of wastes in drums, and removal
of the drums, waste, contaminated soil, sludge, and
debris offsite for appropriate disposal This ROD
addresses a final remedy for the remaining
contaminated soil and ground water at the site The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and ground water are VOCs, including PCE and ICE,
other organics. including PCBs, and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating all contaminated soil, and treating metal-
contaminated soil onsire or offsite using stabilization
if necessary, prior to offsite disposal in a landfill;
transporting organic- or PCB-cont.aininated soil offsite
for treatment by incineration, backfillmg the
excavated area with clean fill, collecting ground water
usir g interceptor trenches or extraction wells, and
treating the water onsite using precipitation and
ultrafiltration to remove metals, followed by air
stripping to remove VOCs, with reinjection of the
treated water onsite; treating air emissions if
necessary, using engineering controls to mitigate any
affected wetlands; and monitoring ground water The
estimated present worth cost far this remedial action
is $6,653,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$188,200 for years 0-1; $365,000 for the ground
water remediation for years 1-3; and $283,000 for
years 4-30
PF tFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil and ground water clean-up
goals are established based on the levels specified in
New Jersey’s Proposed Cleanup Standards for
Co,tramrnated Srtes (February 1992) Surface soil
clean-up standards include arsenic 20 mg/kg. lead
100 mg/kg; benzene 3 mg/kg; PCE 9 mg/kg, TCE
23 mg/kg(s), and PCBs 0.45 mg/kg The clean-up
standards for sub-surface soil include arsenic
20 mg/kg; lead 1 mg/kg; PCE 1 mg/kg: ICE I
mg/kg, and PCBs 100 mg/kg Ground water clean-up
standards include arsenic 8 ugh, chromium 100 ugh;
PCE 1 ugh, TCE I ugh, toluene 1,000 ugh; and lead
100 ug/l.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds,
Chromium; Direct Contact, Excavation, floodplain;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment, Incineration/Thermal Destruction.
Lead, Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal, Offsite
Treatment, Onsite Discharge, Onsite Treatment,
Orgaiucs, PCBs, PCE, RCRA, Safe Drinking Water
Act, Soil, Sohdification/Stabiliraiion, Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations, TCE, Toxic Substances
Control Act, Treatment Technology, VOCs, Wetlands
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
81
-------
SITE SUMMARY
ELLIS PROPERTY, NJ (Continued)
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, OW
VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
82
-------
ENDICOTT VILLAGE WELL FIELD, NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 16-acre Endicott Village Well Field sue is an
inactive landfill in the Village of Endicoit, Broome
County, New York. The site includes a municipal
drinking water supply well, known as the Ranney
well, that provides 47 percent of the total water
supply to the Village, and lies on the boundaries of
En-Joie Golf Course and Tn-Cities Airport. The
portion of the site adjacent to the Tn-Cities Airport
extends into an 8-acre area designated by the Federal
Aviation Administration as a controlled activity area
(CAM. Land use in the area is primarily industrial.
A wetlands area is located along the east and west
banks of Nantzcoke Creek, north of the Susquehanna
River. In addition, part of the site lies within the
lOO..year floodplain of the Susquehanna River. From
the late 1950’s to 1977, Endicort Village used the site
for storing municipal solid waste, as well as
residential, and industrial refUse In May 1981, EPA
detected vinyl chloride and other VOCs in the Ranney
well discharge. Subsequently, the state closed the
supply lines to the well and installed diffused air
aeration equipment to reduce VOCs levels in the soil
and ground water As a result of additional onsite
investigations, the state installed 9 monitoring wells
in 1983, and in 1984, installed a purge well and
additional monitoring wells Onsite contamination
was determined to be the result of a plume of
contaminated ground water emanating from the onsite
Landfill #1. Two prior RODs signed in 1987 and
1991, addressed ground water contamination at the
Ranney public supply well, and provided for
additional ground water control and treatment
measures using a purge welt, as OUl and 0U3.
respectively This ROD addresses the Endicoti
Village landfill #1, the source of the site
contamination, as 0U2 The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, debris, and ground water
are VOCs, including 1 ,2-DCE, benzene, PCE, TCE,
toluene, vinyl chionde. and xy lenes, other orgarncs,
including PANs, PCBs. and pesticides, and metals,
including lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
l’he selected remedial action for this site includes
capping the majority of landfill #1 with a low
permeability soil cap; covering the Tn-Cities Airport
Controlled Activity Area and the compost facility area
with a bituminous (asphalt) can. backfilhnc or
mitigating any affected wetlands; performing an
explosive gas investigation, and installing a passive
gas venting system; collecting and treating the ground
water and leachate seep using an air stripper, with
onsite discharge of the treated water and leachate to
the Susquehana River or transporting the ground
water and leachate offsite to a local POTW,
maintaining the landfill cap and venting system;
conducting long-term air and ground water
monitoring; and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions, and site access restrictions
such as fencing. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action ranges from $16,684,200 to
$16,889,400, which includes an annual O&M cost
ranging from $248,000 to $258,900
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chenucal-specific goals for ground water are based on
TCE 5 ug/l, chromium 5 ugh, and lead 5 ugh
Leachate collection, treatment, and disposal will be
designed to comply with SPDES discharge
requirements and air emission standards will be
adhered to for the air stripper.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to control
future land use of landfill # I and fencing will be
installed to ensure protection of the landfill cap
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Air Stripping, Benzene; Capping.
Carcinogenic Compounds, Direct Contact; Floodplain,
Ground Water Monitoring, lnorgarncs, Institutional
Controls, Landfill Closure, Leach ate
Colieccionlrreatment, MCLs, Metals, O&M, Onsite
Containment, Onsne Discharge, Onsite Disposal,
Onsite Treatment, Organics, PAHs, PCBs, PCE,
Pesticides, Pubhcly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW), Safe Drinking Water Act, Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations; TCE, Toluene, Venting:
VOCs, Wetlands, Xylenes
83
-------
REGION 2
ENDICOTT VILLAGE WELL FIELD, NY (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODS: 09125/87,03129/91
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Fianl Action
84
-------
EVOR PHILUPS LEASING, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 6.5-acre Evor Phillips Leasing Company site is a
former disposal facility in Old Bridge Township,
Middlesex County, New Jersey. Land use in the area
is predominantly industrial with four residences
located northwest of the site The Old Bndge Sand
Aquifer, which underlies the site, is a major dnnkiog
water source for the region Beginning in 1969, Evor
Phillips used the site for hauling activities until
leasing the property to North American Metal and
Chemical Company (NAMCC) in 1971. Silver
recovery operations were conducted at the site by
NAMCC. Waste x-rays and other waste film were
shipped to NAMCC, incinerated, and reduced to ash
Waste associated with the silver recovery operations,
specifically, silver and cyanide contaminated waste
waters, were reportedly discharged directly to the
ground The ash was shipped to an offsite facility for
metals recovery. Additionally, the Naval Ammunition
Depot Earle sent 2.000 gallons of drummed spent
potassium hydroxide to the NAMCC Drums
containing chlorinated solvents, aromatic
hydrocarbons. ammonia. benzene, toluene, xylene,
ketones and alcohols were allegedly disposed of in a
ravine at the west end of the site. In 1972, NAMCC
was issued a temporary permit to operate an industrial
waste treatment facility Previously stored drums and
containers remained on the property In 1973,
NAMCC and the state removed 1.100 drums and bulk
liquid waste from the site and constructed two
treatment ponds consisting of lined 50,000 gallon
concrete tanks for neutralization of acidic and caustic
waStewater . Between 1974 and 1975, the treatmen;
ponds were closed and all sludge was disposed of at
a landfill This ROD addresses an interim remedy
for contaminated ground water at the site and a final
remedy for the drum disposal areas as OU1 Future
RODs will address final remedies for onsite soil and
ground water The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the debris and ground water are VOCs,
including benzene, toluene, other orgazucs, including
TCE, PCE, and pesticides; and metals, including
chromium and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes excavating and overpacking approximately
30 buried drums, and removing these offsite for
disoosal alcoa with an estimated 50 drums currently
stored at the drum disposal area; extracting and
treating contaminated ground water onsite using
precipitation to remove inorganics, followed by air
smpptng to remove VOCs, with recharge of the
treated waler to the aquifer; treating air emissions
using carbon absorption, pnor to discharge to the
atmosphere; and conducting environmental
monitonng. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $7.21 1,948 which includes an
annual O&M cost of $717,996 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and state standards including
benzene 1 ugh (state); carbon tetrachloride 2 ug/l
(state), TCA 1 ugh (state); ICE I ug/I (state); arsenic
50 ug/l (MCL); and lead 15 mg/I (MCL). Disposal of
drums will be conducted according to RCRA
requirements for offsite Treatment. Storage or
Disposal (TSD) facilities.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Drinking Water
Contaminants, Excavation; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment, Interim
Remedy, Lead; MCLs, Metals, O&M, Offsite
Disposal, Onsite Discharge, Onsite Treatment,
Organics, PCE, Pesticides, RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act, Solvents, State Standards/Regulations,
TCE, Toluene, Treatability Studies, VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Category: Source Control - Interim
Ground Water - Interim
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
Debris, GW
VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
85
-------
FAA TECHNICAL CENTER, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWTION :
The 5,000-acre FAA Technical Center site is located
8 miles northwest of Atlantic City, Atlantic County,
New Jersey, within the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Land
use in the vicinity includes forested, commercial, and
residential areas. The sue was first developed in the
1930s, when the Atlantic City Reservoir was created
In 1942, a Naval Air Base, including most of the
existing runways, was constructed over two-thirds of
the property. Interest in the property was transferred
to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 1958
for use as research and development facilities and for
the 1979 construction of the existing
Technical/Administration Building. Atlantic City’s
municipal water supply is provided by nine ground
water supply wells located just north of the Upper
Atlantic City Reservoir on FAA property as well as
by water drawn directly from the Atlantic City
reservoirs. Currently, the site is composed of several
installations, which include the Atlantic City
International Air Terminal, New Jersey Air National
Guard 177th Fighter Interceptor Group, Upper
Atlantic City Reservoir, Laurel Memorial Park
Cemetery, and extensive facilities of the FAA
Technical Center From 1978 to 1985, transformers
containing PCB oil were stored on a 25- by 75-foot
concrete pad. referred to as Area G, located at the
lumber yard near building 125 in the western portion
of the property. Some transformers are known to
have leaked, contaminating the concrete pad and
surrounding soil Initial investigations in 1986
revealed PCB-contaminated soil and debns in Area G.
Dunng 1989, the entire concrete pad and
contaminated soil were collected, excavated, and
disposed of in an approved TSCA cell of a landfill.
This ROD addresses pnnctpal threats to human health
or the environment associated with PCB releases from
the Area G transformer storage location Based on
the results of subsequent sampling, it is believed that
Area G no longer poses a threat to human health or
the environment; therefore, there are no contaminants
of concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action. Based upon the completed removal actions
and nsk evaluation for Area G, is determined to be
protective of human health and the environment.
KEYWORDS :
Floodplain; No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODS: 09128/90, 09/26/89
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
86
-------
FACET ENTERPRISES, NY
September 4, 1992
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWrION :
The 31-acre Facet Enterprises site is a manufacturing
facility located in the Village of Elmira Heights,
Chemung County, New York. Land use in the area
is pnmanly residential and commercial. The site
overlies a Class ha aquifer, which is a potential
source of potable water. The facility, constructed in
1895, was first used by Eclipse. Inc. to manufacture
bicycles. From 1900 to 1960, Eclipse manufactured
motorcycles, engine and airplane pans, military
support pans, ammunition, and fuel pumps. During
that time, Bendix Aviation Corporation acquired
control of Eclipse. From 1960 to 1975, Eclipse, then
a division of Bendix, manufactured electric clutches
and brakes. In 1974, Facet Enterprises was
organized, then, in 1989, Purolator Products Company
became the corporate successor to Facet Over
10 different areas were used at the site for disposal of
wastes, including plating wastes, oil sludge, metal
hydroxide sludge, chrornic acid, PCBs, grinding chips,
and miscellaneous liquid wastes. These areas include
an oil/water separator, ponds, lagoons, drainage ways,
and several dry wells for the disposal of liquid
wastes. Since 1979, several site investigations have
been conducted by EPA and the state. A 1986 draft
remedial investigation revealed that VOCs, PCBs, and
PAHs were present in site soil and sediment, and that
VOCs, organics, and inorganics were detected in
ground water and surface water drainage streams at
concentrations above New York State standards.
Remedial measures, which were implemented at the
site in 1979, included excavating surface water
diversions, covering past disposal areas with soil, and
constructing a leachate collection system. In 1992,
Purolator excavated and removed 469 buried drums;
excavated 2,250 tons of contaminated soil; and
removed and sent 30,000 gallons of contaminated
liquids offsite to a RCRA facility This ROD
addresses a final remedy for the onsite contaminated
soil, sediment, debns, and ground water The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, sediment,
debris, and ground water are VOCs, including ICE,
benzene, toluene, xylenes, and PCE; other orgarncs,
including PCBs and PAils, and metals, including
arsenic and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating contaminated soil and sediment from the
disposal areas; disposing of approximately
1,275 cubic yards of TSCA waste with PCBs
concentrations greater than 50 ppm offsite in a secure
double-lined landfill facility, stabilizing of all RCRA
wastes to prevent leaching of metals and disposing of
2,124 cubic yards of waste in a secure offsite RCRA-
lined facility; disposing of approximately 120 cubic
yards of non-RCRA wastes in an offsite indusmal
waste landfill; extracting and storing contaminated
ground water in a central onsite collection tank,
followed by treatment using air stripping to remove
VOCs, and filtration and precipitation to remove
metals, if necessary; discharging the treated effluent
onsite to the facility non-contact cooling system or to
surface water; and implementing a long-term ground
water monitoring program and institutional controls
including land use restrictions The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $4,850,656,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $1,305,596
for 20 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Action levels for excavation of surface soil/sediment
are health-based and include benzo(a)anthracene
20 ppm!3 ppm, benzo(b)fluoranthene 20 ppm/3 ppm,
benzo(k)fluoranthefle 43 ppm/7 ppm, benzo(a)pyrene
3 ppm/I ppm, mdeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 12 ppmt2 ppm;
dibenzo(a.h) anthracene 3 ppm/I ppm, PCBs 10 ppm/
I ppm; arsenic 19 ppmfl ppm, and chromium
1110 ppm in sediment only. Action levels for
excavation of subsurface soil are also health-based
and include benzo(a)anthracefle 54 ppm;
benzo(b)fluoranthene 55 ppm; benzo(k)fluoranthefle
118 ppm, benzo(a)pyrene 8 ppm, indeno(l ,2,3-
cd)pyrene 33 ppm, PCBs 25 ppm, and arsenic
52 ppm. Chemical-specific clean-up goals for soil
and sediment are based on RCRA TCLP, Land Ban
regulations, and TSCA regulations Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals are based on SDWA
MCLs and state drinking water standards including
TCE 5 ug/l, xylenes 5 ug/l, and lead 2.5 ug/l
Chemical-specific ARARs will be waived if it is
determined by EPA that certain portions of the ground
water cannot be restored for beneficial use
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Zoning ordinances are recommended to control any
future site use that could create an exposure pathway
to subsurface soil If certain portions of the groun4 _
REGION 2
87
-------
REGION 2
FACET ENTERPRISES, NY (Continued)
September 4, 1992
water cannot be restored for beneficial use,
institutional controls will be provided to restrict use of
the aquifer.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic; Benzene; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chronuum; Debris; Direct Contact,
Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Institutional
Controls; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment; PAHs;
PCBs; PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Sediment; Soil; Solidificat.ionlStabilizatiofl; Solvents;
State Standards/Regulations; TCE; Toluene; Toxic
Substances Control Act, Treatment Technology;
VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sediment, Debris,
GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
88
-------
GENERAL. MOTORSFCENTRAL FOUNDRY DIVISION, NY
March 31, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYFDESCRIPTION :
The 270-acre General Motors/Central Foundry
Division site is an aluminum casting plant in
Massena, St. Lawrence County, New York. The site
is bordered on the north by the Si Lawrence River,
on the east by the St Regis River Mohawk Indian
Reservation, which includes Turtle Creek and
wetlands; on the south by the Raquette River, and on
the west by a manufactunng plant. Land use in the
area is mixed industrial and residential, with the
nearest residence located 300 feet from the site. The
site contains at least seven areas that were used
previously as waste disposal areas From 1959 to
1980, hydraulic fluids containing PCBs were used in
the manufacturing process at the plant. During the
1960’s and 1970’s, PCB oil-laden wastewater was
discharged onsite into four industrial lagoons,
resulting in PCB-laden sludge The sludge from these
lagoons was removed periodically and placed in the
unlined North and East Disposal Areas and in the
Industnal Landfill Solid industrial wastes were also
placed in the Industrial Landfill In 1975, a berm
surrounding the East Disposal Area was breached and
water and sludge flowed to the St Regis Mohawk
indian Reservation and Turtle Creek Visible spill
material was removed from the Reservation and
relocated to the site property. From 1985 to 1989,
General Motors investigations detected contamination
in soil, sludge, debris, sediment, and ground water
and surface water. In 1988, an intenm cap was
placed over the industrial landfill A 1990 ROD
addressed most affected areas of the site, including
the St Lawrence River System sediment.
contaminated ground water, soil on the facility and
the St Regis Mohawk Indian Reservation, and
matena] at four lagoons and the North Disposal Area
This ROD provides the final remedy for the
contaminated soil, sludge, debris, ground water, and
surface water at the East Disposal Area and the
Industrial Lagoon The primazy contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, sludge, debris, ground
water, and surface water are VOCs, including TCE,
other organics, including PAHs, PCBs, phenols, and
oils
debris, and all visibly oily soil from the East Disposal
Area, followed by onsite treatment using either
biological, thermal destruction, or another treatment as
determined by the results of treatability studies
performed as part of remedy for OU 1, disposing of
debns offsite, consolidating and containing soil with
PCB levels below 500 mg/kg in the East Disposal
Area along with the treated soil and sludge, and
covering the area with a composite cover,
recontounng, regrading, and containing contaminated
material from the Industrial Lagoon onsite with a
composite cover; installing a slurry wall to control
ground water migration and a runoff collection and
treatment system to treat surface water, prior to onsite
discharge at the East Disposal and the Industrial
Lagoon areas, based on testing results; treating ground
water onsite using air stripping to remove VOCs and
carbon adsorption to remove PCB5, with onsite
discharge to the St. Lawrence River, monitoring
ground water, surface water, and air, and
implementing institutional controls, including deed
restrictions, to discourage use as a residential area
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action ranges from $31,000,000 to $45,000,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $567,000 for
years 0-2 and $200,000 for years 3-28.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The chemical-specific clean-up goal for treated soil
residuals is tO mg/kg for PCB5, which is an onsite
residual disposal ARAR waiver of the TSCA
regulation concerning landfill requirements of
2 mg/kg for PCBs; for sludge with initial PCB
>500 mg/kg, clean-up residual level is 2 mg/kg
(TSCA) Ground water clean-up goals are based on
SDWA and state standards, and include PCBs
0.1 ug/l, TCE 5 ugh, and total phenols I ug/l
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be placed on the property to
discourage future residential use
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 174,000 cubic yards of soil containing
greater than or eciual to 500 mg/kg PCBs, sludge ,
89
-------
REGION 2
GENERAL MOTORS/CENTRAL FOUNDRY DIVISION, NY (Continued)
March 31, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Air Stripping; ARAR Waiver,
Biodegradation/Land Application; Capping; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Closure Requirements. Debns; Direct
Contact; Excavation; Filling; Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitonng; Ground Water Treatment:
lncinerauonlFhermal Destruction, Institutional
Controls; MCLs; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Oils; Onsite
Containment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal;
Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs; PCBs, Phenols;
RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act, Sludge, Slurry
Wall; Soil; Solvents; State StandardslRegulalions;
Surface Water Collection/Diversion; Surface Water
Monitonng, Surface Water Treatment, TCE; Toxic
Substances Control Act; Treatment Technology;
VOCs; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 12117/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge, Debns, GW,
SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Oils
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waler - Final Acuon
90
-------
HIGGINS FARM, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFHON :
The 75-acre Higgins Farm site is a former cattle farm
in Franidin Township, Somerset County, New Jersey.
Land use in the area is predominantly agricultural,
with two residences located onsite. The estimated
3,200 people who reside within 3 miles of the site use
a municipal water supply well for their drrnking water
supply. During the 1960’s, municipal sludge and
penicillin waste were used as fertilizers on Higgins
Farm. The site also contains three holding tanks and
dnims containing material removed from previous
remedial investigations. In 1985, the city discovered
and reported elevated levels of chlorobenzene in a
potable well near the site. Additionally, the state
investigated and discovered the presence of a drum
burial dump site approximately 40 yards from the
contaminated well, lii 1986, the owner excavated
50 containers, including drums; however, dunng
excavation activities, some of the containers were
punctured and their contents spilled onto the ground.
Later in 1986, the state sampled residential wells and
discovered VOC contamination. The state also
collected soil samples and analyses indicated the
presence of VOCs, pesticides, metals, dioxins, and
furans In 1987, EPA responded to contamination in
drinking water wells by providing bottled water to
affected residents as an interim ground water remedy
(OUI), and EPA assumed the lead in mitigating the
site by constructing a barn of contaminated material,
draining, lining, and backfilhng the excavation pit;
pumping treated and stored liquids into holding tanks,
and fencing in the excavated pit area. In 1989,
carbon filters were installed to limit ingestion of
VOCs and mitigate the potential for human exposure
In 1992, EPA performed a removal action and
completed the excavation of 94 drums and
contaminated soil This ROD addresses the final
action for ground water to limit future migration of
contaminated ground water to offsite areas, as 0U2
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
ground water are VOCs, including benzene, PCE,
ICE, and xylenes.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The final remedial action for this site includes
installing ground water extraction wells around the
perimeter of the site; treating the contaminated ground
water onsite by processes that are expected to include
orecinitation. flocculation, clarification, filtration, air
stripping, intermediate pH adjustment, ion exchange,
and final pH adjustment, however, the exact system
will be developed during the RD phase; discharging
the treated ground water to onsite surface water;
monitoring ground water, surface water, and onsite
and offsite wells including downgradient residential
wells; and performing limited investigations to ensure
all sources of contamination have been identified,
with removal and offsite disposal of contaminated
materials that were previously remediated and are
currently stored onsite The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action ranges from $5,990,000
to $8,447,600, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$384,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS
Chemical-specific goals for ground water clean-up.
which are based on SDWA MCLs and state standards,
include benzene I ug/l (state), chlorobenzene 4 ugh
(state); cis-1,2-dichloroethene 10 ugh (state); vinyl
chlonde 2 ug/l (state); bis (2-ethyl hexyl) phthalate
6 ugh (MCL); and xylenes 44 ug/l
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Aeration, Air Stripping, Benzene; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Water Act, Direct Contact;
Drinking Water Contaminants, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment, MCLs,
O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Treatment. PCE, RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act,
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations, Surface Water
Monitoring; ICE, VOCs, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/24/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
91
-------
REGION 2
IMPERIAL OIL/CHAMPION CHEMICALS, NJ
September 30, 1992
SITE HiSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 15-acre Imperial OillChainpion Chemicals site is
an oil blending facility in Marlboro Township.
Monmouth County, New Jersey. The site is located
within the Matawan watershed of the Atlantic Coastal
Drainage Basin. Birch Swamp Brook, an intermittent
stream, collects discharge from a fire pond located
east of the berm. The site consists of a 4.2-acre oil
blending facility, which includes seven production.
storage, and maintenance buildings, and several oil
storage tanks. Land use in the area is predominantly
residential, and a wetland area is located to the north
of the site. The estimated 27,000 people who reside
within I mile of the site use the Enghshtown Aquifer.
which underlies the site, as their drinking water
supply. From 1912 to 1950, the facility and
associated land have been used for a variety of
business operations under various owners. In 1950,
Champion Chemicals Company acquired the property
Since 1969, the Imperial Oil Company has leased the
facility to support used oil reclamation and oil
blending repackaging operations. Waste products
from the reclamation process included wash water,
waste oils and sludge, and spent filter clay. In 1981,
the state identified onsite contamination by oil and
PCBs, metals in the onsite tank farm area and in soil,
waste samples, and sediment; and PCBs in the
adjacent Swamp Brook, which had resulted from
various onsite spills during operations. State
inspections of offsite areas identified oily stained soil.
In 1982, a site investigation was performed that
confirmed the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons,
PCBs, arsenic, and VOCs in the ground water and
soil, in addition to a floating product layer underneath
the former waste pile and catchment area A
subsequent state investigation in 1983 confirmed the
continued presence of oily stained soil in the areas
that had historically exhibited visible contamination
Results of an EPA Innovative Technology Evaluation
indicated that the solidification technology was
effective in remediating elevated concentrations of
metals in soil, but was ineffective in remediawig
PCBs and other organics. A 1990 ROD addressed the
principal threats posed by offsite areas, including
contaminated soil within the wetlands Subsequently,
in 1991, EPA installed extraction wells to remove a
petroleum-like product layer from the ground to
prevent a major source of ground water contamination
and reduce time needed to restore the aquifer to a
usable condition. This ROD addresses final
remediation of contaminated ground water as 0U2
Future RODs will address soil, sediment, surface
water, air, and any other outstanding contamination
sources The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water are ‘/OCs, including
benzene, PCE, ICE, toluene, and xylenes; other
orgarncs, including PAHs and PCBs; and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extracting and treating contaminated ground water
onsite using precipitation to remove inorganic
contaminants, and carbon adsorption to remove
organic contaminants; discharging the treated ground
water onsite to Birch Swamp: continuing the previous
removal action; conducting a wetlands assessment to
determine site impact, regenerating or disposing of the
spent carbon; disposing of any sludge generated
during the treatment process offsite; and conducting
environmental monitoring to ensure the effectiveness
of the remedy The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $9,647,000, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $515,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals, based
on federal MCLs and state levels, include benzene
I ugh, xylenes 40 ughl. toluene 1,000 ugh, pyrene
200 ugh, PCBs 5 ugh, arsenic 8 ug/l, beryllium
20 ug/l, and lead 10 ugfl
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Carbon Adsorption (GAC), Carcinogenic
Compounds, Direct Contact, Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment, Lead;
MCLs; Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal, Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment, Organics; PAHs, PCBs;
RCRA; Safe Drinking Waxer Act, Solvents: State
Standards/Regulations Toluene: Toxic Substances
Control Act: Treatability Studies: VOC5; Wetlands;
Xylenes.
92
-------
REGION 2
IMPERIAL OIL/CHAMPION CHEMICALS, NJ (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date or previous RODs: 09/26/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics ,
Metals
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
93
-------
INDUSTRIAL LATEX, NJ
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWrION :
The 9.67-acre industrial Latex site is a chemical
adhesives and natural and synthetic rubber compounds
manufacturer in Wallington, Bergen County, New
Jersey. Land use in the area is predominantly
residential, industrial, and recreational, with a wetland
area located near the northeast corner of the site. The
estimated 17,500 people who reside within 1 mile of
the site used four of the five public water supply
wells as their drinking waler supply; however, these
wells have been closed since 1985 because of ground
water contamination. From 1951 to 1980, the
Industrial Latex Corporation manufactured both
chemical adhesives and natural and synthetic rubber
compounds. Adhesives were initially formulated
using vegetable protein in a solvent base. Solvents
used in the process included acetone, heptane, hexane,
methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), and methylene chloride.
To reduce flammability, PCBs were introduced as a
fire retardant. In the late 1970’s, solvent-based
adhesives were replaced by water-based latex
adhesives Poor operational procedures and onsite
waste disposal practices, including chemical dumping,
resulted in widespread areas of surface and subsurface
contamination In 1980, the state conducted a site
inspection and found approximately 250 leaking
drums of various chemical compounds. The state
discovered that VOCs and materials contaminated
with PCBs were disposed of in an onsite sanitary
septic system. After site operations ceased in 1983,
the state conducted a second site inspection and
discovered approximately 1,600 leaking and open
drums. Analyses of the drums’ contents revealed the
presence of numerous VOCs and PCBs. In 1985, the
state ordered the site owner to properly dispose of the
drums; however, only about 400 drums were
removed In 1986. EPA initiated a removal action to
address the remaining 1,200 drums and 22 USTs at
the site. This ROD addresses the final remedy for the
contamination present in the soil, sediment, buildings
and equipment, drums, sludge, septic system, and
hardened latex, as the first of two operable units A
future ROD will address ground water contamination,
as 0U2. The pnmazy coinaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, sludge, and debris are
VOCs, including PCE, TCE, toluene, and xylenes;
other organics, including PAHs, PCBs, pesticides, and
phenols; and metals, including arsenic and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 600 buried drums with
off site disposal or incineration, dismantling
30 production vats from their steel supports and
draining any remaining material that is not hardened
into drums for offsite disposal or incineration;
disposing of the vats in an offsite landfill; removing
the floor drains and demolishing 41,000 square feet of
the onsite buildings with offsite disposal; excavating
the septic system along with 800 gallons of associated
liquids and 6 cubic yards of sludge with offsite
disposal; excavating and treating onsite an estimated
34,700 cubic yards of contaminated soil and sediment
using low thermal desorption; testing soil to determine
the need for stabilization prior to disposal, and
backfiuiog treated material onsite; transporting
residuals generated during the treatment process
offsite for disposal or treatment; treating offgases
using carbon adsorption or another appropriate
treatment; monitoring air; assessing the wetland area
and perfomung additional ground water investigations
during the remedial design phase; implementing
institutional controls, if necessary and site access
restrictions including fencing. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $17,883,600,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $4,848,700
for 1 year.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals, which are
based on the EPA Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund (RAGS), include PCBs 1 mg/kg;
heptachlor epoxide 0.1 mg/kg; benzo(a)anthracene
0.4 mg/kg; chrysene 13 mg/kg; bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate 46 mg/kg; indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
0.2 mg/kg, arsenic 3.6 mg/kg; and lead 500 mg/kg
Building material contaminated with PCBs greater
than 50 mg/kg will be disposed of in accordance with
TSCA/RCRA requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls may be implemented onsite, if
deemed necessary.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris; Excavation,
Inriner %hflnITherTflal Destruction, institutional
94
-------
REGION 2
INDUSTRIAL LATEX, NJ (Continued)
September 30, 1992
Controls; Landfill Closure; Lead; Metals; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PAHs; PCBs; PCE; Pesticides; Phenols;
RCRA; Sediment; Sludge; Soil; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; ICE; Toluene; Toxic
Substances Control Act; Treatability Studies:
Treatment Technology; VOCs; Wetlands; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sednient, Sludge,
Debns
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
95
-------
ISLIP MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFiLL NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 107.5-acre Ishp Municipal Sanitary Landfill site
is located in Hauppauge, Town of Islip, Suffolk
County. New York. Land use in the surrounding area
is predominantly residential, with a day care center
and an apartment complex located adjacent to the
northern edge of the landfill. The Glacial and
Magothy aquifers underlying the site are a primary
source of potable water in the region, and five public
supply wells are located within a 2-mile radius of the
site. Two perennial surface water bodies, the
Connetquot Brook and the North Branch of the
Nissequogue River, are located nearby and are used
for recreational purposes. From 1963 to 1990, the
site was operated as a municipal landfill, an
incinerator, which was constructed onsite, operated
from 1963 to 1968. Landfllling activities have
occurred in phases. Encompassing 55 4 acres, Phase
I (unlined area) and Phase II (lined area) of the
landfill received waste from the early 1960’s through
the early 1980’s It is believed that in 1978, sixty to
seventy 55-gallon drums of waste dry-cleaning solvent
were disposed of in these areas. The 13.4 acres
planned for Phase Ill will be used for disposal of
clean fill, and the remainder of the property is used
for temporary storage of ash fill, sand storage and
borrow areas, setback/buffer zones, vehicle storage,
and other support uses In 1979, the Town purchased
two houses adjacent to the site because of high
concentrations of methane detected in their
basements. An active gas-collection system was
installed to control nugration of explosive gases
beyond the site boundary Ground water
investigations, which were conducted in 1980,
revealed VOC contanunation in private wells Public
water mains or alternative water supplies were
extended to affected residents Dunng 1987, the
unlined area was capped, and a liner/leachate
collection system was installed over the cell for
vertical expansion of landfilhng operations. In 1990,
the state required the site to stop receiving municipal
waste and begin implementing a complete closure
program of the entire landfihled area This ROD
addresses a final remedy for the cont2minated soil,
debris, and ground water at the site The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, debris, and
ground water are VOCs, including benzene, PCE.
TCE, and toluene; other organics; and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECFED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing a modified geosynthetic membrane cap over
52 acres of the landfill; constructing a stormwaler
system to direct and control runoff from the site to
recharge basins; allowing ground water with total
VOC concentrations less than 50 ugh to naturally
attenuate; extracting and onsite treatment of ground
water with total VOC concentrations greater than 50
ugh using aeration, with discharge of the treated
water onsite to a recharge basin; determining if
carbon absorption will be required as a pohshing
treatment step to ensure compliance with state
discharge limits; conducting a treatability study to
determine the effectiveness of aeration in precipitating
metals from the ground water, and providing for a
contingency remedy that treats ground water using
chemical precipitation and air stripping; evaluating the
ground water treatment system to determine whether
an air pollution control device is necessary;
monitoring ground water and air, and implementing
institutional controls including deed and ground water
restrictions to prevent the installation of drinking
water wells in impacted areas. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $17,942,025,
which includes a present worth O&M cost of
$4,588,875 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals, which
are based on SDWA MCLs and state standards,
include benzene 5 ugh (MCL); PCE 5 ugh (MCL);
TCE 5 ug/1 (MCL), toluene 5 ugh (MCL); arsenic
0.025 mg!1 (state), chromium 50 ug/l, and lead
0.02 mg/I (state).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
This remedy includes recommendations that deed and
well restrictions be imposed to prevent the installation
of drinking water wells in impacted areas.
KEYWORDS :
Aeration, Air Monitoring; Arsenic; Benzene; Capping;
Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act;
Contingent Remedy; Direct Contact; Ground Water,
Ground Waler Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment
Institutional Controls; Landfill Closure; Lead; MCLs;
Metals: O&M: Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge ;
96
-------
REGION 2
ISUP MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFILL, NY (Continued)
September 30, 1992
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Tralinent Organics; PCE;
RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; Solvents;
State Standards /Regulations; Surface Water
Collection/Diversion; ICE; Toluene; Treatability
Studies; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
97
-------
K IN-BUC LANDFILL, NJ
September 28, 1992
REGION 2
SITE H1STORYIDESCRWI’ION :
The 200-acre Kin-Buc Landfill consists of several
inactive disposal areas and is located in Edison
Township, Middiesex County, New Jersey. Land use
in the area is predominantly industrial and
commercial, with some residences within 2 miles
north of the site. No drinking water supply wells are
located within a 2-mile radius of the site The Kin-
Buc site includes three landfill mounds: Kin-Buc I,
Kin-Buc II (directly north of Kin-Buc I), and Mound
B (southwest of Kin-Buc I and adjacent to the Raritan
River). Additionally, the low-lying Edmonds
Creek/Marsh area is situated between Kin-Buc I and
the adjacent Edison Landfill and a wetlands area.
Portions of the Km-Buc site lie within both the 100-
year floodplain of the Raritan River and a coastal
zone. From 1947 to 1977, Kin-Buc accepted
industrial and municipal waste, including solvents,
waste oils, paint sludge, cyanides, metal stripping
wastes, and paint thinners. An estimated 70 million
gallons of liquid waste and at least I million tons of
solid waste were disposed of at Kin-Buc between
1973 and 1976 alone. As a result of an oil spill in
1976, EPA conducted an investigation of the property.
In 1980, clean-up activities were initiated under the
Clean Water Act and included removal, treatment, and
disposal of leachate and dnimzned waste. Also in
1980, Kin-Buc was ordered to cap Kin-Buc I and II
A 1988 ROD addressed source control remedianon in
mounds I and II, the low-lying area, and Pool C as
OUl. This ROD addresses a final remedy for 0U2
which includes sediment and ground water in the
Edmonds Creek wetlands area. Mill Brook/Mamns
Creek, Mound B, and the low-lying area The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the
sediment, ground water, and surface water are VOCs.
including beozene and xylenes, other organics,
including PAHs and PCBs, and metals, including
arsenic.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 2,200 cubic yards of contaminated
sediment with PCB levels above 5 mg/kg using
excavation methods selected to control surface water
flow and nunimize impact to wetlands; dewaiermg,
consolidating, and disposing of the sediment onsite
within the OUI containment area, actively restoring
1.36 acres of affected wetlands in Edmonds
Creek! Marsh using a program to be developed during
the RD stage; maintaining the Mound B cover;
allowing natural attenuation to reduce contaminant
concentrations in the ground water to acceptable
levels; and conducting long-term monitoring of
ground water and surface water. If EPA determines
that disposal of 0U2 sediment in the OU I
containment area will delay construction of the OU I
remedy, a contingency remedy will be implemented,
which provides for offsite disposal of sediment at a
chemical waste facility. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $4,314,900, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $67,100 for 30
years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific excavation goals for sediment are
based on EPA’s evaluation of bioavailabiity, Office
of Water methods, and remediation goals at other
Superfund sites and include PCBs at 5 mg/kg. EPA
believes that a PCB-driven remedial action will also
affect reduction of the other contaminants onsite, such
as metals and PAHs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Benzene, Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Water Act; Contingent Remedy, Direct Contact,
Dredging; Excavation; Floodplain; Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitonng, Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Onsite Containment; Onsite Disposal,
Organics; PAHs; PCBs; RCRA; Sediment, Solvents;
State Standards/Regulations; Surface Water, Surface
Water/Diversion Collection; Surface Water
Monitonng, Surface Water Treatment; Toxic
Substances Control Act; VOCs, Wetlands; Xylenes
98
-------
REGION 2
KIN-BUC LANDFILL, NJ (Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/30/88
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Sediment. GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Fmal Action
99
-------
NAVAL AIR ENGINEERING CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 5), NJ
January 3, 1992
REGION 2
SITE H1STORY/nEsCmP’rIoN :
The 7,400-acre Naval Air Engineering Center
(NAEC) site is located in Jackson and Manchester
Townships, Ocean County, New Jersey,
approximately 14 miles inland from the Atlantic
Ocean. Surrounding land use is primarily
undeveloped woodlands and open areas, with the
closest residential area, the Borough of Lakehurst,
located southeast of the facility. The NAEC, which
lies within the Tons River Drainage Basin, contains
over 1.300 acres of flood-prone areas. In the vicinity
of NAEC. drinking water is generally supplied to the
populace by mwiicipal supply wells. Some pnvat
wells exist, but these are used primarily for irrigation
purposes. The U.S. Navy assumed control of the
property in 1919, and ft was formally commissioned
Naval Air Station (NAS) lakehurst in 1921. The
NAEC was moved from the Naval Base, Philadelphia
to NAS Lakehurst in 1974. The NAEC’s mission is
to conduct research, development, engineering, testing
and system integration, Itnuced production, and
procurement for aircraft and airborne weapons
systems. Historically, vanous operations at NAEC
have required the use, handling, storage, and
occasional onsite disposal of hazardous substances
Dunng the operational period of the facility, there
have been reported and suspected releases of these
substances into the environment The U.S. Air
Force’s Installation Restoration Program (IR?) has
identified 44 potenually contaminated sites at NAEC,
16 of which have warranted further tnvesugauon to
assess potential impacts. ER? investigations revealed
three of these sites, Sites 5, 19, and 21, as having
evidence of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination.
From 1958 to 1980, Site 5, the Arresting Engine
RSTS Track No. 2/Building 371. was used for the
surface storage of small amounts of liquid waste, such
as cleaning solvents, hydraulic fluid, and propylene
glycol. Leakage from stored materials at Site 5 has
resulted in visible soil discoloration Site 19, the
SATS Catapult (7401 Test Site), was abandoned in
the 1960’s and 1970’s, after which it became a minor
storage area for 55-gallon drums of waste material,
such as clutch and lubricating oils and jet fuel. In the
early 1980’s, twenty-two 55-gallon drums that had
potentially contaminated the soil were removed from
the site for offsite disposal. From 1958 to 1981,
solvents and jet fuel were stored at Site 21, the Jet-
Car Maintenance Shop. In 1983, stained soil areas
prompted NAEC to set up a hazardous waste drum
accumulation area with secondary containment at the
site. As part of a 1991 removal action at each of
these three sites, NAEC excavated and removed
offsite for disposal, a total of 76 cubic yards of soil
with petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations greater
than 1,000 mg/kg. This ROD addresses any potential
remaining petroleum hydrocarbon contamination at
Sites 5, 19, and 21, as 0U5. Future RODS will
address other Ot is at NAEC. EPA has determined
that the previously implemented removal actions have
eliminated the need to conduct additional clean-up
activities ax these sites; therefore, there are no
contaminants of concern affecting this site ,
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action because previously implemented removal
actions have eliminated the need to conduct additional
remedial action at sites 5, 19, and 21. There are no
costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Floodplain, No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 02/04/91,02/04/91
09130/91, 09130/91,
12 /31/91
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Containiriantc: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
100
-------
NAVAL AIR ENGINEERING CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 6), NJ
December31, 1991
REGION 2
SITE HLSTORY/DESCRIFflON :
The 7,400-acre Naval Air Engineering Center
(NAEC) site is located in Jackson and Manchester
Townships, Ocean County, New Jersey,
approximately 14 miles inland from the Atlantic
Ocean. Stitrounding land use is primarily
undeveloped woodlands and open areas, with the
closest residential area, the Borough of Lakehurst,
located southeast of the facility. The NAEC, which
lies within the Toms River Drainage Basin, contains
over 1,300 acres of flood-prone areas. Drinking
water in the vicinity of the site is generally supplied
to the residents by municipal supply wells. Some
private weLls exist, but these are used primarily for
irrigation puiposes. The U.S. Navy assumed control
of the property in 1919, and it was formally
commissioned Naval Air Station (NAS) Lakehurst in
1921. The NAEC was moved from the Naval Base,
Philadelphia to NAS Lakehurst in 1974. The NAECs
mission is to conduct research, development.
engineering, testing and system integration, limited
production, and procurement for aircraft and airborne
weapons systems. Historically, various operations ax
NAEC have required the use, handling, storage, and
occasional onsite disposal of hazardous substances.
During the operational period of the facility, there
have been reported and suspected releases of these
substances into the environment The U.S. Air
Force’s Installation Restoration Program (IRP) has
identified 44 contaminated sites at NAEC, 16 of
which have warranted further investigation to assess
potential impacts. One of these sites, Site 44, was
used over a 34-year period for testing and storage of
PCB-contaming electrical transformers As part of
past operating procedures at the site, a 3-ounce
sample of transformer oil was tested yearly and
disposed of onto the ground outside Building 191
An estimated total of 26 gallons of PCB oil has been
disposed of in this manner. IRP investigations at
Sute 44 revealed elevated levels of PCBs in soil, in
a 1991 removal action, NAEC excavated
approximately 13 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated
soil at concentrations greater than 5 mg/kg and
transported the soil offsite for incineration. This
ROD addresses any remaining conlanunated soil at
Site 44, as 0U6. Subsequent RODs will address
other OUs at NAEC. Post-excavation sampling has
confirmed that the previously implemented removal
action has accomplished the pnmary objective of
remediating the site; therefore, there are no
contaminants of concern affecting this site.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACflON :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action because the previously implemented removal
action has eliminated the need to conduct additional
clean-up activities. Recently conducted environmental
investigations show no evidence of any significant
contamination remaining at Site 44. There are no
costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
floodplain; No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 02104/91. 09/04(91,
09/30/91, 09/30191
Lead: Federal Facihty
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
101
-------
NAVAL AIR ENGINEERING CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 7), NJ
March 16, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 7,400-acre Naval Air Engineering Center
(NAEC) site is located in Jackson and Manchester
Townships, Ocean County,. New Jersey,
approximately 14 miles inland from the Atlantic
Ocean. Surrounding land use is primarily
undeveloped woodlands and open areas, with the
closest residential area, the Borough of Lakehurst.
located southeast of the facility. The NAEC, which
lies within the loins River Drainage Basin, contains
over 1,300 acres of flood-prone areas. In the vicinity
of NAEC, drinking waler is generally supplied to the
populace by municipal supply wells. Some private
wells exist, but these are primarily used for irrigation
purposes. The U.S. Navy assumed control of the
property in 1919, and it was formally commissioned
Naval Air Station (NAS) Lakehurst in 1921. The
NAEC was moved from the Naval Hase, Philadelphia
to NAS Lakehurst in 1974. NAEC’s mission is to
conduct research, development, engineering, testing
and system integration, lumted production and
procurement for aircraft and airborne weapons
systems. Historically, various operations at NAEC
have required the use, handling, storage, and
occasional onsite disposal of hazardous substances.
The U.S. Air Force’s Installation Restoration Program
(IRP) has identified 44 potentially contaminated sites
at NAEC. 16 of whicb have warranted further
investigation to assess potential impacts. Several of
these sites are located within Areas A and B of the
northeastern section of NAEC, where ground water
has been found to be contaminated with VOCs.
Area A is subdivided into two sections. Area A-East,
including Sites 14, 29. and 37; and Area A-West,
including Sites 12. 33, and 42. A wetland area is
adjacent to the northern edge of Area A Area B,
located immediately south of Area A, includes Sites
9, 13, 36, and 39 as well as Hangars 1, 2, and 3
Several reported or potential contaminant sources may
have contributed to the ground water contamination
beneath Areas A-East and B, including releases of
mixed liquid wastes from tire-fighting pits during
training activities (A-East), surface disposal of jet fuel
and gasoline (A-East), spills and leaks at former drum
storage area (A-East), leakage and spills from former
underground storage tanks (Area B), and releases
from a dry well receiving unknown liquids at
northeast corner of Hangar I (Area B) Reported or
potential contaminant sources at the sites in Area A-
West include leakage from two former underground
storage tanks (Site 12), releases from a former dry
cleaning facility (Site 12), discharges from a dry well
that received mixed liquid waste (Site 33), and
surface disposal of mixed wastes in a landfill
(Site 42). Six previous RODs have addressed other
OUs at NAEC. This ROD addresses an interim
remedy for the principal threat at the site, migration
of the contaminated groundwater plume from Areas
A and B. A future ROD will address a final remedy
for ground water and any other areas of conraniiniuion
in Areas A and B. The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil and ground water at the site
are VOCs, including benzene, PCE, ICE, toluene,
and xylenes; other organics, mcluding PAILS and
PCBs; and metals.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this sue includes
extracting and preweaung contaminated ground water
from six recovery weUs to remove metals, solids, and
free product; transporting the free product of ite for
recycling or disposal; treating ground water onsite
using air stripping and granular activated carbon to
remove VOCs, with discharge of the treated water
onsite to the aquifur through an imgauon and
infiltration system; spray imganng the treated water
over areas of subsurface soil contamination to
facilitate soil flushing and removal of soil
contaminants, treating air emissions from the air
stripping process using granular activated carbon,
pnor to discharge to the atmosphere, testing residual
sludge from the pretreatment processes for hazardous
waste characteristics and sending this offsiie for
appropriate disposal; and returning spent carbon
offsite to the vendor for regeneration The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$4,015,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$400,000 for 3 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical specific clean-up levels for ground water
and soil have not been identified because of the
interim nature of this remedial acuon. Clean-up goals
will be established when a final remedial action is
chosen. Treatment residuals will be tested to
determine whether RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions
apply.
102
-------
REGION 2
NAVAL AiR ENGINEERING CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 7), NJ (Continued)
March 16, 1992
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stnpping; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Deferred Decision; Direct Contact;
Floodplain; Ground Water; Ground Water Treamient;
Interim Remedy; Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal;
Onsjte Treatinent Organics; PAHs; PCBs; PCE;
RCRA; Soil; Soil WashinglFlushin 5 ; Solvents; State
StandardsiRegulauons; TCE; Toluene; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Wetlands; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 02/04/9!, 02/04/91.
09/3019!, 09130/91,
12/31/91, 01/03/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
Ground Waler - Interim
I -
103
-------
NORTH SEA MUNICIPAL LANDFiLL, NY
September 28, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFrION :
The 131-acre North Sea Municipal Landfill site is an
active landfill that is owned and operated by the
Town of Southampton in Suffolk County, New York.
Land use in the area is predominantly residential, with
approximately 15 homes located within a one-quarter
mile radius of the site. The site overhes a fresh waler
aquifer, which overlies a deeper saltwater aquifer.
Most of the adjacent homes obtain their drinking
water from private domestic wells, which tap into the
fresh water Upper Glacial aquifer. Fish Cove, a body
of saltwater with marshes connected via a tidal inlet
to the North Sea Harbor, is located 1,500 feet
northwest of the landfill. In 1963, a landfill was
constructed for the disposal of municipal solid waste,
refuse, debris, and septic system wastes from
residential, industrial, and commercial sources. There
are three main landfill areas: a 13 acre area
encompassing Cell #1 and related septic sludge
lagoons, which received septic system sludge in the
early 1960’s in addition to municipal solid waste; Cell
#2, which is 7 acres in size and was closed in 1990;
and Cell #3, which is currently active, and accepts
80,000 tons of municipal waste annually In 1986,
the septic sludge lagoons were decommissioned, and
sludge and 2 feet of soil were removed. A ground
water monitonng program, which has been conducted
by the Town of Southampton since 1979, revealed a
large ground water plume containing heavy metals
that was migrating from Cell #1 toward Fish Cove
As a result, several drinking water wells were closed
in 1981, and the town connected all residents in the
area to a public water supply. A 1989 ROD
addressed onsite source contamination as OU 1 and
provided for capping Cell #1 to reduce the potential
threat to human health and the environment by
reducing the risk of contaminant migration This
ROD addresses onsite ground water, as 0U2 Studies
conducted during the risk assessment for 0U2
confirmed that the nsks to human health are within
EPA’s acceptable risk range; therefore, there are no
contaminants of concern affecting this site.
Date of previous RODs: 09t29/89
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, with air and ground water monitoring There
are no costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Ground Water Monitoring; No Action
Remedy.
SiTE SUMMARY
104
-------
PASLEY SOLVENTS & CHEMiCAL, NY
April 24, 1992
REGION 2
SITE I{ISTORYIDESCRjP ’flON :
The approximately 0.5-acre Pasley Solvents and
Chemical site is a former oil, solvent, and chemical
storage tank farm located in the Town of Hempsiead,
Nassau County, New York. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial, with some commercial and
residential areas within one-fourth mile of the site.
The only drinking water source in the area consists of
aquifers; four public water supply wellfields are
located within 2 miles of the sue. Prior to 1969,
Commander Oil Corporation disrnbuted fuel nil at the
site. From 1969 to 1982, Pasley Solvents and
Chemicals Company distributed chemicals and used
the site for storage of waste and sludge scavenger
(Pasley) operations. In 1980, after Pasley requested
a chemical storage and removal permit, a state
Inspection revealed soil contamination with VOCs
beneath the above-ground storage tanks and
recommended a remedial investigation and clean-up
plan. In 1981, ground water monitoring wells were
installed and revealed that the ground water was also
contaminated with VOCs. All operations onsite
ceased in 1982. In 1988. all 12 above-ground storage
tanks were removed by the site owners under EPA
supervision. A separate site, upgradiern from the
Pasley facility, was shown to be contributing to the
background conlalxunatiori of the ground water. This
ROD addresses contaminated surface soil and ground
water as a final remedy. The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil and ground water are
VOCs. including benzeoe, PCE. ICE, toluene, and
xylenes; other organics, including PAHs; and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating 13.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil
onsite using vacuum extraction to remove aliphauc
hydrocarbons and soil flushing, as necessary, to
remove VOCs, followed by disposal of treatment
residuals at an offsite RCRA facility; ground water
pumping and onsite treatment using precipitation,
clarification, and filtration to remove heavy metals,
followed by treatment with air stripping to remove
VOCs; treating the liquid phase using granular
activated carbon as a final polishing step, with
recharge onsite into the aquifer or to infiltration
trenches; treating offgases from the air stripping
process using vapor phase activated carbon . disposinn
of residual carbon and sludge generated during the
treatment processes offsite; and monitoring soil and
ground water. The estimated present net worth cost
for this remedial action is $13,744,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $1,236,000 for 30
years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
SDWA MCLs to protect ground water by the
reduction of mobility and volume of cornammarns and
include PCE 1.4 mg/kg; ICE 0.7 mg/kg; toluene
1.5 mg/kg; and xylenes 1.2 mg/kg. Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals may be waived because
of the presence of an upgradient contamination source
from another site. Clean-up goals are based on the
upgradient concentrations of certain contaminants.
When the upgradient source has been remediated,
drinking water standards, such as SDWA MCLs and
state ground water quality regulations, will be
assignecL
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; ARAR Waiver, Background Levels;
Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds;
Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs;
O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Treatment; Organics; PAHs; Safe Drinking Water
Act; Soil; Soil Washing/Flushing; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; TCE, Toluene; Treatment
Technology; Vacuum Extraction; VOCs, Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waler - Final Action
105
-------
PLATISBURGH AIR FORCE BASE (OPERABLE UNIT 1), NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Plausburgh Air Force Base (AFB) site is located
south of the City of Plattsburgh, Clinton County, New
York. Surrounding land use is primarily residential
and light industrial. Ground water beneath the site is
not used as a drinking water source. Plausburgh AFB
has historically been engaged in numerous operations
that have required the use, handling, storage, and
disposal of hazardous materials. The U.S. Air Force’s
Installation Restoration Program (IRP) has identified
39 sites at Plattsburgh AFB as having suspected
cozuamination by hazardous materials. One of these
sites, the 10.1-acre LF-023 landfill, is located
approximately 300 feet from the Plattsburgh AFB
western boundary, and 600 feet northeast of a small
mobile home development. From (966 to 1981, the
Landfill received domestic wastes for disposal. Daily
operations consisted of digging 25-foot-deep trenches,
spreading and compacting the trash (typically bagged
household garbage), and backfilling with 6-inch layers
of sandy soil. Hazardous wastes were not routinely
disposed of in this landfill; however, hazardous
materials may have been deposited. Secondary
growth has begun to cover the landfill, allowing a
northern section of the site to be utilized as an
exercise training/obstacle course. Air Force site
investigations have revealed soil, sediment, surface
water, and ground water contamination. This ROD
addresses a final source control remedy for the
contaminated soil, sediment, ground water, and
surface water at the site, as OUI. Future RODS aze
planned to address other OUs at the Base. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, ground water, and surface water am VOCs,
including benzene and xylenes; other orgamcs,
including PAils and PCBs; and metals, including
arsenic.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
clearing and grubbing the site, establishing a low-
permeability vegetated cover system over the landfill;
diverting the surface water runoff to minimize erosion
of the cover and maintenance requirements; installing
a gas detection and monitoring system; developing a
post-closure plan to monitor, maintain, and inspect the
site; monitonng ground water and surface water and
implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $4,574,000, which includes an
estimated present worth O&M cost of $988,000 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil, sediment, and surface water
clean-up goals were not developed for the LF-023
source control action because discrete source areas
were not found. Clean-up levels for other
contaminated media associated with the site will be
established in a subsequent ROD, if necessary.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls for this site will be incorporated
into the Plattsburgh AFB Comprehensive Plan to
ensure that future owners will be made aware of the
landfill location, and to ensure that the integrity of the
liners and final cover will not be compromised.
KEYWORDS :
Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act;
Clean Water Act, Direct Contact; Ground Water
Monitoring; Hybrid/Alternate Closure; Institutional
Controls; Metals; O&M; Onsite Contmnni nt; Onsite
Disposal; Orgazucs; PAils, PCBs; Soil; Solvents;
State Standards/Regulations; Surface Water
Collection/Diversion; Surface Water Monitoring;
VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
106
-------
PLATTSBURGH AIR FORCE BASE (OPERABLE UNIT 3), NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWFION :
The Plausburgh Air Force Base (AFB) site is located
south of the City of Plattsburgh, Clinton County, New
York. Surrounding land use is primarily residential
and light industrial. Although two aquifers underlie
the site, ground water is not used as a dnnking water
source. Plattsburgh AFB has historically been
engaged in numerous operations that have required
the use, handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous
materials. The U.S. Air Force’s Installation
Restoration Program (LRP) has identified 39 sites at
Plansburgh AFB as having suspected contamination
by hazardous materials. One of these sites, the 13-
acre LF-022 landfill, is located on the western side of
the Base, 1.350 feet north of a small mobile home
development. From 1959 to 1966, the landfill
received domestic wastes from Piausburgh AFB for
disposal. Daily operations consisted of digging 25-
foot-deep trenches, spreading and burning the trash in
the trenches, and covering it with sandy soil.
Appropriate methods for hazardous waste disposal
were available at the Base during the operating period
of the landfill; therefore, it is unlikely that LF-022
received any hazardous waste. Air Force site
investigations revealed surface and subsurface soil
conrarrunation as well as limited ground water
contamination. This ROD addresses the contaminated
soil at the sue, as 0U3. to minimize potential current
and future ecological risks associated with exposure
to pesticides in surface soil Future RODs are
planned to address other OUs at the Base. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and debris are VOCs; other organics, including
pesticides, and metals, including chromium and lead.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical-specific soil and ground waier dean-up
levels were not developed because none of the
contaminants of concern identified in the baseline risk
assessment were found to pose an unacceptable risk
to either human health or the environment
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls for the site will be incorporated
into the Platlsburgb AFB Comprehensive Plan to
ensure that firtuze owners are aware of the landfill
location and that the integrity of the final cover will
not be compromised.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act
Debris; Direct Contact; Ground Water Monitoring;
HybricL’Akernate Closure; Instituthinal Controls; Lead;
Metals; O&M; Onsite Containment; Onsue Disposal;
Organics; Pesticides; Soil; State Standardsl
Regulations; Surface Water Collection/Diversion;
VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09130192
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, Debris
VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
SELECTED RE1 IEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
clearing and grubbing the landfill site, diverting
surface water runoff to minimize erosion of the cover
and nuntmize maintenance requirements; covering the
landfill with a 12-inch soil cover; revegetaung the
area to minimize erosion and enhance
evapotranspiration; developing a post-closure plan to
monitor, maintain, and inspect the site; monitoring
ground water; and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $2,114,000,
which includes a present worth O&M cost of
$866,000 for 30 years
107
-------
PREFERRED PLATING, NY
September 28, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 0.88-acre Preferred Plating site is a former metal
plating facility in Farmingdale, Town of Babylon,
Suffolk County, New York. Land use in the area is
mixed, with commercial and light industrial use to the
east and west, a residential area and U.S. Army
facility to the south, and a wooded area to the north.
An estimated 10,000 people who live within a 3-mile
radius of the site use ground water as the principal
source of drinking water. The naturally occurring
surface soil type is a sandy loam, which promotes
rapid infiltration to the ground waler. From 1951 to
1976, Preferred Plating Corporation (PPC) operated a
metal plating facility that degreased, cleaned, and
finished metal parts. This process resulted in the
onsite generation, storage, and disposal of hazardous
waste. Untreated wastewater was discharged to four
onsite concrete waste storage pits. In 1953, the
County found that the waste pits were cracked and
leaking and detected metals in ground water at the
site. In 1975, an SPDES permit was issued to PPC to
treat and then remove the wastewater. However, the
facility never complied with permit requirements. In
1976, PPC declared bankruptcy: subsequent owners
have not conducted similar operations onsite. A 1989
ROD addressed the VOCs and metal-contaminated
ground water onsite and upgradient. A subsequens
RI/FS detected VOCs and metals in subsurface soil
around the waste storage pits, the former sanitary
leaching pool, and the former steam condensate
leaching pool and line. This ROD addresses
subsurface soil contamination contributing to the
ground water problem attributable to the site. A
flitere OU will address the potentially contaminated
upgradient ground water as the final site remedy. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil are
VOCs, including benzene, PCE, ICE, toluene, and
xylenes, metals, including arsenic, chromium, and
lead; and inorganics, including cyanide.
areas; treating the soil offsite using solidification /
stabilization or another appropriate technology still to
be determined, with offsite disposal ax a RCRA-
permitted facility; and backfilling the excavated areas
with clean soil. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $1,423,700. No O&M costs
are associated with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Prior to disposal, the contaminated soil will be treated
to comply with RCRA LDRs. Chemical-specific soil
clean-up levels were nor provided.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Benzene; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act; Deferred Decision; Direct
Contact; Excavation; Filling; Inorganics; Lead;
Metals; Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Organics;
PCE; RCRA; Soil; Solidification/Stabilization;
Solvents; ICE; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09t22/89
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes jet
grouting of the building’s foundation to stabilize the
foundation dunng excavation; excavating
approximately 700 cubic yards of contaminated soil
from the waste storage pit area and approximately
350 cubic yards of contaminated soil from within,
around, and beneath the former sanitary leaching pool
and former steam condensate leaching pool and line
108
-------
RAMAPO LANDFiLL, NY
March 31, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HI5T0RyIDESCRIPrION :
The 60-acre former landfill site is located on a 96-
acre tract in the Town of Ramapo, Rockland County,
New York, about 35 miles northwest of New York
City. Utility comdors lie on three sides of the site,
including high-voltage power transmission lines. A
high-pressure gas line is to the south, a pistol range,
nonheast and a power substation, north of the site.
Surface water bodies in the site area include the
Ramapo River, Tome Brook, and Candle Brook. The
Ramapo River may be used as a dxinlung water
source, and Tome Brook is suitable for primary
contact recreation. The landfill consists of two major
lobes that are steeply sloped toward the Ramapo
River and Tome Brook. Ground water is withdrawn
from the area south and west of the site for residential
use. Ten water supply wells, operated by the Spring
Valley Water Supply Company and serving a
population of over 200,000, are located along the
Ramapo River both upstream and downstream of the
site. Several of these wells are located within
1,500 feet of the landfill; the closest lies
approximately 500 feet west of the site. Prior to
landfill operations in the 1950’s and 1960’s. portions
of the site were excavated as a gravel source, and in
1971, the Rockland County Department of Health
granted a permit to the Town of Ramapo for the
operation of the sanitary landfill Until 1984,
municipal waste was accepted in the landfill, and
construction and demolition debris was accepted at
the site until 1989. An offsite leachate collection
system, constructed in 1984, currently discharges an
average flow of 80.000 gallons per day to the Village
of Suffern Wastewaler Treatment Plant. The site iS
currendy being used as a compaction and transfer
facility by the Town of Ramapo. Trash and debris
are weighed at a weigh station/guardhouse, compacted
at a baler facility in the northeastern corner of the
site, and transferred to the Al Tun Landfill in Goshen.
New York This ROD represents the entire remedial
action for the sire by controlling source of
contamination arid the generation of leachate. and
treatment of contaminated ground waxer The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, debns,
ground water, and surface water are VOCs, including
benzene and xylenes; other organics. including PAHs
and phenols: and metals, including arsenic, chromium,
and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this Site includes
installing a multi-media cap over the 60-acre landfill;
improving the existing leachate collection system;
diverting surface waxer drainage; and relocating and/or
raising Tome Valley Road to allow for filling;
installing ground water extraction wells to supplement
the existing leachate collection system, and treating
the extracted ground water and leachate offsite at the
Suffern Wastewater Treatment PIant conducting long-
term ground water, surface water, and perimeter air
monitoring with venting or control, as required;
implementing institutional controls, including deed
restrictions; and providing for a contingency remedy
to provide preliminary design of the alternate water
supply system. and ground water pretreatment and
landfill gas treatment systems. if necessary. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
ranges from $19,890,000 to $26,423,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost ranging from $319,800
to $678,600 for 30 years. The present worth cost for
the contingency remedy ranges from $24,890,000 to
$30,880,000, which includes an annual of $319,600 to
$622,600 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific goals for leachate and shallow
ground water clean-up are based on the more stringent
New York State Water Quality Criteria standards.
Surface water standards are based on the more
stringent of human and aquatic ARARs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed and access restrictions, including posting and
fencing the landfill will prevent any activities which
may compromise the integrity of the cap.
KEYWORDS :
Air; Air Monitoring, Alternate Water Supply; Arsenic;
Beazene, Capping: Carcinogenic Compounds.
Chromium, Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act;
Contingent Remedy; Debris; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment: Institutional
Controls; Leachale Collectionfrreatmeflt; Lead;
Metals; O&M; Offsite Treatment; Onsite
Containment; PAHs; Phenols; Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (P01W), RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act: Soil; Solvents; State Standards !
109
-------
_________________________________________ REGION 2
RAMAPO LANDFILL, NY (Continued)
March 31, 1992
Regulations; Surface Water Surface Water Collection!
Diversion; Surface Water Monitoring; VOCs;
Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcen nt
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
110
-------
ROBINTECH/NATIONAL PIPE, NY
March 31, 1992
REGION 2
SITE fflSTORYIDESCRIPTION
The Ill-acre RobmtechlNatiOnal Pipe Company site
is a light industrial facility located in the Town of
Vestal, Broome County, New York. The facility is
situated in a regionally important industrial center
adjacent to Binghamton, NY, where an estimated
5,500 people live within 1 mile of the site. Two
distinct aquifers, which underlie the facility, provide
250,000 gallons of water per day for 10 onsite
production wells to meet requirements for cooling
water in the pipe production process. There are no
pnvate drinlung water wells in the vicinity of the site.
All residents are supplied with dnnking waier by the
Vestal well fields. In 1966, Robinson Technical
Products, later renamed Robintech Inc., constructed
the main building that currently exists onsite. The
first floor of the building was used to manufacture
aircraft engine mounts and automobile accelerator
cables; the second floor housed the assembly area for
electronic cable. In 1970, the first floor activities
were replaced with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe
extrusion operations. Since that time, several
successive site owners have continued PVC pipe
production at the site. During site operations, cooling
waters from the PVC operations were discharged to
an onsite settling tank to reduce particulate matter
before entenng the storm sewer. In 1984, a routine
state permit discharge compliance sample found
organic constituents not included in the permit
Further investigation resulted in the conclusion thai
ground water contamination beneath the site
originated from reinjection of wastewaler into the
PW-2 production well. This ROD is the first of two
operable units planned for the site and addresses
remediation of the contaminated ground water. A
future ROD will address suspected lead contamination
of onsite soil as 0U2 The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the ground water are VOCs,
including 1,l-DCE, l,2-DCE, 1,1,l-TCA,TCE, vinyl
chloride, and xylenes
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The remedial action for this site includes onsite
pumping and treatment of contaminated ground water
from the bedrock and overburden aquifers using air
stripping to remove VOCs, followed by discharge of
the treated water to the permitted effluent discharge
point or, depending on plant requirements, use of the
treated water in the plant process, utilizing air
emission controls, if determined to be necessary
during the RI) phase; conducting a semi-annual
monitoring program for 10 wells and the effluent
discharge to track the migration and concentration of
contaminants; invoking an ARAR waiver as
contingency measure, if the continued monitoring and
adjustments to the treatment system indicate that
portions of the aquifer cannot be restored to beneficial
use; and implementing institutional controls including
onsite and offsite deed restrictions to restrict ground
water use. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $2,255,877, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $242,286 for 15 to 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The selected remedy will achieve chemical-specific
ARARs based on SDWA MCLs and state equivalents
for the site, including TCE 5 ugh; l,I-DCE 5 ugh;
l,2-DCE 5 ug/l; 1,1,1-TCA 5 ug/l; and vinyl chloride
2 ugh. Air emissions from the stripping treatment
operations will comply with stale requirements for air
resources.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROI :
Deed restrictions will be recommended to appropriate
authorities in order to prevent extraction of
contanunaled ground water for potable purposes.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; ARAR Waiver: Carcinogenic
Compounds; Contingent Remedy; Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls, MCL5: O&M; Onsite
Discharge: Onsite Treatment; Safe Dnnking Water
Act; Solvents; State StandardslRegulatlofls ICE;
VOCs, Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODS: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
111
-------
ROWE INDUSTRIES GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION, NY
September 30, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 83-acre Rowe industries Groundwater
Contamination site is located in the Town of Sag
Harbor, Suffolk County, New York. Land use in the
surrounding area is mixed industrial, commercial, and
residentiaL Approximately 6,000 people within a 3-
mile radius of the site use ground water as their
primary drinking water source. Site features include
a bwlding that covers I acre of the site, and two
ponds located 300 and 700 feet to the northeast of the
building. Additionally, there is a wetland area onsne.
From the 1950’s to the 1960’s, Rowe Industries
occupied the site and manufactured small electric
motors and transformers. Chlorinated solvents were
used to degrease oil-coated metals, and waste solvents
were discharged from two tanks in the building into
cesspools or to an open field 75 to 100 feet east of
the building. A series of dry wells was used to
dispose of organic solvents while Rowe Industries
was in operation. From the late 1960’s until 1974,
the property was used by two other companies, Rowe
Industries-Aurora Plastics, Inc., and Nabisco, inc. In
1980, the site was sold to Sag Harbor Industries,
which currently uses the property as a facility to
manufacture electronic devices. VOC-contaminated
ground water was first discovered by the County in
1983, when several local private wells were sampled.
In 1985, EPA undertook a removal action to provide
an alternate water supply to residerns in the vicinity
of the ground water plume. This ROD addresses a
final remedy for the contamination in soil and ground
water attributable to the site. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground
water are VOCs, including beozene, PCE, TCE,
toluene. and xylenes; and metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead.
discharge to surface water, treating air emissions, if
necessary; and implementing a long-term ground
waier monitoring program. The esfirnnte l present
worth cost for this remedial action is $6,187,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $254,000 for
15 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals are
established to ensure that soil contaminants do not
coniribute to ground water contnminntion, and Include
benzene 0.5 mg/kg; PCE 1.5 mg/kg; ICE 1 mg/kg;
toluene 1.5 mg/kg; and xylencs 1.2 mg/kg.
Additionally, excavated soil sent for offsite disposal
will be treated, if necessary, according to RCRA LDR
standards. Chemical-specific ground water clean-up
goals are based on SDWA MCLs and MCLGs,
including arsenic 25 ugh; chloroform 7 ugh; PCE 5
ugh; TCE 5 ugh!; toluene 5 ugh!; and xyleaes 5 ug/l.
Treated ground water discharged to Sag Harbor Cove
will meet stale discharge requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic; Benzcne; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chromium Direct Contact; Excavation;
Floodplain; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment; Lead; MCLs; MCLGs;
Metals; O&M; Offtue Discharge; Offsite Disposal;
Offsrte Treatment; Onsite Treatment; PCE; RCRA;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; TCE; Toluene; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Wetlands; Xylencs.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 365 cubic yards of contaminated soil,
treating the soil offsite using incmerauon or another
equivalent technology to meet LDR disposal
standards, then disposing the soil at an offsite RCRA
landfill; conducting soil sampling to confirm that all
soil contaminated above clean-up levels has been
removed, pumping and onsite pretreatment of
contaminated ground water to remove iron and
manganese, followed by filtration to remove metals
and air stripping to remove VOCs. with offsite
SITE SUMMARY
J)ate of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
112
-------
WITCO CHEMICAL (OAKLAND PLANT), NJ
September 28, 1992
REGION 2
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWrION :
The 9-acre Witco Chemical (Oakland Plant) site, a
former technical research facility for the development
of specialty chemicals, is located in Oakland, Bergen
County, New Jersey. The Borough of Oakland has a
population of approximately 13,000 people, and with
the exception of one residential well, the area
downgradient from the site is supplied by a municipal
water supply system. From 1966 to 1984, the Witco
Chemical Corporation (Witco) neutralized laboratory
wastewaler in a 2,000-gallon underground acid
neutralizing tank, and then discharged it to a series of
underground seepage pits. In 1982, the state
inspected the facility to review operations and
wastewater management practices for compliance with
the State Water Pollution Control Act. The
investigation revealed that Witco had conducted
unpermiued discharge of industrial wastewater to
ground waler at the site. in 1982, the state ordered
Witco to take measures to cease unpemutted
discharges. in response to state directives. Witco
initiated a hydrogeological investigation in 1982 and
determined that site soil, sludge, and ground water
contained various organic compounds. Witco then
replaced its underground seepage pit with a 6,000-
gallon capacity fiberglass tank. In 1985, EPA
evaluated the potential contamination attributed to
Witco’s previous operation of the underground
seepage pit system and detected several chemicals of
concern, including 2-butanone and the pesticides DDT
and dieldrin. From 1987 to 1988, Witco voluntarily
disposed of approximately 720 cubic yards of soil and
other debris and founeen 55-gallon drums of sludge
that were shown to contain greater than 100 ppm of
petroleum hydrocarbons, and collected and analyzed
ground water samples from monitonng wells at the
facility. This ROD addresses any remaining soil and
ground water contamination resulting from site
activities. Based on the results of remedial
investigations, the removal of the seepage pits and
surrounding soil by Witco during 1987 has effectively
remediated the contamination at the site Therefore,
there are no contaminants of concern affecting this
site.
concentrations of hazardous substances remaining
onsite. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $8,660, which includes an annual
O&M cost of $2,000 for 5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy;
O&M.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, with ground water monitoring. Results of the
RI indicated that there are no si niflcant
113
-------
ABEX, VA
September 29, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The Abex site is a former brass and bronze foundry
in Portsmouth, Virginia. Land use in the surrounding
area is mixed residential, commercial, and light
industrial. The site is located approxunately one-half
mile west of Elizabeth River, within the 500-year
floodplain for the South branch of the River. The
Elizabeth River Basin is heavily industrialized and
receives wastewater discharges from U.S. Naval
facilities, heavy industry, treatment facilities, urban
runoff, and boating and docking facilities. From 1928
to 1978, Abex operated a facility that melted used
railroad car journal bearings into sand molds to cast
new railroad car beanngs. The sand casts became
laden with metals such as lead, antimony, copper, tin,
and zinc. The foundry operations also produced stack
emissions of fine particulate matter. During Abex’s
operations, waste sand was disposed of in a 1-acre
area immediately north of the foundry. In 1984,
Holland Investment and Manufaccunng Corporation
purchased the portion of the Abex site that contains
the former foundry, which included five buildings and
is referred to as the Holland Property. In 1986, EPA
discovered high levels of lead in the foundry waste
within the Abex Lot and in the soil of many
nerghbonng residential lots. That same year, Abex
performed a removal action to excavate and remove
lead-contaminated soil from residential areas around
the Abex lot, and to pave and fence the Abex and
McCready Lots In 1992, Abex excavated and
removed additional contaminated soil from adjacent
properties. This ROD addresses contamination in soil
and waste matenals on the Holland Property, Abex
Lot, and McCready Lot and in the surrounding
properties within a 700-foot radius of the foundry
facility, as OW. Future RODs will further
investigate ground water, ecological impacts, and
additional remediation of the soil for 0U2. The
primazy contaminants of concern affecting the soil are
orgamcs, including PAHs and PCBs, and metals,
inicuding chromium and lead.
SELEC1ED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
demolishing all foundry operations buildings, with
removal and decontamination of associated equipment
and demolition debris at an offsite landfill;
temporanly relocating residents during soil
excavation; removing and disposing of offsite any
asphalt and concrete from paved areas prior to soil
removal; excavating surface soil with lead
concentrations greater than 500 mg/kg and subsurface
soil with concentrations of lead exceeding 1,000
mg/kg from non-residential areas, from around
foundations, and under residences in affected
residential areas; temporarily storing these onsite prior
to treatment; testing, then treating any soil that
exhibits TCLP toxicity onsite using stabilization;
retesting the treated materials to ensure they meet
RCRA LDR requirements, followed by transporting
and disposing of treated and untreated soil and waste
materials offsite at a RCRA landfill; disposing of
water generated during the weamient processes offsite
ax a POTW; backfilling all excavated areas with clean
flU; installing erosion and sediment control measures;
and momtonng air for dust and lead during remedial
activities. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $28,891,243. There are no O&M
costs associated with this remedial action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals m residential
areas down to the waler table, which are based on
EPA’s policies for soil clean-up levels per OSWER
Directive #9355.4-02, include lead 500 mg/kg for
surface soil to one foot below surface and
1.000 mg/kg for subsurface soil from one foot below
surface to the water table. All excavated soil and
waste matenal will be tested using the TCLP method
and, if they exhibit toxicity, they will be stabilized
onsite to meet RCRA LDR standards prior to offsite
disposal.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring, Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris;
Decontamination, Direct Contact; Excavation;
floodplain, Lead; Metals; Offsite Discharge, Offsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAH5, PCBs;
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (P01W); RCRA;
Relocation; Soil; Solidification/Stabilization; State
S tandardsfRegu lations; Temporary Storage;
Treaiability Studies; Treatment Technology; Wetlands.
114
-------
REGION 3
ABEX, VA (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dales of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - Intenm
l ’s
-------
BROWN’S BATtERY BREAKING, PA
July 2, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 14-acre Brown’s Battery Breaking site is an
inactive lead acid battery processing facility in Tilden
Township, Berks County, Pennsylvania The area
surrounding the site is primarily agncultural with
scattered rural residences. The site is bordered by
Conrail tracks and Mill Creek. The entire site lies
within the 100-year floodplain of the SchuyLkill River.
From 1961 to 1971, the facility recovered lead-
bearing materials from automobile and truck batteries
by breaking the battery casings, draining the acid, and
recovenng the lead alloy, grids, plates, and plugs.
Dunng this time, battery acid and rinse water from
recovery activities were dumped onto the soil, and
crushed casings were disposed of onsite or used as a
substitute for road gravel. During the 1980’s, state
onsite and offsite investigations identified lead
concentrations in excess of acceptable limits in
residents’ blood levels, livestock, soil, and surface
waters. A 1983 EPA investigation also revealed
extensive lead contamination in onsite soil and
sediment located in the Schuylkill River. As a result
of the investigations, EPA initiated a removal action
that relocated three families, and excavated and
consolidated 13,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil
and battery casings into an onsite containment area,
which was capped with a low permeability cap in
1990, a second removal temporarily relocated all
onsite residents and implemented institutional
controls A 1990 ROD addressed implementation of
deed restrictions and relocation of affected residents
This ROD addresses the remediation of onsite soil,
battery casings, and ground water as a final action at
the site. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, debris, and ground water are metals,
including lead and nickel: and inorganics, including
sulfate.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and treating 67,000 cubic yards of soil and
battery casings offsite using an innovative thermal
treatment technology, followed by offsite disposal;
constructing two vertical limestone bamers in the
shallow aquifer to neutralize lead levels; pumping and
treatment of contaminated ground water in the
bedrock aquifer using pH adjustment. precipitation,
and ion exchange, with onsite discharge; transporting
sludge generated during the treatment process offsite
for disposal at a POTW; monitoring ground water;
and implementing institutional controls, including
deed resthcuons to limit site use; providing for a
contingent remedy, which allows for
stabilization/solidification of the soil and casings,
followed by offsite disposal of the stabilized mass, if
the selected innovative alternative cannot be
implemented. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $12,316,000. No O&M costs
were specified in this ROD.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Clean-up levels for lead-contaminated soil are based
on pre nt EPA policy. An ARAR waiver has been
issued on the basis that EPA will achieve an
Equivalent Standard of Performance in the protection
of human health and the environment The
recommended action level for residential areas is
between 500 and 1,000 mg/kg, but no criterion for
industrial areas has been established. EPA, therefore,
has determined 1.000 mg/kg as the clean-up level for
the lead-contaminated soil. Ground waxer clean-up
goals for the shallow bedrock aquifer are based on
CWA WQC and state standards. Chemical-specific
clean-up goals for this site are background levels
except for manganese, which must be cleaned to
50 mg/I (state). Other ground water goals include
beryllium 0.19 ugh (WQC); cadmium 0.88 ugh
(WQC); lead <3 ugh (WQC); manganese 50 ugh
(state), nickel 2.9 ug/l (WQC), and sulfate 27 ug/l
(WQC).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented limit the site to
industrial use only.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver; Background Levels; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Water Act; Contingent Remedy;
Debris, Direct Contact; Excavation; Floodplain;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring; Ground
Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; Lead; Metals;
Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Discharge;
Onsite Treatment; Public Exposure; Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTW); Soil; Solidification/
Stabilization; State Standards/Regulations; Treatability
Studies; Treatment Technology.
116
-------
REGION 3
BROWN’S BATIERY BREAKING, PA (Continued)
July 2, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/28/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Deb!is, GW
Major ContaminafltS Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waler- Final Action
117
-------
BUTZ LANDFiLL, PA
June 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWFION :
The Butz Landfill is an inactive landfill in Jackson
Township, Monroe County, Pennsylvania The 13-
square-mile site extends into Pocono Township and
includes the known extent of contamination and the
83-acre landfill. The sole source aquifer underlying
the site supplies drinking water for approximately
3,300 people who live within 3 miles of the site and
an additional 3,000 people during summer tounst
seasons. In 1963, the property was purchased by the
Buiz family for landfill development Beginning in
1965. municipal waste, sewage sludge/liquids, and
possibly some industhal wastes were accepted at the
landfill. During the years that the landfill operated,
the waste was disposed of without a state permit. In
1971, onSite investigations revealed well water
contamination and the presence of leachate seeps. By
1973, the state ordered the landfill closed and
required that corrective measures be taken, including
the development of a surface water management plan,
ground water monitonng, and placement of a cover
over the landfill. In 1986, additional onsite
investigations revealed high TCE levels in domestic
wells to the south of the landfill, which prompted a
request to EPA that the site be considered for
emergency action. The same year, the state and EPA
initiated emergency response activities, including
additional sampling, installing water coolers, and
supplying bottled water or carbon filters to homes
with contaminated well water. A 1990 ROD
addressed the first of two operable units, establishing
an alternate waler supply. This ROD addresses OU2,
designed to prevent human exposure to contaminated
ground water. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water axe VOCs, including
benzene, PCE, and TCE.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing ground water extraction wells immediately
downgradient from the landfill in the area of
suspected ground water and DNAPLs contamination,
extracting and transporting ground water to an
appropriate treatment facility and treating the
extracted water using either chemical precipitation,
followed by air stripping with vapor phase carbon
units to control emissions or granular activated
carbon, as determined during the RD phase;
dIct h2r InP the treated eround water onsite to surface
water, and disposing of residuals produced during the
treatment process offsite. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action ranges from
$11,012,000 to $14,495,000, (depending on the final
treatment selected during the RD), which includes an
annual O&M cost ranging from $561,000 to $861,000
for up to 10 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Clean-up goals for ground water axe based on SDWA
MCLs and state standards designed to achieve
background levels for all of the VOCs in the ground
water, thereby restoring the ground water to its
beneficial usc as a drinking water source.
Background concentrations will be determined by
EPA based on contaminant concentrations in
upgradient monitoring wells.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Background Levels; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking
Water Contaminants; Ground Water Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs;
MCLGs; Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment; PCE; RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Sole-Source Aquifer, Solvents;
State Standards/Regulations: TCE: VOCs.
Dates of previous RODs: 09f28/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
118
-------
C&D RECYCLING, PA
September 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 110-acre C&D Recycling site is a former metals
recycling facility located along Brickyard Road in
Foster Township, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.
Land use in the area is predominantly agricultural and
residential, with fields and wooded areas to the west
and north of the site and a residential development
located northeast of the site. Mill Hopper Creek, a
small stream, is located on the property and flows
into a man-made pond to the south of the site.
Ground water underlying the property is used for
drinking water purposes. From 1963 to 1978, Lurgan
Corporation operated a metals reclamation business.
which recovered copper and/or lead from cable or
scrap metal transported to the site. Five onsite
furnaces were used to burn and process the cable, and
these activities resulted in extensive contamination of
the surrounding soil and sediment Based on site
documentation and reports by local residents, burning
also took place in onsite pits. Lurgan Corporation
drawings indicate that water used in the metals
processing area was collected in a trench drain and
directed to a leach pit (dry well). In 1979, the
business was conveyed to C&D Recycling, who
continued to operate the facility until 1984. when
operations ceased. In 1984, the state collected soil
and ash samples, which identified elevated levels of
both lead and copper In 1985, the state and C&D
Recycling arranged for the excavation and offsite
recycling of 134,200 pounds of lead-contaminated ash
and soil at a lead refining center. In 1987, EPA
required AT&T Nassau Metals Corporation, a
potentially responsible party, to consolidate and cover
piles of ash onsite and to construct sedimentation and
erosion controls to minimize soil migration from the
site in surface water runoff. Two underground
storage tanks were also removed, decontaminated, and
disposed This ROD addresses a final remedy for the
onsite contaminated soil, sediment, and debris. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, and debris are metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and stabilizing onsite 20,565 cubic yards
of contaminated soil and sediment with lead levels
greater than 500 mg/kg. along with the onsite ash,
followed by disposal in an offsite landfill ;
decontaminating and/or demolishing contnvnin2ted
buildings and structures with offsite disposal or
decontamination and recycling of dismantled material
and equipment; conducting post-excavation/removal
sampling to confirm that clean-up levels are met;
removing any casings and wire for offsite disposal or
recycling; abandoning wells that serve no useful long-
term purpose; grading and revegetating excavated
areas; monitoring air, ground water, and surface
water, and implementing institutional controls,
including deed restiictions. If, within 180 days of the
issuance of this ROD, EPA receives information that
indicates an onsite containment cxli may be designed
and constructed, then the stabilized and
decontaminated materials may be disposed of onsite.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $11,985,717, which includes an annual O&M
cost of $25,390.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals and debris
decontamination goals are based on health-risk levels
and include lead 500 mg/kg; copper 3,300 mg/kg;
antimony 35 mg/kg. Excavation goals for sediment
include lead 500 mg/kg; copper 2,900 mg/kg;
antimony 35 mg/kg. All soil, sediment, and ash will
be stabilized to below RCRA TCLP levels prior to
disposal. Building surfaces will be decontaminated to
the following: lead 50 ug/m 3 ; copper 1.000 uglm 3 ;
and antimony 500 ug/m 3
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions
will be implemented for buildings and structures that
were constructed pnor to 1963 and are not dismantled
and decontaminated, as well as the soil beneath them
that is left in place, to ensure public knowledge of the
location of contaminated materials and prevent land
use.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium, Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris;
Decontamination; Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground
Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls; Lead;
Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Containment;
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; RCRA; Sediment;
Soil; SolidiflcationlStabilization; State Standards!
119
-------
REGION 3 ______ -
C&D RECYCUNG, PA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
ReguLations; Surface Water Monitonng; Treatabilhty
Studies; Treatment Technology; Wetl uwt .
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
120
-------
CHEM-SOLV, DE
March 31, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWflON :
The Chem-SoIv site, located in Cheswold, Kent
County, Delaware, occupies approximately one-third
of a 13-acre property and consists of a one-stoiy
concrete building, a distillation pixess building, and
a concrete pad used for drum storage. Surrounding
land use is mixed agricultural, residential, and
commercial snip development, In the vicinity of the
site, the Columbia Formation functions as a thin
water-table aquifer and is a potential source of
drinking water in the area. From 1981 to 1984,
Chein-Solv, Inc., used the facility to purify spent
industrial solvents and store the distillation residues,
known as “still bottoms,” for offsne disposal as
hazardous waste After an explosion and fire at the
f ciLity in 1984, during which stored solvents ran off
the concrete pad, a state investigation concluded that
this incident and prior hazardous waste handling
violations had resulted in soil and possible ground
water contamination of the site with VOCs. After
Chem-Solv failed to comply with a state order, the
state removed 1,300 cubic yards of contaminated soil
and a portion of the storage pad and implemented a
ground water treatment system that operated from
1985 until 1988. This ROD addresses the ground
water contamination in the Columbia aquifer. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water are VOCs, including benzene and TCE; and
manganese, a metal.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
ground water pumping and offsite discharge to a
POTW for treaunent, or as a contingency if an
agreement with the POTW cannot be reached, onsue
treatment using filtration, and air snipping with
orisite discharge to surface water conducting ground
water monitoring and providing an alternate water
supply, including wellhead treatment to affected
residences if ground water monitoring detects
contamination in existing residential wells; removing
existing recovery wells, and implementing
rnstitutionai controls, including deed and ground water
use restrictions The present worth cost for the
selected remedial action ranges from $660,000 to
$686,000, which includes an annual O&M cost
ranging from $57,000 to $148,000. Present worth
costs for the contingency remedy would be $688,000,
which include an annual O&M cost rangiüg from
$148,000 to $189,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs or risk-based levels,
including benzene 5 ugh (MCL); and TCE 5 ugil
(MCL); manganese 3 .000 ugh (risk-based).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
A ground water iesthcuon zone will be instituted and
deed resnicuons will be placed on all properties
within the restriction zone until ground water clean-up
levels aic achieved throughout the contanunated area
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; Benzene;
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Contingent Remedy; Direct Contact;
Ground Water. Ground Water Monitoring; Ground
Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; MCLs;
MCLGs; Metals; O&M, Offsite Discharge: Offsite
Treatment, Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment,
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW); RCRA;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; ICE; VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
121
-------
COMMODORE SEMICONDUCTOR GROUP, PA
September 29, 1992
REG! W 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFflON :
The 14-acre Commodore Semiconductor Group
(CSG) site is a manufacturing facility in Norristown,
Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Land use in the
area is residential, commercial, and industrial with a
wetland area located within I mile from the site. The
site overhes a Class HA aquifer that is used as a
source of drinking water. From 1969 to present, the
owners, including CGS, used the site to manufacture
semiconductor chips. A concrete underground storage
lank was installed adjacent to the southeast side of the
building to store a waste solu cm known to contain
ICE and other solvents generated from the
manufacturing process. The concrete tank was
reported to have leaked in 1974. As a result, an
unlined steel tank was installed next to the concrete
tank. Use of the concrete tank was discontinued. In
1978. a local water supplier detected TCE in two of
its wells adjacent to the site. The state identified the
CSG site as a possible TCE contaminant source.
Subsequently, in 1979, the underground storage tanks
were excavated and replaced with a waste solvent
collection system In 1981, CSG also elimInated use
of TCE in their manufacturing process. From 1981 to
1984, to address the ICE contamination, CSG
pumped and spray irrigated water from a public
supply well, purchased and installed an air stripper for
treating contaminated ground water, unplemented a
residential samphng program, and installed carbon
filter systems at affected residences. In 1984, further
state and EPA investigations confirmed contaminants
onsite in ground waxer and drinking waier. This ROD
addresses the contamination of onsite grouni3 water
and dnnking water. The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the ground water are VOCs,
including PCE and ICE,
SELECTED REMEDIAL AC11ON :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extending the public water supply lines and
connecting affected residences located in areas south
of the CSG facility; abandoning contaminated wells;
continued maintenance of existing residential carbon
units, with disposal or recycling of the spent carbon
filters as determined dunng the remedial design
phase; installing additional ground water extraction
wells, air strippers, and vapor phase carbon units, to
neat the contaminated ground water onsite with
discharge to a public water system or reuse by the
CSG facility, with overflow discharge offsite to a
P01W; sampling ground waler and treated water; and
implementing institutional controls, including ground
water well restrictions. The esnnmted present worth
cost for this remedial action is $5,573,700. which
includes an annual O&M cost of $446,500 for years
0-2, and $404,300 for years 3-30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Ground water clean-up goals are based on background
levels as established by SDWA MCLs or health-based
levels, whichever are more stringent. Chemical-
specific ground water goals include l,2.DCB 75 ugh;
I,2-DCA 810 ugh; PCE 5 ag /i; TCA 200 ag/I; ICE
S ag/I; and vinyl chloride 2 ug/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Ground water use restrictions on installing new wells
shall be implemented in areas where MCLs are
exceeded.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Alternative Water Supply; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking
Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Institutional
Controls; MCLs; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite
Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite
Treatment; Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW); PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Waxer Act;
Solvents; State Standazds/Regulations; ICE; VOCs;
Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
122
-------
REGIONS
DIXIE CAVERNS COUNTY LANDRLL, VA
September 28, 1992
SITE RISTORYIDESCRJflION :
The 39-acre Dixie Caverns County Landfill is a
former municipal landfill in Roanoke County.
Virginia. The surrounding land is ninE with the
nearest residence located one-half mile frniti the site
The size is situated on a steep ridge between two
valleys surrounded by heavily CaresS mounta ins
traversed by small streams. Two unnamed heañwater
sneams receive surface water runoff from the site and
discharge to the Roanoke Rivet which is located
2 miles southlsoutheast. The landfill is currently
owned and was operated by the County of Roanoke
front 1965 with its closure in 1976. During
operation, the landfill accepted an estimated
440,000 cubic yards of municipal and industrial
wastes, includrng refuse, scrap metal, fly ash, and
sludge. in 1983, EPA invesrigautwis identified several
disposal areas, including a discarded drum area, a
sludge pit, and a large fly ash pile, which contained
elevated levels of metals. In 1981, EPA conducted a
removal action that addressed the drum and sludge
areas, but recommended that removal of the fly ash
be postponed. A 1991 ROD addressed the fly ash
pile as OUt and provided for excavation and
transportation of appioxunataly 9,000 cubw yards of
fly ash to an EPA-nppmved high-temperature metals
recovery facility for treatment and subsequent re-use.
In 1992. a second EPA removal action addressed the
northern drainage area and the soil in the vicinity of
and d i rectly beneath the fly ash pi le This ROD
addresses areas at the site sItar were not previously
addressed by OU I or by the 1992 removal order, as
0U2. Previous and ongoing removal and remedial
actions have addressed or will address all risks posed
by the site; therefore, there are no contanainanis of
concern affecling this site.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action. There are no costs associated with the no
aetior remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
KEYWORDS :
No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: 09t3O, l
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
M*jor Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
Not applicable.
123
-------
DUBUN WATER SUPPLY, PA
December 30, 1991
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 43-acre Dublin Water Supply is a fommr
manufacturing facility located in Dublin Borough,
Bucks County, Pennsylvania. The site consists of a
one-story tower building and parking lot. The
surrounding area is mixed commercial and residential,
with a fruit orchard bordering the site to the north and
west. Ground water beneath the site contributes to
the aquifer by providing a drinking water source to
area residents. The ground water flows toward
residential and commercial wells in the Dublin
Borough and is believed to be predominantly
controlled by bedrock fractures. Surface drainage,
which flows in a northward direction, is absorbed by
the fruit orchard or discharges to a tributary of Moms
Run located northwest of the site. Since the 1930s,
the site has been used for various industrial purposes
and has had Severn] owners. From the early 1930’s
to 1956, the site operated as a hosiery mill. In 1956,
Home Window Company of Pennsylvania used the
property for the manufacture of aluminum doors and
windows. In 1959, the property was purchased by
Kollsman Motors Corporation (KMC) and used to
manufacture mechanical and electromechanjcaj
components that aze utilized in aircraft and missiles.
During this time, TCE was used onsite and spent
product was either poured onto the ground or stored
in perforated chums. In 1973, Athlone Industries
purchased the property for cleaning, stamping, and
packaging softballs. ICE solvents were used as
degreasing agents to assemble stamping machines. in
1986, the current owner purchased the site for antique
car restoration. A portion of the site is currently
leased to Laboratory Testing, Inc., for metallurgical
testing. During a routine drinking water survey in
1986, the state discovered elevated levels of ICE
affecting approximately 170 area homes Under
EPA’s direction, the owner supplied carbon filtration
units to affected residential water supplies and
installed ground water monitoring wells, which
indicated ground water contamination with several
VOC compounds. This early action ROD addresses
the provision of a permanent clean drinking water
supply to affected area residents and businesses. An
additional Rl/FS, which commenced in 1991, will
focus on remediation of the soil, ground water, and
surface water in a separate clean-up action. The
pnrnaiy contaminarns of concern affecting the ground
water are YOCs, including ICE and PCE
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing and operating a new water supply well, or
operation of the existing well within the plume,
construction and operation of an onsite air stripping
and vapor phase carbon adsorption treatment system,
or other appropriate technology for the well;
discharging the treated water to the municipal water
supply system; expanding the Dublin Borough public
distribution system to supply well and treated water to
affected residences; and monitoring the residential and
commercial wells not serviced by the public
disthbution system. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $5,000,000, which includes
an annual O&M cost of $300,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground waier standards are based
on SDWA MCLs including TCE 5 ugh, PCE 5 ugh;
vinyl chloride 2 ugh; cis-1,2-DCE 70 ugh; trans-1,2-
DCE 100 ugh; l,l-DCE 7 ugh; and l,1,l-TCA
200 ugh!. Performance standards for air emissions
from the ground water stripping unit shall comply
with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) under CAA, and disposal standards for
spent carbon filters shall meet RCRA requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; Carbon
Adsorpuon (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contanhin2nts; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; O&M;
Onsite Treatment; PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water
Act; Solvents; State Standanis/Regularioas; TCE;
VOCs.
124
-------
REGION 3
DUBLIN WATER SUPPLY, PA (Continued)
December 30, 1991
SITE SUMMARY
Dates ol previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - trnenm
125
-------
EASTERN DIVERSIFIED METALS, PA
July 2, 1992
REGIONs
SITE HISTORY/DESCRJP11ON :
The 25-acre Eastern Diversified Metals site is a
former metal processing plant located in a sparsely
populated area in Rush Township Schuylkill County,
Pennsylvania. Land use in the area is predominantly
open land with mixed residential, commercial, and
industrial use. From 1966 to 1977, Eastern
Diversified Metals operated a processing plant that
reclaimed copper and aluminum from wire and cable.
An estimated 150 million pounds of waste insulation
material, or fluff, was disposed onsite in a swale
behind the plant This fluff, which contains polyvinyl
chloride, polyethylene insuLation chips, fibrous
material, paper, soil, and metals, is contained in a 7.5-
acre pile onsite. In 1971, in response to an
appLication for an industrial landfill permit, a state
inspection revealed leachate from the waste pile
flowing to the Little SchuylkiLl River. In 1974, a
leachate collection and treatment system was installed
onsite. In 1979 and 1980. residents complained of
odors and expressed health concerns over conditions
at the site. In 1985, an investigation detected PCBs
and lead in the waste pile and metals in a
downgradient monitoring well. In 1987, a security
fence was installed around the property. A previous
ROD addressed areas of fluff, soil, sediment, and
ground water contaminated with PCBs, dioxin, and
metals. This ROD addresses a final remedy for the
remainder of the fluff onsite. Future RODs will
address soil contamination following analysis of soil
samples taken as part of this remedy and deep ground
water contamination. The prtmaiy contaminants of
concern for leaching from the fluff are orgames,
including dioxin and PCBs; and metals, including
lead.
present worth cost for this remedial action ranges
from $13,100,000 to $21,900,000, which includes a
total O&M cost of $6,900,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
There are no specific performance standards for any
of the contaminants. The recycling products and the
residuals will be tested for RCRA hazardous waste
characteristics prior to use of the product or disposal
of non-recyclable residuals.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act; Debris;
Dioxin; Direct Contact; Lead; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Treatment,
Organics; PCBs; RCRA; State Standards/Regulations;
Treatability Studies.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 03129/91
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: Debris
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - lntenm
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTiON :
The selected remedial action for this sue includes
onsite recycling of fluff into one of two forms—a
“Final Product” that requires no further offsite
processing, or a “Non-Final Product,” such as plastic
pellets, which will undergo further offsite processing,
testing recycling residuals for RCRA hazardous waste
charactensucs, with offsite disposal of non-RCRA
wastes and onsite treatment of RCRA wastes using a
technology to be determined based on a treatability
study; disposing of the treated wastes off ite; testing
soil underlying the fluff; and implementing erosion
and sedimentation controls The estimated total
126
-------
F1KE CHEMICAL, WV
March 31, 1992
REGION 3
SITE RISTORY(DESCRIPTION :
The 11.9-acre Fike Chemical site is a former chemical
manufacturing plant and associated wastewater
treatment facility located in Nitro, West Virginia.
Land use in the area is predominantly industrial, with
the Kanawha River located approximately one-half
mile from the site. The estimated 2,500 people who
reside within 1 mile of the site obtain dnnktng water
from a treatment plant located 15 miles upstream,
which uses the Elk River as a source of water. The
facility is situated on the Site of a World War I
munitions plant In 1951. the original chemical plant
was constructed and began operating. From 1978 to
1988, Fike Chemical manufactured more than
60 chemicals at the site and disposed of drummed and
containenzed wastes in pits and trenches located
throughout the facility until the facility was
abandoned in mid-1988. There are no known records
regarding the contents of the drums and containers or
details of their disposal at the site. As a result of
previous state and federal environmental enforcement
actions, EPA conducted numerous investigations that
revealed VOCs, other organics, metals, and other
morganics in buried drums and containers. Previous
RODS addressed the removal of bulk chemicals stored
in surface drums and tanks as well as the dismantling,
decontamination, and disposal of tanks, equipment.
and structures located onsite. This interim remedy
ROD addresses the removal of buned drums and
containers as 0U3 to eliminate future or continued
contamination of soil, ground water, surface water,
and the atmosphere Future actions will address
continued investigation and possible remediation of
soil, ground, water, surface water and the existing
sewer system. The pnmary contaminants of concern
in the buried waste pits are VOCs, including PCE,
other organics, including dio,uns. pesticides, and
phenols; metals, acids; and morgarucs
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating between 7,000 arid 17,000 buned drums
and containers; using a self-supported portable
structure to enclose active excavation areas arid to
minimize organic vapor and dust emissions and
treating air emissions using an air filter and vapor
phase carbon adsorption, with offsite disposal or
incineration of the spent carbon and filters; sampling,
tesnng,, repackaging, and shipping of drummed waste
offsite; using offsite incineration or other equivalent
treatment technologies to treat dninis containing solids
and liquids; decontaminating empty drums onsile prior
to offsite disposal of ireain nt liquids and metals;
stabilizing/neutralizing acidic wastes prior to offsite
incineration; onsite storage of dioxin-containmated
drummed wastes and dioxin-contaminated soil and
sludge identified during excavation for future
treatment; treating cylinders onsite using a cylinder
recovery vessel, or repackaging for offsite disposal;
backfllling excavated areas; employing storm water
management or erosion controls to divert surface
water from the site; monitoring air; and treating any
ground water collected during the excavation at the
cooperative sewage treatment plant. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$16,059,000. There are no O&M costs associated
with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Although this interim action does not provide for
themical-specific clean-up standards, it does provide
for the removal of source contamination in accordance
with state and federal requirements Performance
standards will be established in future OUs addressing
Site media contamination.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Acids, Air Monitoring. Asbestos; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act;
Dioxui; Direct Contact, Excavation; Filling;
Incineration/Thermal Destruction; Inorgazucs, Interim
Remedy; Metals, Offsite Disposal; Offsice Treatment;
Orgazucs, PCE; Pesticides; Phenols, RCRA; Soil;
Sol idificationlStabilizauon; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; Surface Water; Surface Water
Collection/Diversion, Temporary Storage; Treatment
Technology, VOCs
127
-------
REGION 3
RKE CHEMICAL, WV (Continued)
March 31, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: 09t29 8, 09128/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: Debris
MHjor Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics, Acids
Category: Source Concrol -‘Interim
128
-------
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 61.8-acre Lindane Dump is located in the
Allegheny River Valley in Hamson Township, near
Nation, Pennsylvania. Land use in the area is mixed
residential, commercial, recreational, manufactunng,
and special use. The site is divided into both upper
and lower project areas separated by steeply sloping
areas. The majority of both the upper and lower
areas have been graded and form terraces on the
hillside extending from the residential areas, located
north and northeast of the project site. The upper
area consists of fill and waste materials. The
Allegheny River, which is the major surface water
stream in the area, provides the public drinking water
supply for the Township. From 1850 to 1980. the
lower portion of the site, the 47.5 acres owned by the
Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, was used for waste
disposal. The area beneath the site was mined
extensively for coal from the latter pan of the 19th
century to the first half of the 20th century. In 1985,
Pennsylvania Salt Manufacturing Company (later
known as Pennsalt, then Pennwalt) used the site for
waste disposal of mining tailings and cinders.
Tailings from the mining operations and cinders
(bottom ash) from steam and electrical power
generation at the plant were placed onsite, and
sulfuric acid was produced at the Pennsalt plant This
operation was discontinued pnor to 1920 and resultant
cinder and slag. along with cryolite ore tailings, BHC
(Lindane) (liter cake residuals containing pesticides,
and waste sulIunc acid containing DDT were
disposed of onsne In 1965, after the property was
sold to Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, other
wastes—including construction wastes, industrial
waste treatment plant sludge, coke, rubber tires, and
slag—were disposed of onsite During 1976 and
1977. the Aisco Community Park was constructed by
the Harrison Township on a 14.3-acre tract of the
upper site area that had been previously used as a
waste disposal site In addition, fill material from an
unknown source was placed and graded into the park
This ROD addresses onsite contaminated soil and
controlling ground water and surface water
conraim nation The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, debns. and ground water
are VOCs, including benzene, other organics
including pesticides such as DDT, Lindane, and
phenols; and metals, including arsenic and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing a multi-layer cap where side slopes are
stabilized; constructing a combination clay and soil
cap where site slopes are unstable, and vegetating the
capped areas; upgrading the existing leachateishallow
ground water collection system, and treating leachate
and shallow ground water using air stripping, with
onsite discharge to the Allegheny River. disposing of
sludge generated during the treatment process offsite
at an approved facility; constructing and maintaining
a perimeter fence; monitoring ground water and
surface water, restoring the Aisco Community park;
and implementing institutional controls, including
deed restrictions. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $14,122,500, which
includes an annual O&M cost ranging from $634,000
to $634,700 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific goals for leachate and shallow
ground water clean-up goals are based on the more
stringent Pennsylvania state water quality cnteria
standards or SDWA MCLs, and include gamma BHC
(Lindane) 0.2 ugh and benzene 5 ugh. An ARAR
waiver is being issued for ground water based on
technicai linpracucabihty of capturing all ground
water due to the complex hydrogeologic conditions at
the site, the possibility of subsidence and site damage
due to extensive pumping, and the potential for
migration during the pumping
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed restrictions will
be implemented to prevent any activities that may
compromise the integrity of the cap.
KEYWORDS :
Air Snipping; ARAR Waiver; Arsenic, Benzene;
Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; Leachate
Collection/Treatment; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M,
Offsite Disposal; Onsite Containment; Onsite
Disposal; Organics; Pesticides; Phenol. Safe Drinking
Water Act; Sediment; Soil; Solvents; State Standardsl
Regulations; Surface Water Monitoring; VOCs.
UNDANE DUMP, PA
March 31, 1992
REGION 3
129
-------
REGION 3
UNDANE DUMP, PA (Continued)
March 31, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debns,
GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
130
-------
MW MANUFACTURING, PA
June 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 15-acre MW Manufacturing Site is a former
copper recovery facility in Monitor County.
Pennsylvania. Land use in the area is mixed farmland
and residential with a wetlands area, Amuses Creek,
located 700 feet west of the site. The estimated
5,200 people who reside within 1/4 mile of the site
use pnvate ground waier wells as their drinking water
source. From 1969 to 1972, MW Manufactunng
Company, which is a subsidiary of Nile Corporation,
used the site for copper recovery from scrap wire.
using both mechanical and chemical processes.
During this time generated carbon wastes by the
chemical process and generated fluff material (fibrous
insulation materials contaminaied with metals and
solvents) were dumped onsite. and spent solvents
were allegedly disposed of onsite. 1 1972. MW
Manufacturing filed for bankruptcy and the
Philadelphia National Bank acquired the property by
default In 1976. Warehouse 81, Inc., acquired the
sue and unsuccessfully attempted to recover copper
from the large waste piles of fluff material. In 1982,
the state performed an initial remedial investigation
that revealed several areas posing potential threats to
public health the carbon waste pile; four wire-fluff
waste piles; a surface impoundment; a buried lagoon;
and contaminated soil, drums, and storage tanks.
Based on this investigation, the sue ha been divided
into three OUs to address cleanup of all contaminated
media A 1989 ROD (OUI) addressed the carbon
waste pile by excavating the carbon waste pile arid
incinerating the waste offsite A 1990 ROD (0U2)
addressed treating the fluff waste, contaminated soil.
drums, tanks, and the lagoon. This ROD provides a
final remedy for the contaminated of the ground water
and the adjacent wetland areas as 0U3 The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water
are VOCs, including beozene. PCE. arid ICE, other
organics. including PAHs, pesticides, and phenols.
and metals
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing a public water supply system to supply
drinking water to present and future affected
residences, extracting contaminated ground water and
treating the water onsite using chemical precipitation
to remove inorganics. and air stripping to remove
VOCs: treating effluent from the air stripping process
using carbon adsorption to remove organics, followed
by onsite discharge to surface water, treating air
emissions from the air stripping process using thermal
destruction, and recycling the residual carbon waste
offsite; disposing of any collected free product
offsite; dewaxenng and disposing of sludge generated
during the treatment process offsite at ; RCRA
landfill; and implementing a ground water monitonng
program. If it is determined by EPA and the state
that certain portions of the aquifer cannot be restored
to background levels, the ROD specifies modification
of the selected remedy, which include engineering
controls; physical barners, or long-term pumping to
contain contamination; institutional controls to limit
access; and waiver of chemical-specific ARARs for
portions of the aquifer where further contaminant
reduction is impracticable. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $37,402,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $1,568,000
for 30 years, with $20,000 additional every 5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Ground water clean-up goals are based on state
standards. SDWA MCLs and MCLGs under SDWA.
CWA, Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, and
background levels. The clean-up goals will attain
background concentrations that will be determined
during the remedial design In the event that the
background concentration of the contaminant is not
detected, the most stringent chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goal will be met.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
As part of a contingency, instiwlional controls may be
implemented if necessary to restrict access to portions
of the aquifer.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARAR
Waiver, Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act;
Contingency Remedy; Excavation, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls, MCLs; MCLGs, Metals; O&M,
Offsite Disposal; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment.
Orgarucs, PAHs, PCE, Pesticides, Phenols; Plume
Management; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations; TCE, VOCs;
Wetlands.
131
-------
REGION 3
MW MANUFACTURING, PA (Continued)
June 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: 03131/89, 06129/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
132
-------
PAOLI RAIL YARD, PA
July 21, 1992
REG/cW 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 428-acre Paoli Rail Yard site is a maintenance,
storage, and repair facility located north of Paoli in
Chester County, Pennsylvania. The site consists of
the 28-acre rail yard and the surrounding 400-acre
watershed. The site, which is mainly wooded, is
bordered to the north by residential areas and to the
south by commercial developments Since 1915, the
rail yard has provided general maintenance and repair
support for rail cars. The site operates five track
areas used for multiple rail lines, a power house, a
freight house, and a repair shop. Prior to 1968, the
site was owned by Pennsylvania Railroad, after which
it changed hands several times. Contammation of the
soil in and around the car shop is attributed to
releases of fuel oil and PCB-laden transformer fluid
from rail cars during maintenance and repair
activities In 1985, EPA identified PCB
contamination in soil and sediment, and on building
surfaces. The rail companies agreed to address site
clean-up activities, including erosion, sedimentation,
and storm waler characteristics and control,
decontamination, soil sampling, excavation of
3,500 cubic yards residential soil and implementation
of worker protection measures. Further EPA
investigations identified soil samples in and around
the car shop, parallel to the rail tracks, and 10 feet
below the facility that were contaminated by fuel oil
in the form of beazene. toluene. ethylbenzene, and
xylenes (BTEX). Sediment samples taken from the
three creeks that drained the general rail area also
showed PCB contamination decreasing further from
the rail yard. Soil samples taken from residences
lying adjacent to the facility identified topsoil
contamination presumably resulting from soil erosion
from the rail yard This ROD provides a final
remedy for contaminated soil (from the rail yard and
residences), sediment, and structures at the Paoli Rail
Yard, and contaminated ground water The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, sediment,
debris, and ground water are VOCs. including
benzcnc. toluene. and xylenes. and other organics.
including PCBs
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and onsne treatment of approximately
28,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil with PCB
concentrations of 25 mg/kg or greater. 3,000 cubic
yards of previously excavated contaminated residential
soil currently stored in an onsite containment cell with
PCBs greater than 2 mg/kg, and stream sediment with
PCB concentrations exceeding 1 mg/kg using
sohdificanon/stabiltzation processes, followed by
disposal of the solidified mass in an onsite
containment cell, with an impermeable cap; onsite
decontamination of 35,000 square feet of high contact
surfaces in the rail yard buildings and structures with
PCB concentrations in excess of 10 ug/l00 cm 2 ;
mitigating impacts to wetland areas from the sediment
excavation; pumping and onsite treatment of fuel-oil
contaminated ground waier recovering the oil using
a fuel oil recovery system and disposing of the
recovered oil offsite at a RCRA facility, treating the
ground water using filtration and activated carbon
with onsiie discharge through a subsurface infiltration
gallery, with offsite disposal of the spent carbon;
implementing erosion controls to manage sediment
and storm water run-off; backfilhng and regrading,
and revegetaung excavated areas; monitoring soil,
sediment, ground water and air, and implementing
institutional controls including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions, The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $28,268,000, which
includes an O&M cost of $494,000 for years 0-2 and
$258,250 for the remaining 7.5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil clean-up standards at the rail yard are based on
health-based levels, including PCB 25 mgJkg for soil
onsite and 2 mg/kg for residential areas. Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals are based on the
more stringent of slate standards or SDWA MCLs,
and include benzene 5 ugh An ARAR waiver will
also be issued for certain management controls at the
TSCA waste landfill under CERCLA 12l(d)(4)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented onsite to
protect the integrity of the remedy, and to prevent
further development of the land or use of ground
water for domestic purposes
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver; Benzene, Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act;
Decontamination; Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground
Water Ground Water Monjtonng; Ground Water
133
-------
REGION 3
PAOLI RAIL YARD, PA (Continued)
July 21, 1992
Treatment; insuwnonal Controls; MCLs; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Oils; Onsite Containment; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment
Organics; PCBs; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Sediment; Soil; SolidificationlStabihzation; Solvents;
State Standards/Regulations; Toluene; Toxic
Substances Control Act; Treatment Technology.
VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Sod, Sediment. Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
134
-------
RAYMARK, PA
December 30, 1991
REGION 3
SITE RISTORY!DESCRIFFION :
The 7-acre Raymark site is an active metal
manufacturing and electroplating plant in the Borough
of Hatboro, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. The
site, located in an industrial area, is approximately
100 feet from the nearest residence. The nearest
surface water is Pennypack Creek. which flows
4,000 feet southwest of the site. As part of the rivet
manufactunng process at the plant, VOCs, including
30 to 40 gallons of TCE, were used daily at the site
to clean and degrease metal pans. Facility documents
indicate that piping may have directed waste from the
degreasing unit to four small lagoons, which
contained effluent from an onsite wastewater
treatment building. The lagoons were subsequently
cleaned and backfilled in the 1970;s. In 1979. when
EPA discovered TCE in the Ilatboro public water
supply wells, the Hatboro Borough Water Authonry
removed the wells from operation, and supplemented
the water supply using an interconnection with a
neighboring waler company. Further EPA site
investigations from 1980 to 1987 identified TCE in
soil and other wells onsite and adjacent to the
property and concluded that site contanunants were a
contributing source of contamination in the
downgradient public water supply wells In 1987, the
site owners agreed to install ground water treatment
units with air slrlppLrig towers, and, as necessary. air
emission control units, at two Hatboro public supply
wells to return these to routine operation EPA site
investigations also revealed high concentrations of
TCE and lower levels of PAHs and PCBs in soil in
1990, a pilot scale treatability study was conducted to
evaluate the effectiveness of Soil Vapor Extraction
(SVE) as a remedial technology for the site soil and
underlying bed rock. A 1990 ROD addressed
contamination of the drinking water and risks posed
by ground water as 0U2 and 0U3, respectively This
ROD addresses the soil/source of contamination as the
final action at the site, as OUI The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil/source axe
VOCs, including 1,2-DCE, PCE, and TCE
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing, operating, and maintaining a soil vapor
extraction system to remove VOCs from soil and
unsaturated bedrock; treating air emissions from the
extraction process usuig vapor phase carbon
edsorption; constructing and maintaining a low
permeability cap over the treated soil to minimize
intlltratioa; conducting additional sampling of surface
soil; and trnpiementing institutional controls including
deed iesthciions, and site access restrictions. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $3,654,400, which includes an annual Q&M cost of
$1,220,600 for 20 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical and location-specific performance goals are
based on federal and state standards. VOCs will be
removed from the soil/source such that TCE in
subsurface soil does not exceed 50 ugh. VOCs will
be removed from subsurface soil so that leaching of
TCE from subsurface soil will not exceed SDWA
ground water MCLs. Organic emissions will be
minimized from the vapor extraction system such that
the maximum rate of organic emission does not
exceed 3 pounds per hour or 15 pounds per day.
Infiltration of contaminants through the low
permeability cap shall not exceed 9 cubic feet per
day. Water potentially generated during the SVE
process will be treated to meet CWA levels, as stated
in the ROD for OUs 2 and 3 The excess cancer risk
resulting from sire-related contamination will be
reduced to a l0 Level and the HI will equal I.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented, including
deed restrictions to restrict access to the contaminated
soil, to prevent disturbance to the cap and ensure the
integrity of the selected remedy
KEYWORDS :
Capping, Carbon Adsorption (GAC). Carcinogenic
Compounds. Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact, institutional Controls, MCLs, O&M, Oasiie
Containment. Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment;
PCE, RCRA. Safe Dnnking Water Act; Soil;
Solvents, State Standards/Regulations; TCE;
Treatabibty Studies, Treatment Technology; Vacuum
Extraction, VOCs
135
-------
REGION 3
RAYMARK, PA (Continued)
December 30, 1991
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: 09/28/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
136
-------
RHINEHART TIRE FIRE DUMP, VA
September 29, 1992
PEG 10N3
SITE HiSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Rhinehan Tire Fire Dump site is located in a 22-
acre drainage area of a sparsely populated rural area
in western Frederick County, Virginia. Surface water
runoff flows into a north-south tributary that
discharges to Hogue Creek, which is 4,000 feet
downstream. Bedrock is noted to be highly fractured,
and the ground water flow in the overburden aquifer
is toward Massey Run. From 1972 to 1983, the site
owner conducted a tire disposal operation, which
consisted of transporting discarded flies from various
locations and stonng them on a 5-acre wooded slope
behind his borne. An estimated 5 to 7 rmlhon tires
that had been accumulated caught on fire in October
1983 and burned until July 1984. As a result of the
fire, a free-flowing oily-tar, which contained
anthracene, benzene, cadmium, chromium,
ethylbenzene, napthalene, nickel, pyrene, toluene, and
zinc, began to seep out of the tire pile into Massey
Run and on to Hogue Creek. In late 1983. EPA’s
emergency response team conscruc ted a secondary
lined containment basin, known as “Dutchman’s
Pond,” downslope of the fire area to contain water
generated by the early fire-fighting efforts and oil
products from the burning tires The oily-tar waste
stream exhibited properties sinular to heating oil.
therefore, approximately 800.000 gallons could be
collected, removed offsite, and recycled into fuel oils
EPA directed the site owner to construct ditches and
dikes for drainage control In 1984. ground water
studies by EPA concluded that ground water
contamination was limited to the Massey Run
drainage basin A 1988 ROD addressed the migration
of cont ninants offsite via surface waler runoff, as
0 (J ), and included construction of an onsite
wastewater treatment planL This ROD provides for
an early remedial action for the soil, sediment, debris.
and surface water associated with the onsite
containment basin known as “Dutchman’s Ponds’ as
01J2 A future ROD will address OW. which
includes the remainder of site cornairunaiion, and
sludge generated from the treatmeni processes The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, debris, and surface water are metals,
including arsenic, lead, and zmc
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 1,125 cubic yards of
contaminated soil with zinc concentrations greater
than 50 mg/kg from the pond area; sampling,
excavating, and dewazenng pond sediment using
solidification with a solid reagent; resting the soil and
sediment for hazardous characteristics and
transporting these offsite for appropriate disposal;
removing the synthetic liner within the pond, with
offsite disposal; treating approximately
200,000 gallons of contaminated surface water from
the pond using the existing oil/water separator
direcur the water to Rhinehart’s Pond for treatment
in the existing wasrewater treatment plant using
chemical precipitation and filtration to remove solids,
with discharge of the treated water onsite to Massey
Run; backlilling Dutchman’s Pond, and any
surrounding soil that may be excavated with clean
soil; and implementing soil erosion controls. l’be
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $1,300,000, which includes an estimated annual
O&M cost of $12,000 for 2 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals are based on
background and aquatic toxicity levels and include
zinc 50 mg/kg Chemical-specific surface water
discharge limits are based on state standards and
include aluminum 87 ugh, arsenic 360 ugh; copper
9 2 ugh); iron 1,000 ugh; lead 34 ugh; nickel
1,100 ugh, silver 0.12 ug/l, and zinc 180 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Background Levels, Carcinogenic
Compounds, Clean Closure, Debns, Direct Contact;
Dredging, Excavation. Filling. Lead: Metals; O&M;
Offsne Disposal, Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment;
RCRA; Sediment, Soil; Solidification/Stabilization;
State Standards/Regulations, Surface Water, Surface
Water Treatment, Treatment Technology
137
-------
REGION 3
RHINEHART TiRE FIRE DUMP, VA (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/30/88
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debns, SW
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Intenm
138
-------
ROUTE 940 DRUM DUMP, PA
September 28, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 23-acre Route 940 Drum Dump site is a grass-
covered clearing in the Tobyhanna Township, Monroe
County, Pennsylvania. This site and adjacent land
area is presently zoned as a commercial/light-
industrial area. The site is currently inactive with
some stockpiles of soil and several open excavations
on the surface. The site is bordered on all four sides
by a pine-oak woodland with few nearby residences;
however, based on aerial surveys, approximately
4,000 people who live within a 3-mile radius of the
site use the aquifer beneath the site as their source of
potable water. Between 1974 and 1978,
approximately 600 drums of unknown contents from
an unknown source were stored in the southeast
corner of the site. In 1978, approximately 2 years
after the sale of the site by the J.E.M Partnership to
LandMark, one of the partners of the J E.M.
Partnership arranged for the removal of the drums
from the site at the request of LandMark. From 1983
to 1987, several investigations, monitoring events, and
interim measures were completed at the site It was
concluded that some drums may have been buried
onsite and that the contents of some of the drums
stored there previously may have been dumped onto
the ground. Current onsite investigations revealed
that any previously identified site contaminants now
have been reduced to levels that no longer pose a
significant direct health threat or any threat from
potential migration in ground water, and thus, the site
does not warrant any further remechanon Therefore,
there are no contaminants of concern affecting this
site
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no action
with future ground water monitoring There are no
costs provided for this no action remedy
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, No Action
Remedy.
139
-------
STRASBUAG LANDFILL PA
March 31, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 22-acre Strasburg Landfill site is an inactive
landfill located within a 220-acre tract of land in
Newlin and West Bradford Townships, Chester
County, Pennsylvania. The site is characterized by
hills draining toward Brandywine Creek and its
floodplain, which form the southern and western site
boundaries. The nearest wetland is the Briar Run
watershed, located 600 feet east/southeast of the site.
Land use in the area is pnmarily suburban residential,
with some residual agricultural areas The 2&l single-
family residences that surround the site use ground
water as a drinking water source. Prior to 1973, the
site was used as farmland Landfilling permits were
granted, and from 1979 to 1983, the landfill accepted
more than 3 million cubic yards of industrial and
heavy metals waste and sewage treatment plant
sludge, including over 1,000 cubic yards of polyvinyl
chlonde (PVC). In 1979, state investigations
determined that landfill operations had resulted in
excessive siltation of Briar Run, and in 1980, the state
permanently prohibited the landfill from receiving
additional industrial waste In 1983, after the owners
were cited for failure to correct onsite violations, the
state ordered the landfill closed As a result of
improper landfill closure efforts, over 15 leachate
seeps have increased cap erosion and flowed into
adjacent ground water and surface water, including
Briar Creek In 1983, state studies detected VOCs
and organics in both onsiie morutonng wells and
offsite residential wells The state initiated an interim
action to control the leachate flow in which surface
water runoff and leachate were directed into unlined
sediment ponds A 1989 ROD, OUI, addressed
contaminated residential wells and exposure pathways,
and provided an intenm remedy to limit site access
A 1991 ROD addressed site access and secunty, and
provided for the construction of a secunty fence and
additional warning signs, as 0U2 This ROD
addresses OU3, the landfill surface, including the
integnty of the cap, nearby surface streams, air in and
around the landfill, the surficial aquifer, and
protection of ground water from further
contamination Ground water remedianon will be
addressed in a subsequent ROD The pnmaxy
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, debns, and
air are VOCs, including benzene, TCE, toluene, and
xylenes
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and removing the existing landfill cover,
regrading the slopes of the landfill to conform with
the PA and RCRA performance requirements. and
replacing the existing landfill cap with a multi-layer
cap; installing a gas venting system to operate as
either an active or passive system. depending upon
the measured gas emissions; installing a leachate
collection trench around the eastern, southern, and
western perimeters of the landfill to collect leachate
migrating into the surfical aquifer, treating the
leachate using a UV/ozone treatment system, based on
the results of a pilot test, followed by onsite discharge
to an onsite surface stream; monitoring ground water
and air, and implementing site access restncuons.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action ranges from $10,397,070 to $11,306,460,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $312,471 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Site-specific clean-up goals will meet stale and
closure ARARs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air, Air Monitoring, Benzene, Capping; Carcinogenic
Compounds, Debris, Direct Contact, Excavation;
floodplain; Ground Water Monitoring; Landfill
Closure; Leachale Collecuonfl’reatment; Metals;
O&M, Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Soil, Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; TCE; Toluene; Venting;
VOCs, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06128/89,06129/91
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, Air
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waxer - Interim
140
-------
SUFFOLK CITY LANDFILL, VA
September 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRJFHON :
The 67-acre Suffolk City Landfill site is an unlined
sanitary landfill located in Suffolk, Virginia. Land use
in the area is predominantly agricultural and
residential and the 40 to 45 residences located within
1 mile of the site use the ground water as their
primary source of drinking water. From 1967 to
1985, the City of Suffolk operated the landfill, which
received municipal solid waste from both the city and
Nansemond County. Wastes were disposed of onsite
by the trench and fill method, compacted by lifts
above grade, and then covered with approximately
2 feet of clean soil from an onsite borrow area. In
1983, when the permit for the operation of the landfill
was reissued, it required the city to close the landfill
once the regional landfill became operational and to
implement a closure plan, which had been submitted
to the state. While preparing to implement the
closure plan, the city discovered documentation that
indicated that, in 1970, 20 tons of pesticide-
contaminated debris had been disposed of in the
landfill A 1970 state memorandum documented that
the pesticides were treated with lime and covered with
2 feet of soil to promote hydrolytic processes that
break down the pesticides. In early 1989, the city
placed an impermeable tarpaulin plastic liner over the
pesticide disposal area to prevent surface water
mfiltration through the soil cover. In mid-1989, the
state required the city to implement a temporary
leachate collection system, and the collected leachate
was sampled periodically and transported to an offsite
sewage treatment plant. This ROD addresses the
onsite landfill area Based on findings during the RI,
EPA and the state have determined that the site does
not pose an unacceptable risk to either human health
or the environment, and thus no remedial action is
required Therefore, there are no contaminants of
concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action with ground water monitoring, since samplmg
results indicate that the site poses no risk to human
health or the environment There are no costs
associated with this no action remedy
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
SITE SUMMARY
141
-------
TONOLLI, PA
September 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWrION :
The 30-acre Tonolli site is located in Nesquehoning
Borough, Carbon County, Pennsylvania. Land use in
the area is predominantly industrial and residential,
with 20 residences located within one-quarter mile of
the site. Two aquifers, an overburden aquifer and a
bedrock aquifer. are found below the site, the latter
being a current source of drinking water. Site-related
impacts appear to be confined to the overburden
aquifer only. From 1974 to 1986. the Tonolli
Corporation operated a battery recycling and
secondary lead smelting plant onsite. Operations
included storage. breaking, processing. and smelting
of used battenes. battery components. and other lead-
bearing materials The site consists of a battery
receiving and storage area, crushing operation,
smelter, refinery, wastewater treatment plant, above-
ground 500,000-gallon wastewater storage tank, a
rubber-lined waste lagoon, and a 10-acre rubber-lined
solid waste landfill Four primary waste streams were
generated from site operations and included slag from
the secondary lead smelting process, which was
disposed of in the landfill, calcium sulfate sludge
from air pollution control scrubbers, which was
pumped to the landfill; plastic battery casings and
bakelite chips, which were disposed of in the landfill,
and excess process water, battery acid, and
stormwater runoff, which went to the waslewater
lagoon to be neutralized and recirculated back into the
lime slurry air scrubbers From 1974 to 1989, the
state. EPA, and Tonolli Corporation conducted
various sampling investigations that showed elevated
levels of lead and other heavy metals in the soil, air,
surface water, and ground water. In 1985, TonoLli
filed for bankruptcy and abandoned the site. In 1989,
EPA’s Emergency Response Program completed
stabilization activities, which included pumping and
onsite treatment of lagoon wastewater. pumping and
offsite disposal of wastewaler in the above-ground
storage tank, excavating and stabilizing lagoon sludge,
removing the lagoon liner, excavating the soil beneath
the lagoon, backfllling and grading an illegal
diversion ditch and the lagoon, repairing the perimeter
fencing, and installing a mobile onsite treatment
system for contaminated surface water In 1991, EPA
issued a UAO to 46 PRPs to operate and maintain the
automated onsite water treatment plant to address the
contaminated surface water that continues to flow
across the site during precipitation events This ROD
addresses a final remedy for all the contaminated
media present onsite, including battery piles, onsite
smictures, soil, sediment, ground waxer, and surface
water. The primary contaminants of concern affecting
the soil, sediment, debris, ground water, and surface
waxer axe metals, including arsenic, cadmium, and
lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
transporting and treating offsite approximately
13,000 cubic yards of battery wastes, including
battery casings, iron oxide, sump sediment, and dust
by resource recovery at a secondary lead smelter;
conducting additional sampling and characterization of
other waste pile materials effectively via excavating
and characterization of all sediment and baueiy
fragments in stormwaxer collection piping and onsite
dumps, or consolidation within the onsite landfill;
excavating and consolidating approximately
39.000 cubic yards of soil with lead levels above
1,000 mg/kg within the onsite landfill; stabilizing
onsite approximately 7,300 cubic yards of soil with
lead levels over 10,000 mg/kg. with consolidation of
the treated soil into the onsite landfill, excavating soil
situated in the residential area to the immediate west
of the property boundary containing greater than lead
500 mg/kg; collecting confirmatory samples,
consolidating soil into the onsite landfill, and
backfllling both onsite and offsite excavated areas
with clean soil; sampLing to define the area and
volume of soil potentially impacted by the site
activities and requiring remediation, consolidating
and, if necessary, treating approximately 2,020 cubic
yards of treated sludge, 250 drums of melted plastic,
and 210 cubic yards of excavated lagoon soil in the
onsite landfill prior to closure, conducting additional
sampling and completion of bioassays for
contaminated sediment in Bear and Nesquehoning
Creeks during the RD to develop appropnaie clean-up
levels, and excavating all sediment above the set
levels from the creek(s) with consolidation within the
onsite landfill, closing the onsite landfill in
accordance with the federally authorized state
requirements for hazardous waste, including removal
of standing water from the landfill, upgrading the
leachate collection system, consolidating matenals
generated dunog the remedial action within the
landfill to meet the minimum grading requirements ;
142
-------
TONOLLI, PA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
REGION 3
application of the properly designed layer of
agricultural limestone, and covering over the landfill
with a low permeability cap; conducting a treazability
study to evaluate the optimal application rate of
agricultural limestone to provide maximum pH
buffering capacity to the consolidated soil for this in-
situ passive treatment method; maintainrng the cap
and dewatenng system. and monitonng ground water,
collecting and treating approximately 2 million
gallons of landfill leachate decontamination fluids
generated during remediation, and approximately
16 gallons per year of contaminated stormwater using
the existing onsite treatment system, prior to onsite
discharge to Nesquehoning Creek; using monitoring
data collected from the treatment system to determine
appropriate discharge levels; decontaminating onsite
buildings, dismantling of nonstructural components,
with removal of equipment and debris offsite;
disposing of drained nickel/iron batteries offsite;
monitoring air; implementing measures to prevent
runoff of surface waters, sediment, and/or
contaminated soil or battery wastes into Nesquehonrng
or Bear Creeks. evaluating underground storage tanks
during remedial design. any tanks that will impede the
completion of the selected remedy (especially
contaminated soil) will be addressed during
remediation, treating the contaminated overburdened
ground water by constructing a vertical chemical
barrier, with possible injection of pH-adjusted water
to enhance ground water flow rates, using gradient
controls to prevent infiltration of contaminants into
the bedrock aquifer; monitoring the effectiveness of
the vertical chemical bamer and/or injection of the
pH adjusted fluids, and implementing institutional
controls, including deed restrictions to prevent
excavation of the landfill and limit site use, and site
access restrictions The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $16,616,000, which
includes an estimated annual O&M cost ranging from
$35,300 to $35,600 for 30 years
water and ground water clean-up levels will also be
determined during the remedial design stage and will
be based on allowable NPDES discharge parameters
and state-specified background levels, respectively.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions
will be implemented to limit the use of the land to
industrial applications and prevent excavation or
construction on the closed landfill.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Arsenic, Capping; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Air Act; Debns; Decontamination,
Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment;
institutional Controls; Landfill Closure; Leachate
Collection/Treatment; Leachability Tests, Lead,
Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment;
Onsite Containment, Onsite Discharge; Onsite
Disposal, Onsite Treatment; RCRA, Safe Drinking
Water Act, Sediment, Sludge, Soil, Solidification!
Stabilization; State Standards/Regulations, Surface
Water, Treatabihty Studies, Treatment Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debns,
GW, SW
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation levels axe based on
health-risk calculations and include onsite lead 1,000
mg/kg and offsite lead 500 mg/kg Soil will be
stabilized onsite to meet RCRA TCLP levels, such as
lead 5 mg/I. pnor to disposal Chemicai-specific
sediment clean-up levels will be determined during
the remedial design stage Chemical-specific surface
143
-------
REGION 3
U.S. DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 1), VA
May 15, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 640-acre U.S. Defense General Supply Center
(DGSC) is a military support, service, and storage
facility located approximately 11 miles south of the
City of Richmond. Virginia. Land use in the area is
predominantly residential and wooded, with the James
River located approximately I mile east of the site.
Although the site overhes a shallow aquifer,
residences in the area are serviced by a municipal
drinking water facility. From the 1940’s to 1970’s.
DGSC provided multiple support functions for the
U.S. Army. Operational areas consisted of indoor and
outdoor matenal storage areas, a motor pool fucility,
a National Guard training area, fire training areas, and
various acid neutralization pits. Matenals that were
stored in Open Storage Areas (OSA) consisted mainly
of petroleum, oils, and lubncants although, in the
past, there were reported pesticide and herbicide
spills. Soil contamination at the OSA source area
resulted from improper chemical handling and storage
activities conducted dunng this time. In 1986. as part
of a RCRA Corrective Action permit for the facility,
remedial investigations revealed contamination by
VOCs. other organics, metals, and inorganics in both
the soil and ground water throughout the facility As
a result, remediauon of DGSC has been divided into
eight operable umis (OUs). This ROD addresses the
intenm remediauon of OUl, the contaminated soil at
OSA Future RODs will address onsite contaminated
media at the remaining seven areas as 0U2 through
0U8 The pnmary contaminants of concern affecting
the soil are VOCs. including benzene, PCE, TCE.
toluene, and xylenes; other organics, including PAHs.
pesticides, and phenols, metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead, acids, and oils
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
implementing institutional controls and site access
restrictions, including fencing of the storage area
The present worth cost for this remedial action is
$15,000 No O&M costs are applicable to this
remedial action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed resthctions will be implemented to limit future
development of the area.
KEYWORDS :
Acids; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium;
Direct Contact; Institutional Controls; Interim
Remedy; Metals; Oils; Organics; PAHs; Pesticides;
Soil; Solvents; Toluene; VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 03125/92
Lead: Federal Facihty
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Acids, Oils
Category: Source Control - Interim
‘44
-------
- REGION3
U.S. DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 5), VA
March 25, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 640-acre U.S. Defense General Supply Center
(DGSC) is a militaty support, service, and storage
facility located approximately Ii miles south of the
City of Richmond, Virginia. Land use in the area is
predominantly light industrial and residential with
surrounding woodJands. Although the site hes above
a shallow aquifer, most residences in the area are
served by a municipal drinking water system. From
the 1940’s to the 1970’s, DGSC provided multiple
support functions for the U. S Armed Forces and
several federal civihan agencies. Operation areas
consist of indoor and outdoor matenal storage areas,
a motor pool facility, a National Guard training area.
a firefighting training area, and two acid
neutralization pits Studies conducted by the Army in
1984 led to initialing site clean-up activities Results
of remedial Investigations revealed VOCs, other
orgamcs, and metal contamination in soil and ground
water samples at sites throughout the facility As a
result, remediation of DGSC has been divided into
eight operable units to address site contamination
issues These include an open storage source area.
National Guard source area, a fire training source
area, Area #50 source area, an acid neutralization pit
source area, a fireflghtrng training ground water area,
an acid neutralization pit ground water area, and Area
#50/open storage area/National Guard ground waler
area. The acid neutralization pit (AN?) area, located
in the northern section of DGSC, was in operation
from 1958 to the early 1980’s During the time of
operation, caustic and acid wastes were collected from
onsite metal-cleaning operations in large outdoor
14,000— and 3.000-gailon capacity concrete-lined
basins Penodically, spent cleaning solutions were
discharged to the settling pits where they were
neutralized and suspended solids were allowed to
settle out. The neutralized wastewater was then
discharged offsite in either a salucal-y or storm sewer
Sludges were also disposed of off-site in a nearby
landfill in 1985, the pits were closed and remedial
actions began After cleaning the pits and prior to
filling them with clean fill, cracks in the sides and
bottom of the pits were observed, indicating possible
routes of contamination of the surrounding soil and
ground water Ground water monitoring around the
AN? revealed ground water contamination in the
uppermost aquifer Another 1992 ROD has addressed
the mitigation of the open storage area where
instiwnonal controls were applied to reduce exposure
to the public. This ROD addresses the interim
remediation of contanunated soil surrounding the
ANP as 0U5. A future ROD will address the
remedianon -of ground water associated with the acid
neutralization pits. Other RODs will address
remedianon activities for the remaIning contaimnation
areas at the site. The primary contaminants affecting
the soil are VOCs, including benzene and PCE; and
arsenic, a metal.
SELECTED REMEDLAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating contaminated soil onsite using a vacuum
exu ction system, and controlling air emissions using
carbon adsorption; constructing concrete covers over
the pits to prevent their further use and infiltration of
rainwater; disposing of or recycling the spent carbon
offsite at a RCRA facility; and sampling soil at the
end of the clean-up period to evaluate the
effectiveness of the remedy. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $115,607, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $ 16,000 for 4 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemica l-specitic sod action levels are based on
health-based cntena and include MCLs established for
arsenic 5.7 mg/kg; benzene 0.001 mg/kg; PCE
1.5 mg/kg; DCE 0.015 mg kg, ICE 0.036 mg/kg,
toluene 2,400 mg/kg, and xylenes 24,000 mg/kg Soil
action levels will protect ground water at the site from
further contamination
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided,
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Benzene, Capping, Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds, Direct Contact,
Interim Remedy; Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal;
Offsite Treatment, Onsite Containment, Onsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment, PCE; RCRA, Solvents,
State Standards/Regulations; Treatment Technology,
Vacuum Extraction, VOCs.
145
-------
REGION 3
U.S DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER (OPERABLE UNIT 5), VA
(Continued)
March 25, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dates ol previous RODs: None
Lead: Federai Facility
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
146
-------
USA ABERDEEN, MICHAELSVILLE, MD
June 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 20-acre USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville Landfill is
a municipal landfill located along the Chesapeake Bay
in Harford County, Maryland. The site is in the
northern portion of the Aberdeen Proving Ground
(APG) in the Aberdeen Area (AA) between
Michaelsville Road and Trench Warfare Road. Land
use in the area is predominantly indusmal and
residential, with a wetland area located south and east
of the site. In 1970, operations at the landfill began
and continued until its closure in 1980 Previous
studies of the landfill operations indicated that trench
and fill methods were used to dispose of wastes in the
landfill. The majority of materials reponedly
disposed of at the site included domestic trash, trash
from nonindusinal sources at APG, solvents, waste
motor oils, PCB transformer oils, wastewater
treatment sludges, pesticides containing thallium,
insecticides containing selenium, and rodenucides
containing antimony. From 1981 to 1991, the county,
state agencies, U S Army Environmental Hygiene
Agency (AEHA), and U.S Army Corps of Engineers
Waterways Expenment Station (WES) periodically
inspected the site. In 1981, the county recommended
that the landfill be capped. In 1983, the state
inspected the installed cover and advised the APG
personnel to repair two “leachate outbreaks.” In
1985, the AEHA discovered that the landfill cover
was not functioning properly and suggested that an
impervious cap be placed on the landfiU From 1987
to 1990. WES conducted an analysis of ground water
from the monitoring wells surrounding the site and
concluded that the landfill contributed chemicals to
the uppermost aquifer In early 1991, the state
observed several additional “leachate outbreaks’
onsite In mid-1991. a removal action was conducted
onsite by APG, which included installing a leachate
collection system to control and collect leachase This
ROD addresses protection of the ground water by
minimizing leachate flow and preventing current or
future exposure to waste materials as the first of two
OUs planned for the site A future ROD will address
sediment, surface water, and ground water at and near
the site to determine the need, if any, of further
remethation at the site The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil are VOCs, other organics.
including pesticides, and metals, including chromium
and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
replacing the existing cover with a multi-layer cap in
accordance with state requirements for sanitary
landfills; covering the cap with an earthen cover and
revegetaung the area; installing a methane gas
venting system within the cap system to mininuze the
migration or accumulation of gases generated by the
landfill wastes; and installing surface water controls
to accommodate seasonal precipitation. The present
worth cost for this remedial action is $9,207,200,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $27,000 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The sod clean-up goals for capping the site are
established in accordance with state requirements for
sanitary landfill and RCRA subtitle C requirements
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Capping, Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium; Clean
Air Act, Clean Water Act; Closure Requirements;
Landfill Closure, Lead; Metals. O&M, Onsite
Containment, Onsite Disposal, Orgatucs: Pesticides,
RCRA, Sod, Solvents, Sate Standards/Regulations;
Surface Water Collection/Diversion, Venting,
Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: 09/27/91
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
147
-------
WESTINGHOUSE ELEVATOR PLANT, PA
June 30, 1992
REGION 3
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFTION :
The approximately 90-acre Westinghouse Elevator
Plant is a manufacturing plant for eJevator and
escalator components in Cumberland Townslup.
Adams County, Pennsylvania. The surrounding land
is mixed residential and small commercial properties
with the Gettysburg Battlefield National Park to the
south. The site is located within the watershed of
Rock Creek, a small stream that receives discharge
from the northern tributary that traverses the site.
Ground water is the only source of potable water and
area residents near the site rely on municipal or
private wells for drinking supply. Prior to its current
use, most of the property consisted of farm land.
From 1968 to the present, the facility has used
degreasing solvents, paints, and cutting and
lubricating oils in the manufacturing process for
elevator and escalator components. Waste solvents,
paint sludge, oils, and greases were stored in various
areas at the site for offsite disposal. In 1983, after
complairns from local residents, the state initiated an
investigation that revealed soil, sediment, and
widespread ground water contanunanon with VOCs.
In November 1983, Westinghouse removed a total of
43 drums of coatairunated soil from two areas of the
site In 1984, Westinghouse installed an au stripping
tower to treat contaminated ground water and
constructed water mains to provide affected residents
with access to the public water supply Since 1984,
Westinghouse has installed several public water main
extensions for affected residences and also installed
monitoring wells in the area. In 1987. EPA ordered
Westinghouse to perform an RI/FS at the site
Schindler Elevator Corporation has leased and
operated the plant building since 1989 1 1991, there
was a TCA spill at the site, which was then. and us
currently owned by Westinghouse Elevator This
ROD addresses remediation of dense non- ueous
phase liquids (DNAPLs) in the fractured bedrock and
the highly contaminated ground water resulting from
contact with DNAPLs Addauonai soil investigations
are necessary because of the recent TCA spill, and
this will be addressed in a subsequent ROD The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water are VOCs. including TCA, TCE. and 1,1-0 ( 1
stripping from both the onsite area, in the center of
the Conmminntion plume in contact with the DNAPLs;
and the offsite area, downgradient from the center of
the plume, to control migration of dissolved
contaminants; discharging the treated water offsite to
surface surface water, treating air emissions using
carbon adsorption, and recycling and/or disposal of
the spent carbon off site at a RCRA facility;
monitoring ground water and residential wells; and
implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions to restrict the use of onsite ground waxer.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $4,400,000, which includes an annual O&M
cost of $142,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for ground water are
based on SDWA MCLs and non-zero MCLGs for
VOCs, including TCE 5 ug/l; TCA 200 mg/I; and
l,I-DCE 7 ug/l, and State Water Quality Criteria for
discharge to surface water. The state standard for
ground water cleanup to background levels is waived
due to technical impracticability. Emission reduction
from the air scripper/adsorber will be reduced to the
minimum obtainable levels through the use of best
available technologies.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be placed on the Westinghouse
Plant property to prevent any use of the ground water
until EPA and the state have determined that cleanup
goals have been met from monnonng results.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; ARAR Waiver Carbon Adsorption
( (MC), Carcinogenic Compounds, Direct Contact;
Drinking Water Contaminants, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment;
institutional Controls; MCLs. MCLGs; O&M; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment, Plume Management;
RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations, ICE, VOCs.
SELECTED REMTD1AL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for thus site includes
pumping and treatment of around water using air
148
-------
REGION 3
WESTINGHOUSE ELEVATOR PLANT, PA (Continued)
June 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Dates of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
149
-------
AGRICO CHEMICAL., FL
September 29, 1992
REGION 4 _____
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 35-acre Agnco Chemical site is a former
fertilizer manufacturing facility located in Pensacola.
Escainbia County, Florida. Land use in the area is
mixed residential, municipal, commercial, and
industrial. From 1889 to 1920, sulfuric acid was
produced onsite from pyrite. In 1920, the production
of superphosphate fertilizer began. The source rock
used in the process was fluorapatite, which also
contained silica and trace levels of aluminum and
uranium. Four unlined ponds used at the site for
waslewater discharge are referred to as PIP I through
PIP IV. By early 1957, city officials shut down a
public supply well because analyses indicated
declining p 1 - t values and elevated levels of fluoride
and sulfate in the ground water. In 1983, EPA
conducted an investigation that indicated that the
onsite soil and surface water were contaminated with
elevated levels of fluoride and lead. Inianuazy 1987,
the state conducted a ground water assessment at the
site that revealed that site contaminants, primarily
fluoride and sulfate, had polluted the ground water
This ROD addresses a final remedy for contanunated
soil and sludge at the site as OUI to prevent current
or future exposure. Future RODs will address the
treatment of contaminated ground water as 0U2 and
will include the results of a bayou impacts study
being conducted by the PRPs on the Bayou Texar
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil and sludge are VOCs, other organics, including
PAHs and pesticide residues, metals, including arsenic
and lead, and radioactive materials
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating an estimated 32,500 cubic yards of
contaminated soil with concentrations above
1,463 mg/kg fluoride from PIP I. JU. and IV, and
dewatenng the excavated areas, excavating.
solidifying, and stabilizing all soil with lead
concentrations above 500 mg/kg and arsenic levels
above 16 mg/kg from PIP lv, excavating and
stabilizing contaminated sludge from all ponds,
consolidating the excavated soil and sludge from all
areas uno PA ’ U, constructing a slurry wall around
PIP 11, and covenng the area with a RCRA cap,
monitonng ground water; and implementing
institutional controls including deed resmcuons, and
site access restrictions such as secunty fenclnR The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $10,731,013, which includes a present worth O&M
cost of $384,313.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals are based on
protection of ground water and include fluoride
1,463 mg/kg. The excavation goals established for
lead and arsenic are based on health-based soil
exposure scenarios, including lead 500 mg/kg and
arsenic 16 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions and fencing will be implemented to
prevent public access.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water
Monitoring; Inorgazucs: Ixisrinnional Controls, Landfill
Closure; Lead, MCLGs; MCLs; Metals, O&M, Onsite
Containment; Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment;
Orgatucs, PAHs, Pesticides; Radioactive Materials;
RCRA. Safe Drinking Water Act, Sludge; Slurry
Wall; Soil, SolidificauonlStabilizauon; State
Standards/Regulations, Trearabthcy Studies; Treatment
Technology; VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Radioactive
Matenals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
150
-------
ALABAMA ARMY AMMUNITiON PLANT, AL
December 31, 1991
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWI’ION :
The 2,200-acre Alabama Army Ammunition Plant
(AA.AP) site is located in Talledega County, Alabama,
near the junction of Talledega Creek and the Coosa
River. Land use surrounding AAAP is mixed
recreational and rndusinal. The majority of the
surface runoff from AAAP drains west or southwest
into the Coosa River Prior to construction of AAAP,
the area consisted of farms, woodlands, and wetlands
AAAP was built in 1941 as a government-
owned/contractor-operated facility that produced
nitrocellulose, nutroaromauc explosives, and 2,4,6-
trinitrophenylmethylmtramine Support of chemical
manufacturing included the use of sulfuric acid,
aniline. N,N-dimethylaniline, and diphenylamine.
Operations at AAAP were terminated in August 1945,
and in 1973 several parcels of the onginal 13.233-
acre property were sold In 1978, the U.S. Army
Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency
(USATHAMA), managing the Army’s Installation
Restoration Program (IRP), identified soil, sediment,
and ground waier potentially contaminated by
explosives, asbestos, and lead as a result of past site
operations. During the RIIFS, the facility was divided
into two general areas the eastern area (Area A) and
the western area (Area B) In 1985, investigations
identified soil contamination by explosives, asbestos,
and lead in Area A, and ground water contamination
by these matenals in Area B. In 1986, the Army
conducted clean-up activities at Area A, which
included building decontamination and demolition,
soil excavation, and stockpiling Soil excavated from
Area A was stockpiled in Area B in two covered
buildings and on a concrete slab, which was
subsequently covered with a membrane liner A 1991
characterization study of Area B concluded that
explosives, lead, and asbestos contamination were
present above regulatory limits This ROD addresses
a final action for the contaminated soil in the
Stockpile Soils Area (Area B) A final remedy for
the remainder of the AAAP facility will be proposed
by the U.S Army following completion of the RIJFSs
currently in progress The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil and debris are explosives,
including 2,4,6-TNT, 2,4-DNT, 2,6-DNT, and tetryl,
metals, including lead, and asbestos, an inorganic
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for the stockpiled soil in
Area B includes separating between 24,300 and
25,650 cubic yards of contaminated sod and between
1,350 and 2,700 cubic yards of asbestos-containing
material; incinerating onsite contaminated soil; testing
the treated soil for explosives and lead to verify
compliance with the treatment criteria and stabilizing
the soil or ash, if necessary, to meet LDR’s, followed
by disposing of the treated soil and stabilized material
onsite at designated backfill area and containerizing
asbestos-containing material, followed by either onsite
or offsite disposal at a regulated facility depending on
the quantity of material to be disposed of and the
availability of disposal facilities. The total present
worth cost for this remedial action ranges from
$10,991,900 to $17,055,600 (including asbestos
disposal), which includes a total O&M cost ranging
from $8,782,800 to $14,846,500 for 9 to 12 months,
depending on the type of incinerator used.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific sod and debris clean-up goals are
based on federal standards, including explosives
1 ug/g of 2,4,6-TNT (RCRA) and lead 5 mg/I in the
TCLP extract (RCRA).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Asbestos, Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act,
Debris; Direct Contact, IncinerationTFhermal
Destruction, Inorganics; Lead, Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal, Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment,
Orgamcs, RCRA, Soil; Solidification/Stabilization,
State Standards/Regulations, Toxic Substances Control
Act, Treatment Technology
151
-------
REGION 4
ALABAMA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, AL (Continued)
December 31, 1991
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris
Major Contaminants: Explosives, Metals,
Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
152
-------
BENFIELD INDUSTRIES, NC
July 31, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORYfD SCRIPTION :
The 3.5-acre Benfield Industries site is a former bulk
chemical mixing and repackaging plant in Hazelwood,
Haywood County, North Carolina: Land use in the
area is mixed, with surrounding light industrial,
commercial, and residential areas The estimated
3,258 area residents use ground water as their sole
source of drinking water, and approximately
2,056 people in Hazeiwood are connected to the local
public water supply system. From 1904 until
Benfield Industries purchased the property in 1976.
site ownership changed several times and was used
for furniture manufacture and sewing operations
Products handled and stored at the facility by Benfield
Indusmes included paint thinners, solvents, sealants;
cleaners; de-icing solutions; and wood preservers.
including creosote. During site operations, complaints
from citizens concerning the improper disposal of
hazardous waste prompted initial site investigations by
the state On April 21, 1982, a series of explosions
at the Benfield site started a fire that destroyed most
of the onsite facilities and resulted in permanent
closure of the Benfleld Industries plant None of the
onsite tanks or gas cylinders ruptured dunng the fire,
however, dense toxic fumes emanating from the site
resulted in the temporary evacuation of nearly
2,000 area residents Investigations conducted by
EPA, state, local agencies, and academic institutions
revealed a wide range of organic and inorganic
contaminants, including elevated levels of lead and
chromium Following the fire, the state ordered the
site owner to remove all fire debris, chemicals, and
creosote storage tanks from the site This ROD
addresses the remediauon of contaminated soil and
ground water The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil and ground water are VOCs.
including benzene, other organics, including PAHs.
and metals, including arsenic and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for the site includes
excavating, separating, sizing, and treating the
contaminated soil using onsite soil washing,
transferring the smaller soil pamcles to an ex-situ
slurry biological treatment system, replacing coarse
soil fraction and the treated soil fines in the onsite
excavations, and grading and revegetaung the area,
treating andlor disposing of any remaining hazardous
waste residual offsite, extracting and pretreaung
ground water onsite using aeration to remove iron and
manganese, followed by treatment using ion exchange
to remove heavy metals; ex-situ biotreatment using a
submerged fixed-film bioreactor; and a polishing step
using granular activated carbon, reintroducing the
nutnent-ennched water into the onsite aquifer to
facilitate in-situ biodegradation, or if necessary off site
discharge to a POTW. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $3,079,900, which
includes a present worth O&M cost of $424,360 for
5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and state standards, including
benzene 5 ug/l, antimony 6 ugh: barium 1,000 ugh,
beryllium 4 ugh, and lead 15 ugh Chemical-specific
soil clean-up goals are based on SDWA MCLs and
state standards, including benzo(a)anthracene
0.8 mg/kg, chrysene 1.6 mg/kg; naphthalene
10 mg/kg; and benzo(a)pyrene 0.3 mg/kg (health-
based)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Aeration, Arsenic, Biodegradation/Land Application;
Carbon Absorption (GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds;
Clean Au Act, Clean Water Act, Dnnkmg Water
Contaminants. Excavation, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment, Lead,
MCLs, Metals: O&M, Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Organics; PAHs,
Pesticides. Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW), RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act, Soil, Soil
Washing/Flushing, Solvents, State Standards/
Regulations. Treatment Technology, VOCs
153
-------
REGION 4
BENFIELD INDUSTRIES, NC (Continued)
July 31, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil. GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Acuon
154
-------
CARRIER AIR CONDITiONING, TN
September 3, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFrION :
The 135-acre Carrier Air Conditioning site is an
active manufacturing facility in the Town of
Collierville, Shelby County, Tennessee. Land use in
the area is predominantly industrial, with the nearest
residential area approximately 100 feet north of the
site boundary Two aquifer units have been identified
at the site: a shallow class lila aquifer, which is not
used as a drinking water source; and the Memphis
Sand. a class Ha aquifer, which lies below the shallow
aquifer and is currently used as a dnnlung water
source. The Town of Collierville purchased the site
property and installed a well field for potable water
on the northwest corner of the site, known as Water
Plant 2, which currently provides up to 1.4 million
gallons per day of potable water to the Town of
Collierville. In 1967, Collierville leased the site
property, buildings, and equipment to Camer to
manufacture residential heating and air-conditioning
units Dunng the manufacturing process, aluminum
sheeting is stamped and assembled with copper tubing
to form air heat exchangers. Stamping and forming
oils and dirt are removed prior to assembly Until
recently, inchloroethylene (TCE) was used onsite as
the primary solvent for degreasing and cleaning pans.
In 1979. a TCE release from a storage area resulted
in the removal of asphalt pavement and underlying
soil from the parking area, which was affected by the
spill It also was discovered that an onsne wastewater
lagoon had accepted waste contaminated with TCE
and zinc hi response to a second release in 1985,
both a massive soil excavation and disposai action
were conducted to remove ICE contamination.
Monitoring wells also were installed at the facility.
In 1986, one of the wells from Water Plant 2 was
found to be contaminated with low levels of TCE In
1987, Carrier purchased the site property, except for
the municipal well area. In 1990. Carrier installed air
strippers at Water Plant 2 to remove ICE and its
degradation products This ROD addresses a final
remedy for the cornanunated soil, sludge. and ground
water at the Carrier facility and is the only ROD
planned for the site The pnmary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, sludge, and ground water
are VOCs, including TCE and PCE, and metals,
including lead and zinc.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating an estimated 76,500 cubic yards of
contaminated soil/sludge and shallow ground water in
the old lagoon and main plant source areas using soil
vapor extraction (SVE), extracting and containing
ground water from the Memphis Sand aquifer using
the existing and supplemental extraction wells with
treatment using the air strippers at Water Plant 2,
followed by discharge of the treated ground water to
the municipal water supply, a local POTW, surface
water, or reinjecting it to the Memphis Sand aquifer,
treating any air emissions from the SVE or the air
stripping processes using granular activated carbon.
thermal treatment, or photolytic oxidation, if
necessary: implementing institutional controls deed
restrictions to hmit well construction and water use
near the site, and conducting periodic monitoring.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action ranges from $5,700,000 to $7,900,000, which
includes a total O&M cost of $5,489,334 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The chemical-specific soil clean-up level is 533 ug/kg
for ICE, based on fate and transport modeling for
TCE leachate, which would not contaminate the
ground water above the maximum concentration level
for ICE established under the SDWA. The ability to
achieve 533 ug/kg cannot be determined until after
the extraction system has been implemented. EPA
may set an alternate clean-up level when it is
determined that contaminant levels have ceased to
decline over tune and are remaining constant at some
statistically significant level above remediation levels,
as verified by soil sampling The chemical-specific
ground water clean-up levels are based on SDWA
MCLs, MCLGs, and UIC regulations, CWA
Discharge Limitations and Pretreatment standards,
and/or the Tennessee Water Quality Act. These
levels include TCE 5 ug/l, cis-DCE 70 ugul, trans-
DCE 100 ug/l. PCE 5 ug/I; vinyl chloride 2 ugh; zinc
5,000 ug/l, and lead 15 ugh or background levels.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Local ordinances or deed restrictions will be placed
on well construction in the general area of the site
and restrict the use of ground water.
155
-------
REGION 4
CARRIER AIR CONDITIONING, TN (Continued)
September 3, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Mr Stripping; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact Dnnking Water
Contaminants; floodplain; Ground Water Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Inc inerati on/Thermal Destruction; Institutional
Controls; Lend; MCLs; MCLGs; Metals; Offsite
Discharge; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment. Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW); RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sludge;
Soil; State StandardslRegulations; TCE; Trealabihty
Studies, Treatment Technology. Vacuum Extraction;
VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sludge, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - lntenm Action
156
-------
CHEM-FORM, FL
September 22, 1992
REGION 4 _____
SITE HISTORYfDESCRJPTJON :
The 4-acre Chem-Form site is a former
electrochemicai machine design, manufactunng, and
tnarkedng facility in Pompano Beach, Broward
County. Honda. Land use tn the area is
predominantly industnai, with residential areas located
within 2 miles east of the site. The Pompano-Cypress
Creek Canal lies about 3,000 feet south of the site
and flows east into Biscayne Bay. The estimated
72,400 residents of Pompano Beach use the
underlying sole source Biscayne aquifer as their
pnmary source of drinking water. From 1967 to
1985, Chem-Fomi used the site as a certified repair
station for refurbishing turbine engine components
related to the aerospace industry, and they also
provided services to utility companies that used
turbine power plants. Additionally, they were
involved in the design, manufacture, and marketing of
electrochemical machines for other industries involved
in the fabncauon of mend parts These operations
resulted in substantial waste generation. Spent cutting
oils were stored in stainless-steel vats and were
routinely collected by reprocessing contractors
Organic solvents were used for metal cleaning and
painting operations. Process wastewaters were
discharged to an onsite septic tank/drain field systent
Other wastewaters were discharged to an open trench
Prior to 1975. about 50 gallons of wastewaler per day
were disposed of in this manner As a result of EPA
investigations, a removal action was performed to
remove approximately 3,000 cubic yards of soil from
the field and trench areas at the site A 1985 EPA
site screening investigation reported that a total of
66 drums containing oils and sludge were being
stored onsite and that two of the drums were leaking
A second removal action was conducted in 1990 to
remove these drums and investigate mend
concentrations in the ground water In 1991, EPA
also ordered the PRPs to remove contaminated soil
that may potentially affect the ground water Future
RODs will address the contaminated onsite soil This
ROD addresses a final remedy for the ground waler
ax the site, as OU1. Previous removal actions have
now reduced contamination in ground water to below
significant levels, therefore there are no contaminants
of concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no action,
with quarterly ground water monitoring for no less
than 1 year. The estimated total cost for this remedial
action is $104,000, which includes an O&M cost of
$80,000 for a 1-year period.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water M iutonng, No Action Remedy;
O&M; Sole-Source Aquifer.
SITE SUMMARY
Date or pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Federai Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
157
-------
CIBA-GEIGY (McINTOSH PLANT), AL
July 14, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFI’ION :
The 1,500-acre Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant) site is an
active chemical manufacturer in an industrial area in
Mcintosh, Washington County, Alabama. A wetlands
area borders the site property, and part of the site lies
within the floodplain of the Tombigbee River. From
1952 to 1965, Ciba-Geigy, formerly Geigy Chemical
Corporation, manufactured primarily DDT and BHC.
After 1965, when the production of DDT and BIIC
was ceased, Ciba-Geigy began to manufacture laundry
products, herbicides, insecticides, agricultural
chelating agents, sequestering agents, plastic resins
and additives, antioxidants, and specialty chemicals.
In 1982, during an investigation of an adjacent
chemical company, EPA identified onsite
contamination in a drinking water well on the Ciba-
Geigy properly In 1985, EPA issued a RCRA permit
that included a corrective action plan requiring Ciba-
Geigy to remove and treat ground water and surface
water contamination at the site. Further investigations
by EPA revealed II former waste management areas
of potential contamination onsite. These azeas contain
a variety of waste, debris, pesticide by.products and
residues In 1987, Ciba-Geigy installed an additional
wastewater treatment system and four ground water
monitoring wells Two previous RODs in 1989 and
1991 addressed the contaminated shallow alluvial
aquifer and contaminated sludge and soil at 10 of the
Ii former waste management areas This ROD
addresses a final remedy for 0U4, which includes
contaminated soil and sludge in former waste
management Area 8 and the upper dilute ditch A
future ROD will address 0U3, the contamination
withm the floodplain and lower portions of the dilute
ditch The pnrnary cornamiriarns of concern affecting
the soil, sludge, and debris are VOCs, including
benzene. toluene, and xyleries, other organ lcs,
including pesticides, metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead, and inorgarucs
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
removing and decontaminating nonchemical
constructionJdemolition debris from the surface of
Area 8. excavation and offsire disposal of
approximately 63 000 cubic yards of contaminated
soil and sludge from the area as possible, to a depth
of 20 feet, or until concrete structures, die water table,
or the iron slurry waste axe encountered, solidilvine
and stabilizing onsite approximately 46,000 cubic
yards of contaminated soil that contain less than
2,500 mg/kg total organics and no gamma-BHC;
treating approximately 17,000 cubic yards of soil,
sludge, and other waste, which is not amenable to
other treatment using an innovative thermal
technology to be decided during the RI) phase;
treating approximately 46,000 cubic yards of iron
slurry waste in-situ using fixation/stabilization;
backfilling and establishing a vegetative cover over
excavated areas; disposing all treated soil, sludge,
slurry waste, and debris residuals ensue in a RCRA
landvauh; monitoring air emissions and ground warer-
and implementing institutional controls, including land
and ground water use restrictions. In areas where
clean-up levels are not attained, but no further
excavation can occur, the technology(s) to be used
will be based on treatability and leachabihiy studies
to be conducted during the RD stage, but may include
using in-situ soil flushing alone or in combination
wth vacuum extraction or bioremediation to
remediate areas where risk-based levels are not
reached before excavation is terminated. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $49,723,000, which includes an unspecified O&M
cost for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil and sludge clean-up goals are
based on health-nsk levels to assure that drinking
water MCLs would not be exceeded m the ground
water as a result of contaminants leaching through
soil or sludge Actual clean-up levels to be used will
be determined for axrazme, diazinon, prometon,
simazine, 4,4-DDD. 44-DDT, 4,4-DDE, and bladex
using the summers and pestan models, and based on
the proximity of the waste to the ground water table
It is anticipated that site contaminants that do not
have specified clean-up levels in this ROD will be
reduced to acceptable levels when established clean-
up levels are met for the most toxic and mobile
contaminants.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
institutional controls, such as land and ground water
use restrictions, will be implemented if subsurface soil
is left in place above clean-up levels to ensure that
any future excavations of that soil will be handled in
158
-------
REGION 4 _____
CIBA-GEIGY (McINTOSH PLANT), AL (Continued)
July 14, 1992
accoidance with the treatments specified in the
selected remedy.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng; Arsenic; Benzene; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act: Clean Water
Act; Contingent Remedy; Debris; Decont2mln tion,
Deferred Decision; Direct Contact; Excavation;
Filling; floodplain; thcineraiion/Thermal Destruction;
Inorganics; Institutional Controls; Leachability Tests;
Lead; MCLGs; MCLs, Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Onsne Containment; Onsite Disposal;
Onsiie Treatment; Orgamcs; Pesticides, RCRA; Safe
Dnnking Water Act; Sludge, Soil, Soil
Washing/Flushing; SolidificationlStabilization,
Solvents, Solvent Extraction, Toluene, Treatability
Studies; Treatment Technology; Vacuum Extraction,
VOCs; Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09128/89, 09130/91
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge, Debris
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Acuo
159
-------
SITE H1STORY/DESCRJPTION :
The 150-acre Florida Steel site is located 2 miles
northwest of lndiantown, Martin County, Florida.
Surrounding land used is mixed industrial and
agricultural. The site is located within the Indian
River Lagoon Drainage Basin System, and adjacent
property is a mixture of uplands and wetlands.
Several private residences are within 1 mile
downgradtent of the site. In 1969, the Indiantown site
was acquired by Florida Steel Corporation (FSC) for
the purpose of constructing a steel imil using electhc
arc furnace technology for recycling scrap steel,
primarily junk automobiles, into new steel products.
The mill operated from 1970 until 1982, at which
time it was shut down because of depressed economic
conditions Three types of by-products were
produced at the mitt, mill scale, which as oxidized
iron that sloughs of hot steel as ins being cooled by
water, slag formed on top of the steel in the furnace,
which contains barium, chromium, and lead, and
emission control (EC) dust from the electric ar
furnace, which contains iron, zinc, and lead oxides
The EC dust was collected in a baghouse system and
deposited in two onsite disposal areas until 1980,
when EC dust became listed as a RCRA hazardods
waste (K061) and had to be manifested offsite for
disposal In 1983, state investigations revealed PCB
contamrnation of soil an the area of a recirculating
reservoir and in the EC disposal areas In 1985, the
state required FSC to remove appmximately 8,000
tons of EC dust from the disposal areas and send it to
an offsite recycling facility for zinc recovery A
second removal action, conducted in 1986, involved
excavating 11.200 cubic yards of contaminated soil,
sediment, and EC dust containing PCBs greater than
50 mg/kg and temporarily storing the inaienaJs in an
onsite storage vault, as well as implementing an
onstae ground water monitoring program.. The stored
PCB-contarnjnatecj soil was later Incinerated onsne
under a consent order with EPA in 1987, and ash
from this incineration onsite under a consent order
with EPA in 1987, and ash from this incineration was
consolidated within the ash retention building pending
final deposition This ROD addresses the remaining
conlagunaceij onsite soil, sediment, and debris as
OU 1. The pnmaiy contaminants of concern affecting
the soil, sediment, and debris are organics, including
PCBs; and metals, including lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected ren dia1 action for this site includes
excavating and disposing offsite 600 cubic yards of
soil and sediment contaminated with PCB levels equal
to or greater than 50 mg/kg; excavating and onsite
solidification of 37,000 cubic yards of EC dust and
metals-contaminated ash and soil, including soil with
lead concentrations above 600 mg/kg andlor PCB
concentrations between 25 and 50 mg/kg; temporarily
storing the excavated materials onsite pending final
treatment in a manner that will prevent PCB
contamination through surface water run-off, and
disposing of the solidified materials in an onsite
double-lined landfill with a RCRA cap; controlling
surface water run-off from the site by routing ito the
oasite surface water retention pond; periodic
monitoring of surface water for at least 2 years after
construction is completed, continuing ground water
quality monitoring; and implementing institutional
controls, including deed restrictions. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$7,004,750, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$18,200 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals are based on
health risk levels and the leachabihty of lead from
soil into the underlying ground water, including lead
an soil 600 mg/kg; PCBs 2.5 mg/kg. and slag, which
contains lead 1360 mg/kg The slag level was
developed to be protective of human health in an
industrial setting, and additional TCLP testing will be
conducted during the RD stage to confirm its
protectiveness. Compliance with the RCRA land
disposal treatment standards for EC dust will be
attained by meeting levels specified in the treatabilny
variance for contaminated soil and debris.
INSTiTUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions, which hmii the use of the site to
mostly industrial or commercial activities, have been
filed with the Martin County Clerk of the Circuit
Court and will remain in effect regardless of the
clean-up activities that occur.
KEYWORDS :
Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act;
Debris; Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water
Monitoring; lnstnuuonai Controls; Landfill Closure:
FLORIDA STEEL, FL
June 30, 1992
REGiON 4
-------
REGION 4
FLORIDA STEEL, FL (Continued)
June 30, 1992
Leachability Tests; Lead; Metals; O&M; Onsite
Containment; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PCBs; RCRA; Sediment; Soil,
Solidification/Stabilization; State Standards!
Regulations; Surface Water Collection/Diversion;
Temporary Storage; Toxic Substances Control Act.
Treatment Technology.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment. Debns
Major Contaminants: Orgamcs, Metals
Category: Source Control - lntenm
161
-------
GEIGY CHEMICAL (ABERDEEN PLANT), NC
August 27, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 1-acre Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant) site is
a former agricultural chemical distribution center in
Aberdeen, Moore County, North Carolina Land use
in the area is predominantly mixed business,
residential, and agricultural. The estimated
355 families who reside within I mile of the site use
the second of three underlying confined aquifers as
their pnmaiy source of drinking water. From 1947 to
1967, the site changed hands numerous times but was
always used for pesticide mixing and formulation, not
for pesticide manufacturing. From 1985 to 1989. the
site was leased to Lebanon Chemical Corporation for
use as an agricultural pesticide and fertilizer retail
distribution center. The site is currently unoccupied,
however, the Aberdeen and Rockfish railroad that
traverses the southern portion of the site is still active.
In 1988, site investigations conducted by EPA
revealed lead and pesticide contanunation in the soil,
and pesticide and other organic contamination in the
ground water. In 1989, an initial soil excavation and
disposal was conducted for 462 tons of visuafly
contaminated soil. In 1991 an additional 2,000 tons
of contaminated soil were removed. Three PRPs
performed the R1/FS This ROD addresses the soil
and ground water contamination as a final action No
future RODs are planned. The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil and ground water are
pesticides. including aidrin, dieldnn, toxaphene. DDD,
DDE, and DDT
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and disposing of an estimated 1,000 cubic
yards of contaminated soil offsite at a RCRA-
approved landfill, or an incinerator, backfilling the
excavated areas with clean soil and revegetating the
area, onsite pumping and treatment of contanirnated
ground water using a system to be developed dunng
the RD phase, but will include a series of carbon
filters, discharging the treated water to an infiltration
gallery or offsite to a POTW, transporting the spent
carbon offsite for disposal, destruction, or
reactivation, implementing any of the following
contingency remedies, if it is determined that certain
portions of the aquifer cannot be restored to their
beneficial use installing physical bamers or long-term
gradient controls; waiving chemical-specific ARARs;
monitonne soecific wells. re-evaluatina remedianon
technologies for ground water restoration; and
implementing institutional controls and site access
restrictions including fencing. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action ranges from
$2,810,000 to $4,650,000, based upon final
technologies selected during the RD. which includes
a present worth O&M cost of $1,680,000 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil and ground water clean-up standards are based
on the more stringent of state or federal MCLs, and
will attain a 10 risk level. Chemical-specific goals
for soil include aldnn 0.113 mg/kg; dieldrin 0.13
mg/kg; toxaphene 2 mg/kg; DDD 7.6 mg/kg; DDE
5.5 mg/kg; and DDT 4.75 mg/kg, aldrin 0.05 ugh;
dieldnn 0.01 ug/1; and toxaphene I ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not specified.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Contingent Remedy; Drinking Water
Contaminants, Excavation, Filling, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment;
MCLs; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
Organics, Pesticides; Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (P01W), RCRA; Safe Dnnking Water Act;
Soil. State Standards/Regulations. ICE: VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of prnious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: Pesticides
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
162
-------
JFD ELECTRONICS/CHANNEL MASTER, NC
September 10, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 13.09-acre JFD Electronics/Channel Master site
is a former television antenna production and satellite
assembly system facility in Oxford, Granville County,
North Carolina. Two onsite buildings are used by
two companies aS distribution centers. Land use in
the area is predominantly residential and business.
Fishing Creek lies 1.7 miles south of the site and
receives runoff and drainage from the facility. An
estimated 164 people per square mile use municipal
water as their drinking waler supply. From 1961 to
1979, JFD Electronics used the site to manufacture
television antennas. From 1964 to 1965, an unlined
lagoon, with a liquid capacity of 800,000 to 1,000,000
gallons, received wasiewater from a chromate
conversion process and a copper/nickel electroplating
process From 1980 to 1984, Channel Master owned
the site and produced satellite systems, antennas,
amplifiers, and boosters. Organic solvents were
reportedly used onsite to clean tools and antenna
elements prior to sending them offsite for
electroplating. A 1987 state inspection detected
VOCs and metals in the lagoon sludge, adjacent soil,
and ground water. In 1987, Channel Master
excavated and disposed of 17,000 cubic yards of
contaminated sludge/soil at a permitted waste disposal
facility. In addition, 2,000 cubic yards of VOC-
contaminated soil was excavated and thermally treated
onsite in 1988. Channel Master excavated and
disposed of two fuel oil tanks and one concrete waste
oil tank An EPA investigation in 1989 concluded
that contaminated soil and ground water still existed
at the site This ROD addresses the contaminated
soil/sludge and ground water as a final remedy The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sludge, and ground water are VOCs, including
benzene and TCE, other organics; metals, including
chromium, nickel, and antimony, and inorganics,
including cyanide
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating, consolidating, and treating onsite an
estimated 3,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and
sludge using oxidation-reduction to destroy inorganics,
followed by onsite stabilization of the treated soil and
sludge, backfilLing the stabilized material onsice and
capping the area with either a RCRA-approved or
non-RCRA cap. based on the results of a creatability
study; extracting and treating contaminated ground
water onsite using alkaline chlorination to remove
cyanide and VOCs; precipitation/filtration to remove
metals; and air stripping and carbon adSorptloD to
remove VOCs, followed by either onsite discharge to
surface water or offsite discharge to a POTW;
disposing of the spent carbon from the treatment
processes in accordance with ARARs; and conducting
ground water monitoring. The present worth cost for
this remedial action is $6,392,000, which includes a
total O&M cost of $2,804,000 over a period of ax
least 5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil/sludge clean-up goals are based
on health-based levels and include chromium
310 mg/kg; nickel 1,110 mg/kg, and antimony
25 mg/kg. Chemical-specific ground water clean-up
goals are based upon health-based levels, and include
benzene 5 ugh; 1,2-dichloroethane 0.38 ugh, 1,1-
dichloroethene 7 ugh; 1 ,2-dichloroethene 70 ugh;
i,1,l-TCA 200 ug/l, ICE 2.8 ugh, vinyl chlonde
0015 ug/l, barium 1,000 ugh, chromium 50 ugfl.
copper 1,000 ugh; lead 20 ugh, nickel 100 ug/l, zinc
500 ugh!; and cyanide 154 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not Provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Arsenic, Capping, Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean
Air Act; Clean Water Act, Direct Contact,
Excavation, Floodplain; Ground Water, Ground Water
Monitoring. Ground Water Treatment, inorganics,
MCLs, Metals, O&M, Offsite Discharge, Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal, Onsice Treatment, PCE,
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (P01W): RCRA,
Safe Drinking Water Act; Sludge; Soil, Solidification!
Stabilization, Solvents; State Standards/Regulations,
ICE; Treatment Technology, VOCs, Xylenes.
163
-------
REGION 4
JFD ELECTRONICS/CHANNEL MASTER, NC (Continued)
September 10, 1992
SiTE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
164
-------
MADISON COUNTRY SANITARY LANDFILL, FL
September 28, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWflON :
The 90-acre Madison County Sanitaxy Landfill is an
active landfill area located in Madison, Madison
County, Florida. Adjacent to the ‘site is other county
land, including the County Department of
Transportation and the County’s aviation hangar and
Landing snip. The landfill surface is covered with
native soil that was originally excavated from the
trenches in preparing cells to receive waste.
Vegetative cover is absent over most of the inactive
or recently closed waste cells, however, over older
closed cells, vegetative cover is present. In 1970, the
City of Madison began operating the Madison County
Landfill as a sanitary landfill. The landfill, which
was operated as an unlined trench and fill operation,
was divided into several areas. The Yard Trash Area,
located in the southeastern portion of the landfill, was
pnmanly used to dispose of Large bulk debns usually
associated with construction and demolition activities
as well as drums containing industrial wastes The
alleged Acid Disposal Area, located in the southern
portion of the property, was reportedly used to
dispose of acid wash water. From 1971 to 1980,
domestic waste from the city and surrounding area as
well as local industrial wastes were disposed of in the
Landfill During that time, the I TT Thompson
Industries (formerly a division of ITT Corporation)
disposed of waste in the Landfill, including 55-gallon
drums filled with waste polishing/buffer compounds
at the site, but the exact location of disposal is not
known From 1971 to 1974, ITT Thompson arranged
for the disposal of acid, which was reportedly taken
to the landfill The type of wastes disposed of
included acid wash water that may have contained
chroniic acid with maximum concentrations of
chromium 50 ug/l No information on the pH of the
acid wash water or the quantity disposed was
available. No other known wastes were disposed of in
that area Currently, approximately 40 tons of waste
per day are disposed into the one group of remaining
active onsite waste cells, however the state is in the
process of closing the landfill to any receipts of
waste. As part of the landfill closure activities,
Madison County will construct an earthen/clay cap
over the site This ROD addresses both the onsite
and offsite contaminated ground water in an effort to
minimize the migration of contamination from the
landfill to the surrounding community, to restore the
ground water to dnnkmg water ualttv for the
chemicals of concern, and to monitor ground water in
a manner that will verify the effectiveness of the
selected remedy. The prunary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil and ground water are
VOCs; other organics; and metals.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing a multi-Layer clay cap over the landfill;
installing a stormwater runoff system including dikes,
impoundments, and drainage ditches to control cap
runoff; pumping and treatment of contaminated
ground vater onsite using air snipping and carbon
adsorption, reinjection of the treated ground water
offsite, or if infeasible, evaluating other disposal
options including infiltration, irrigation, or direct
discharge: monitoring ground water, implementing
institutional controls including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions, and site access restrictions
including fencing; and providing a contingency for
installation of a passive gas and collection and control
system. if methane is detected. The present worth
cost for this remedial action is $5,191,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost ranging from $109,000
to $409,000 for 25 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on the federal and state MCLs
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls include, but are not limited to,
access restrictions in the form of fences and signs
around the site, restrictions on future use of the site
to preveni construction of water supply wells and
construction onsite that would require excavation,
land use ordinances or other measures restricting
construction of water supply wells offsite in the
vicinity of the landfill, and ground water monitoring.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Capping, Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment,
Institutional Controls, MCLs, O&M, Offsite
Discharge, Onsite Containment, Onsite Discharge;
Onsice Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; RCRA,
Safe Drinking Water Act, Soil, State Guidance; State
Permit: State Standards/Regulations, VOCs ______
165
-------
— REGION 4
MADISON COUNTRY SANITARY LANDFiLL, FL (Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
166
-------
MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE, GA
August 14, 1992
REGfON 4 _____
SITE IUSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 3,200-acre Marine Corps Logistics Base (MCLB)
site is an active military facility in Albany, Georgia.
Land use in the area surrounding the Base is
agricultural or recreational to the south and east, with
residential and commercial areas to the north and
west. The site currently serves as a center to control
acquisition and distnbution of combat and support
materials for the U.S. Manne Corps. In addition, the
Base is used as a training facility for military
personnel and other functions of the Marine Corps
Dunng operations, MCLB has generated various types
of solid and liquid wastes on site, including refuse
and hazardous wastes. The hazardous wastes include
electroplating residues containing heavy metals,
organic solvents from stripping and cleaning
operations, and waste fuel oil. Because of suspected
conta_minatjon from site operations, the Navy
conducted several site investigations between 1985
and 1989 Twelve potential sources of conlammation,
which were identified for the RI/FS, were divided
subsequently into five operable units for remedial
activities. This interim ROD addresses 0U3 , which
is composed of two potential sources of
conlanunation. a former leaking transformer location
(PSC 16), and a chrome-plating waste spill area
(PSC 17) Both areas are located in the west-central
portion of the Base Surface soil from PSC 16 was
removed in a prior action to a 4.4-inch depth and was
replaced with clean soil Future RODs will address
OUs 1, 2, 4, and 5 ax the site, as well as all related
ground water contamination, The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the surface and
subsurface soil and sediment of PSC 16 and 17 are
organics, including PCBS and PAHs, and metals,
including chromium and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
covering PSC 16 with a multi-layer cap, excavating
and disposing of sediment from within the catch basin
adjacent to PSC 16 offsue, excavating and
transporting hazardous soil from PSC 17 offsite for
stabilization and disposal, backfihlmg excavated areas
with clean soil and revegetating the area, installing
ground water monitoring wells, and implementing
institutional controls including land use restrictions on
future activities within the source areas, as well as
site access restrictions such as fencina The esnmated
total present worth cost for this remedial action is
$717,200, of which $242,200 is allocated for PSC 16,
including an estimated first-year O&M cost of
$41,500; and $475,000 is allocated for PSC 17, with
no O&M costs.
PERFORMANCE STAI DAIWS OR GOALS :
The proposed remedy for PSC 16 will meet ARARs;
however, because capping is not a treatment
technology, no health-risk based clean-up goals will
be achieved. Contaminated soil from PSC 17 will be
stabihzed offsite in accordance with RCRA land
disposal standards. Although these actions are
intended to be final for soil, ground water
contamjnaxion at 0U3 will be Investigated under a
separate ROD, at which time the ultimate level of
remedjation to be attained will be determined,
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Land use restrictions for future activities will be
implemented.
KEYWORDS :
Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium; Clean
Air Act; Clean Water Act; Closure Requirements;
Direct Contact, Excavation, Ground Water
Monitoring; Institutional Controls, Imenm Remedy,
Lead, Metals, O&M; Offsite Disposal, Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Disposal, Organics, PAHs, PCBs,
RCRA, Sediment, Soil, Solidificaflon/Stabilizanon
State Scandards/Regu lanons, Toxic Substances Control
Act, Treatment Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - lutenni
167
-------
MILAN ARMY AMMUNITiON PLANT, TN
September 30, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY!DESCRJPTION :
The 22,436-acre Milan Army Ammunition Plant
(MAAP) is located in western Tennessee, 5 miles east
of Milan, Tennessee. The facility was constructed in
1941 to produce and store fuses, boosters, and small-
and large.caliber ammunition. The site is located in
a primarily rural area where land use as predominantly
agricultural, and there are scattered residences to the
north and east of the facility boundary. The Mempbis
Sand aquifer of the Claiborne Group is used as the
major source of potable water in this area The site
lies within the coastal plain province of the
Mississippi Embayment Of the original 13 onsue
process areas, only seven are in use today. One of
these is the 0-line area at MAAP. which was built in
1941. Its major function since then has been to
remove explosives from bombs and projectiles by
injecting high pressure streams of hot water and steam
into the shells of the munitions. The types of
explosives handled at the facility include 2,4,6-
trinrtrotoluene (TNT) and RDX Wastewater,
contaminated with explosives, was discharged from
the washout operations through a series of baffled
concrete sumps where coohng caused significant
amounts of explosives to precipitate out of the waste
stream. Effluent from the sumps was initially
discharged to an open ditch, which ran through the 0-
line area. In 1942, eleven individuai surface
impoundments with a total capacity of 5 5 million
gallons were excavated to receive the effluent before
discharge to the open ditch In 1978. during several
investigations, the Army observed that all of the
wasrewater ponds were full and overflowing into
onsite soil, and that 3 of the 11 water supply wells
sampled were contaminated with explosives After
onsite ground water contamination was determined to
be a direct result of the improper use of 0-line ponds,
use was discontinued In 1981, the ponds were
drained and the effluent was treated in an offsite
facility. A closure plan was implemented in 1984. the
ponds were filled and covered with clay, and the area
was revegetated. This ROD addresses an interim
remedy for the contaminated ground water beneath
and immediately downgradient from the former ponds
as 0U1. Future RODs wtli address contaminated soil,
sediment, and surface water as well as any additional
ground water contamination further dowagradreot
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
ground water are VOCs, including carbon disulfide.
other organics, including HMX, RDX, 2.4.6-TNT,
2,4-DNT, 2,6-DNT, l,3-DNB, 1,3,5-tximtrobenzene,
and nitrobenzene; and inorganics, including nitrate.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this sue
includes pumping and pretreatment of contaminated
ground water immediately downgradient of the former
0-line ponds using electrochenuical precipitation to
remove inorganics, followed by onsite filtration to
remove suspended solids, and UV oxidation to
destroy the majority of the organic contaminants, and
granular activated carbon (GAC) to remove the
remaining organic compounds; re-injecting the treated
water onsite upgradient of the former ponds;
analyzing the precipitated filter cake and the carbon
filters for hazardous waste characteristics and
disposing of them offsiie accordingly; monitoring
ground water; and implementing institutional controls,
including ground water use restrictions. The
estimated present worth cost for this interim remedial
action is $26,980,000, which includes an annual 0&M
cost of $l,413,00() for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical-specific ground water discharge levels are
based on best practicable treatment, are slightly higher
than human health-nsk standards (HBN) and SDWA
MCLs, and include nitrate 10,000 ugll (MCL); carbon
disulfide 3.500 ugh (HBN); 1.3-dinitrobenzene 5 ugJl
(HEN), 2,4-dmitrotoluene 05 ugh (HEN); 2,6-
dinitrotoluene 0.5 mg/I (HEN): HMX 2,000 ug/l
(HEN), nitrobenzene 17.5 ugh (HBN); RDX 10 ugh
(HEN); 1,3, 5-tnnitrobenzene 20 ugh (HEN); and
2,4,6-TNT 10 ugh! (HEN). Health-based standards
will be fully met in the final remedial action under
one final ROD addressing ground water immediately
downgradient of the former ponds (OUI), soil in and
around the former pond (0U2), and the ground water
plume (0U 14)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented to prevent
ingestion of contaminated ground water. Ground
water within the OU will not be used for potable
purposes while contaminant levels are higher than
health-based levels, and any well installed within the
facility will be tested prior to use.
168
-------
REGION 4
MILAN ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, TN (Continued)
September 30, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcmogeruc Compounds;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants;
Ground Water, Ground Water Morutonng; Ground
Water Treatment; J.norganics; Institutional Controls,
interim Remedy. MCLs; MCLGs, O&M: Offsite
Disposal; Onsite Discharge; Onsue Treannent;
Orgamcs, RCRA. Safe Drinking Water Act; State
Standards/Regulations; Treatabihty Studies; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facihty
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Organics,
Inorganics
Category: Ground Water - lntenm
169
-------
NATIONAL ELECTRIC COILICOOPER INDUSTRIES, KY
September 30, 1992
REGION 4
SiTE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 3.5-acre National Electric Coil/Cooper Industries
site includes an active manufacturing facility in
Dayhou, Harlan County. Kentucky. Land use in the
area is light industrial and residential, with 40
families residing at a mobile home park adjacent to
the site. The site is located within the floodplain of
the Cumberland River, and overhes both shallow and
bedrock aquifers, the latter bemg used for drinking
waler and industrial uses. From 1951 to 1985, the
National Electric Coil (NEC) Company operated a
manufacturing facility onsite, which rewound electric
motors, manufactured coils, and rebuilt machinery
used in the coal mining industry. In 1985, Cooper
Industries purchased the facility and operated it until
1987 TCE was used onsite to remove oil and tar
from motors and other equipment prior to rebuilding.
A 1,000-gallon tank, which held the solvent, was
maintained in a below-grade concrete pit.
Periodically, the tank was drained and the waste
liquid was allowed to flow over land and drain into
the Cumberland River. Sludge from the tank and
debns from an onsice furnace were disposed of along
the n er bank PCB-laden oil also was allowed to
drain from transformers onto the ground and into the
river These improper disposal practices, which
continued until the mid- 1980’s, have resulted in
contamination of the local drinking waxer supply,
drainage channels, flyer embankment property, and
facility grounds in 1989, state Investigations
revealed VOC contamination in several residential
wells Bottled water was provided to affected
residences and municipal lines were installed. As part
of a 1990 removal action, EPA required the PRPs to
excavate 5,100 tons of contanunated soil for offsiie
disposal This ROD addresses an rnienm remedy for
the VOC contamination in the bedrock aquifer to
further restrict migration of the VOC-cornaminant
plume A future ROD will address a final remedy
for the shallow aquifer beneath the SUe and any other
site-related contamination The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the ground water in the bedrock
aquifer and air are VOCs, including TCE, toluene,
and xylenes; and metals, including lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
onsite pumping and treatment of contaminated ground
çr_ustn air stripping to remove VOCs. with
onsite discharge of the treated water to the
Cumberland River capturing and treating resulting
vapors using activated carbon, and disposing of the
spent carbon offsiie as RCRA FOOl waste; and
monitoring ambient air and ground water. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$106,000, with an estimated annual O&M cost of
$150,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground waxer clean-up goals are
based on state effluent discharge limitations and
include TCE 0.172 mg/I; l,l-DCE 0.0021 mg/I; vinyl
chloride 0.128 mg/I; PCBs 0.0043 ugh; cis-I,2-DCE
0.07 mg/I; methylene chloride 0.011 mg/I; benzene
0.833 mg/I; and lead 0.072 mg/I. Ambient air
performance standards also will be met and include
cis-l,2-DCE 5 uglm 3 ; TCE 5 ug/m 3 ; and vinyl
chloride S ug/m 3 .
INSTiTUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng, Air Stripping; Benzene; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds; Direct
Contact, Drinking Water Contaminants: Floodplain;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment: Interim Remedy. Lead, Metals;
O&M; Onsite Discharge, Onsite Treatment, RCRA;
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations, TCE, Toluene;
VOCs, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: GW, Air
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
170
-------
NEW HANOVER COUNTY AIRPORT BURN PIT, NC
September 29, 1992
REGION 4 _____
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit site is
located on Gardner Road approximately 500 feet west
of the New Hanover County Airport terminal, New
Hanover, North Carolina. Land use in the vicinity of
the site is commercial, industrial, and residential. The
site was onginally developed as a military hospital,
however, from 1968 to 1979, the site was used for
fire-fighter training purposes. During training
exercises, jet fuel, gasoline, petroleum storage
bottoms, fuel oil, kerosene, and sorbent materials
from oil spill cleanup were burned in a pit. During
its active years, water from the pit was allowed to
flow onto land surfaces. Inspections conducted after
the pit was abandoned showed that most of the
standing liquid in the pit was water. The bottom of
the pit and the soils immediately surrounding the pit
were black with characteristics similar to tar in
addition to the burn pit area, fire-fighting activities
resulted in contanunation at several other site areas.
including an auto bum area; a railroad tank burn area.
an aircraft mock-up area; a fuel tank and pipelines
area; and two stained soil areas north of the burn pit.
In 1990, under EPA order, the PRP removed waste
materials, contaminated water, surface and subsurface
soils, and structures Removed and disposed of were
approximately 12,500 gallons of contaminated water;
3,200 tons of contaminated soil, drums, and
dismantled structures and pipelines This ROD
addresses restoration of the aquifer to drinking water
quality as a final action for this site The pnmary
contanunarns of concern affecting the ground water
are VOCs, including benzene, and metals, including
chromium and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
collecting additionai ground water quality data for a
1-year penod. conducting a treatability study to size
the ground water treatment equipment and to
determine if a technology for pretreatment is
necessary, extracting and onsite pretreatment of an
estimated 97 million gallons of contaminated ground
water using either clarification, filtration, or addition
of chemical complexing agents to remove suspended
solids or iron, followed by treatment with air smpping
to remove VOCs, with offsne discharge of the treated
water to the Northside POTW system, testing and
d.isposin of the sludre generated dunnn the
pretreatment process in the most economical means;
conducting a review of the existing ground water
rnomtoring system to ensure proper monitoring of
ground water quality and the effectiveness of the
system; and monitoring ground water, providing for
the following contingencies if certain portions of the
aquifer cannot be restored to their beneficial use
including providing engineering or long-term gradient
controls by low-level pumping; consid.enng a waiver
of chemical-specific ARARs for the aquifer,
reevaluating the remedial technologies for ground
water restoration; continued rnonitonng of specific
wells, and implementing institutional controls to
restrict access to certain portions of the aquifer. The
estimated present worth for this remedial action is
$ 1,932,800, which includes a present worth O&M
cost of $1,073,700 for 4.5 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up levels are
based on the North Carolina Water Quality, EPA, and
MCL standards and include benzene I ug/l: chromium
50 ugh, and lead 15 ugIl.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented to restrict
access to certain portions of the aquifer
KEYWORDS :
ARA.R Waiver; Air Stnpping, Benzene. Carcinogenic
Compounds, Chromium. Clean Air Act, Clean Water
Act. Contingent Remedy, Direct Contact, Ground
Water; Ground Water Monitonng, Ground Water
Treatment, Institutional Controls, Lead, MCLs.
MCLGs, Metals. No Action Remedy, O&M, Offsite
Discharge, Onsite Treatment, Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTW), RCRA, Safe Drinking
Water Act, State Standards/Regulations, Treatability
Studies, VOCs
171
-------
REGION 4
NEW HANOVER COUNTY AIRPORT BURN PIT, NC (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SiTE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
172
-------
P0TrER’S SEPTIC TANK SERVICE PITS, NC
August 5, 1992
REGION 4
SITE I{ISTORYIDESCRWrION :
The 5-acre Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits (Potters’s
Pits) is located in a rural section of Brunswick
County, North Carolina. The surrounding land use is
semi-rural residential The site is situated within a
residential community known as the Town of Sandy
Ci eek. The Chinnis Branch waterbody traverses the
site, flowing from southwest to northeast. A
forest/wetland region covers approximately half of the
site. There axe no public water supplies within
approximately 10 miles of Sandy Creek because the
current residences use pnvate domestic waler wells
and onsice septic systems The EPA Domestic Water
Survey for the subdivision indicates that there are
60 wells in the area. Between 1969 and 1976, before
the land was developed for residential use, a family
business operated sludge hauling and oil spill clean-up
companies as well as waste disposal pits on the site
Disposal practices consisted of placing petroleum
waste products and septic tank sludges either in
shallow unlined pits or directly on the land surface
In 1976, an unlined pit failed, allowing approximately
20,000 gallons of oil to flow into Chinnis Branch
The U.S. Coast Guard responded to the spill pursuant
to CWA. Additionally, the site owners pumped the
remaining oil from the breached pit and three other
onsite pits for offsite disposal. Approximately 150
truckloads of oil sludges and stained soil were
removed. Thick oil sludge that could not be pumped
was mixed with sand and buried onsite In 1982,
Dixie and Earl Gurkin purchased the site and
discovered buned wastes, which resulted in an EPA
investigation that revealed soil and ground water
contamination In 1984, EPA conducted an
emergency removal, excavating an estimated 1,770
tons of oil, sludge, and contaminated soil for offsite
disposal This ROD addresses the ground water
treatment and contaminated soil for offsite disposal
The pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil and ground water are VOCs, including benzene,
toluene, and xylenes, other organics, including PAHs
and pesticides, and metals, including chromium and
lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
temporanly relocating all onsite residents, excavating
and treating approximately 10,100 cubic yards of
contaminated soil onsite using an ex-situ low
temperature thermal desorption process; stabilizing the
waste stream if necessary, and treating any off-gas
emissions using a treatment to be selected Later,
sampling and analyzing the tream nt residue,
disposing of all non-hazardous treated soil into the
original excavated areas, and filling and revegetating
the areas; treating any soil that exhibits RCRA
toxicity characteristics onsite using stabilization, with
offsite or onsite disposal; extracting and treating
ground waler from the surficial aquifer onsite using
precipitacion/floccu lation/filtration to remove heavy
metals, and air stripping to remove VOCs, with
discharge of the treated water onsite to surface water,
transporting the residual sludge offsite for disposal or
treatment, if necessary; and conducting soil sampling
and ground water monitonng. This ROD provides for
a contingency in the event soil and ground water
remedies are not effective, which includes excavation
and offsite treatment or disposal of soil, based on
TCLP test results, with filling of excavated onsite
areas, and pumping and onsite containment of ground
water, with implementation of institutional controls,
chemical-specific ARAR waivers, and continued
monitoring The estimated total present worth for the
remedial action is $11,800,000, which includes a total
annual O&M cost of $384,281 for 50 years The
estimated capital cost for the contingency remedy is
$6,288,234
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Goals are based on the more stringent of state or
federal standards and federal land disposal restrictions
pertairung to storage and transportation of hazardous
wastes Chemical-specific ground water goals include
benzene, 5 ugh; toluene 1,000 ug/l, xylenes 1,000
ug/l, chromium 50 ugh; lead 15 ugh, and naphthalene
30 ug/l Chemical-specific goals for subsurface and
surface soil include benzene 0 01 mg/kg; toluene 3 4
mg/kg. xylenes 3.5 mg/kg, chromium 97 2 mg//kg;
lead 25 mg/kg, and naphthalene 1 8 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls may be implemented as part of
the contingency remedy.
173
-------
REGION 4
POUER’S SEPTIC TANK SERVICE PITS, NC (Continued)
August 5, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; ARAR Waiver; Benzene; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water
Act; Contingency Remedy; Direct Contact; Drinking
Water Contaminants; Excavation; Filhng; Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water
Treatment; IncinerationiThermal Destruction.
Institutional Controls; Leachability Tests; Lead;
MCLGs; Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment; Organics; PAHs; Pesticides; Plume
Management; RCRA; Relocation; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Soil; SolidificationlStabihzation; Solvents;
State StandardsfRegulations; Toluene; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Wetlands, Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
174
-------
SAVANNAH RIVER (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 1), Sc
June 29, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 300-square-mile Savannah River (USDOE) site
(SRS) is a Department of Energy (DOE) facility
located in Aiken, Barnwell, and Allendale Counties,
South Carolina, 20 miles south of Aiken, South
Carolina, and 25 miles southeast of Augusta, Georgia.
Land use in the surrounding area is primarily
agricultural. The Savannah River Site is a secured
facility with no residents. The site, co-operated by
the Westinghouse Savannah River Company, is a
national defense-related facility producing urnum.
plutonium, and other special nuclear materials. From
1958 to 1985, SRS used a northwest portion of the
site, termed the “M-area,” as a hazardous waste
management facility (HWMF). The M-area HWMF
or OUI consisted of an unlined surface impoundment
(settling basin), a process sewer line, an overflow
drainage/seepage area, and an area known as Lost
Lake, which represents a special ecological
environment known as Carolina Bay Manufacturing
wastes from aluminum-forming and metal-finishing
operations conducted onsite were discharged through
the sewer line to the basin, where metals such as
uranium, nickel, lead, and aluminum settled out of
solution Any basin overflow went to the
drainage/seepage area and then on to Lost Lake Use
of this system ended in 1985, when a new wastewater
treatment facility was installed This interim ROD
integrates previously completed RCRA closure
activities that were required and approved by the
South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control Future RODs will address
final remedial actions for other contaminated media,
including the vadose zone and ground waler,
associated with the M-area HWMF The pnrnary
contaminants of concern affecting soil, sludge, and
surface water are VOCs, including TCE and PCE,
metals, including lead, acids, and radioactive
materials, including uranium
outfall; consolidating approximately 39,700 cubic
yards of contaminated soil excavated from the
seepage area, Lost Lake, and a portion of the sewer
line into the basin; installing and maintaining a low
permeability cap over the settling basin, which
includes a surface soil layer that will be graded and
vegetated to promote drainage; monitoring ground
water, and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action ranges from
$3,000,000 to $5,000,000, which includes an annual
O&M cost of $20,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
No chemical-specific clean-up goals were provided in
this interim ROD, but will be provided for the final
M-area HWMF remedial action The goal of this
interim ROD is to integrate prior RCRA decisions
into the CERCLA process. The goal of the
remedxauon is to minimize the migration of
contaminants to the ground water and eliminate
surface transport pathways.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
A deed restriction on the M-aiea HWMF will be
maintained with the Aiken County zoning authority as
required by the South Carolina Hazardous Waste
Management Regulations
KEYWORDS :
Acids; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Water Act, Closure Requirements, Dredging;
Excavation; Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional
Controls. Interim Remedy: Lead: Metals, O&M,
Offsiie Discharge; Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment;
PCE. Radioactive Materials, RCRA: Sludge, Soil,
Solidification/Stabilization, Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations, Surface Water, Surface Water
Treatment, TCE, Treatment Technology, VOCs.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
pumping and onsite treatment of any standing water
that remained in the basin, excavating, dewatenng,
and stabilizing approximately 37,000 cubic yards of
basin sludge using Portland cement, placing,
consolidating, and compacting the stabilized sludge
into the basin, discharging the sludge effluent from
the dewatenn orocess offsite to a oermitted NPDES
175
-------
REGION 4
SAVANNAH RIVER (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 1), Sc (Continued)
June 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Radioactive
Materials
Category: Source Control - lntenm
176
-------
SAVANNAH RIVER (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 2), Sc
June 29, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 300-square-mile Savannah River (USDOE) site
(SRS) is a Department of Energy (DOE) facility
located in Aiken, Barnwell, and Allendale Counties,
South Carolina. 20 miles south of Aiken, South
Carolina, and 25 miles southeast of Augusta. Georgia.
Land use in the surrounding area is pnmarily
agricultural. The Savannah River Site is a secured
facility with no residents. The site, co-operated by
the Westinghouse Savannah River Company, is a
national defense-related facility producing muum,
plutonium, and other special nuclear matenals. From
1956 to 1985, SRS used a northwest portion of the
site as a hazardous waste management facility
(HWMF), which received waste from the Savannah
River Metallurgical Laboratory (MET LAB)
Activities at MET LAB included corrosion testing on
stainless steels and nickel-based alloys This process
required degreasing and cleaning metal pans and
sample etching Solvents used in the degreasing
included acetone, carbon tetrach.londe, TCA. and
ICE Potassium chloride, sodium cyanide, and
hydrofluonc acids were used in the etching All of
these chemicals were used and discharged to the
HWMF in small quantities The MET LAB HWMF,
or 0U2, consisted of a vitrified clay process sewer
line, which carned effluent from the laboratory to a
basin, and a drainage outfall, which flowed into an
adjacent Carolina Bay, a special ecological
environment. The contaminated sediment in the
bottom of the basin total 450 cubic yards The
drainage outfall consisted of a pipe beneath a roadway
and a drainage ditch from the roadway into the
Carolina Bay dunng periods of heavy rainfall
Effluents to this system consisted mainly of
noncontact cooling waters and small quantities of
laboratory rinse water containing the previously
named hazardous substances Beginning in 1983.
hazardous wastes from the metallurgical laboratory
building were sent to a TSD facility onsite at SRS.
and in 1985 the process sewer line was closed This
interim ROD integrates previously completed RCRA
closure activities that were required and approved by
the South Carolina Department of l-lealth and
Environmental Control. Future RODs will address
final remedy selection for the site ground water and
remaining contaminants associated with the MET
LAB HWMF. The primary contaminants of concern
affecun2 the soil. sediment. debns. and surface
water are VOCs, including TCE; metals, including
lead and chromium; and acids.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and compacting the process sewer line and
associated soil and sediment, placing them in the
basin, and installing a low permeability cap over the
basin; sampling the accumulated rainwater in the
basin with onsite discharge and/or treatment, if
constituent concentrations in the accumulated
rainwater exceed PDES discharge standards;
maintaining the cap; monitoring ground water, and
implementing institutional controls, including detd
restrictions The estimated present worth cost for this
interim remedial action is $2,000,000, which includes
an annual O&M cost of $20,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
No chemical-specific clean-up standards were
specified in this interim ROD, but will be provided
for the final MET LAB HWMF remedial action. The
goal of this interim ROD is to integrate prior RCRA
decisions into the CERCLA process. The goal of the
remediation is to minimize the migration of
contaminants to the ground water and eliminate
surface transport pathways
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
A deed restriction on the MET LAB HWMF will be
maintained with the Aiken County zoning authonty as
required by the South Carolina Hazardous Waste
Management Regulations
KEYWORDS :
Acids. Capping, Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium. Clean Water Act, Closure Requirements,
Debns, Direct Contact. Excavation, Ground Water
Monitonng, Institutional Controls, Interim Remedy,
Lead, Metals, O&M. Onsite Containment, Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment, RCRA;
Sediment, Soil, Solvents, State Standards/Regulations,
Surface Water, Surface Waxer Treatment, ICE;
VOCs.
177
-------
PEGION 4
SAVANNAH RIVER (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 2), Sc (Continued)
June 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06129/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debns, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Acids
Category: Source Control - Intenrn
178
-------
SAVANNAH RIVER (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 3) Sc
June 29, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 300-square-mile Savannah River (USDOE) site
(SRS) is a Department of Energy (DOE) facility
located in Aiken County. 20 miles south of Aiken,
South Carolina, and 25 miles southeast of Augusta.
Georgia. Land use in the area is primarily industrial,
and SRS is a secured facility with no residents. The
site, co-operated by Westinghouse Savannah River
Company, is a national defense-related facility
producing tritium, plutonium, and other special
nuclear materials. The A/M area, located in the
northwest portion of the SRS, contained many
operations that involved the use of hazardous
substances Between 1952 and 1981, an estimated
13 million pounds of chlorinated solvents were used
in the AIM area to degrease fuel and target tubes for
use in the SRS reactors. An estimated 50 to
90 percent of the solvents evaporated dunng use,
however, the remaining solvents were discharged to
the process sewer system. There are four main
sections to the A/M area. The A-014 outfall received
waste solvents (mainly TCE and PCE) via an
underground sewerage line from buildings 313-M and
320-M onsite until 1976. From 1958 to 1985, the M-
area basin hazardous waste management facility
(HWMF) received an estimated 2 million pounds of
spent solvents from degreasing operations in buildings
3l3-M, 320-M, and 32l-M In transit, some of the
solvents leaked into the ground through cracks in the
pipeline Finally, the 32l-M solvent storage area
contained various storage tanks for TCE and PCE In
1975, an estimated 1,200 gallons of PCE leaked from
a cracked ceramic pump seal connected to a solvent
storage tank located west of building 32l-M As a
result of these activities and incidents, a ground water
plume, encompassing 1,200 acres beneath the A/M
area, is contaminated with significant concentrations
of VOCs In l981,SRS voluntarily initiated aground
water RCRA corrective action program to investigate
the nature and extent of ground water contamination
and to develop a remedial program Ground water
monitonng wells were installed, and beginning in
1983, extraction and treatment of ground water began
To date, over 1.3 billion gallons of contaminated
ground water have been treated This ROD addresses
an interim remedy for the AIM area ground water
subsurface vadose zone, as 0U3 Other RODs have
addressed interim remedies for the M-area HWMF
and the Savannah Metallurgical Laboratory (SRL)
HWMF. Future RODS will address final remedies for
these OUs. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water in the A/M area are VOCs,
including PCE and TCE.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedy for this site includes
installing 11 or more ground water recovety wells
under the RCRA program throughout the A/M area,
extracting and treating contaminated ground water
using an air stripper to remove volatile solvents,
followed by onsite discharge to an NPDES permitted
outfall; upgrading the air stripping tower to include an
off-gas treatment system based on the result of a
treatabihty study The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $7,800,000, which includes
an annual O&M cost of $20,000 for 30 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
No chemical-specific clean-up goals were specified in
this interim ROD, but they will be provided for the
final remedial action The goal of this remediation is
to reduce ground water contaminants and minimize
migration of the contaminant plume
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Air
Act; Clean Water Act; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring: Ground Water Treatment, Interim
Remedy; O&M, Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment;
PCE, Plume Management. RCRA, State Standards/
Regulations, ICE, Treatabiity Studies; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre%ious RODs: 06129/92, 06129/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Ground Water - lntenm
179
-------
STANDARD AUTO BUMPER, FL
September 28, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The approximately 1-acre Standard Auto Bumper site
is a chromium and nickel plating facility in Hialeah,
northeast Dade County, florida. Surrounding land
use is primarily industrial, residential, and
recreational. The topography at the site is generally
flat. Site features consist of a one-story concrete
block structure, two concrete-holding tanks, a concrete
and asphalt slab, and numerous plating process
holding and drying racks. in 1959, Standard Auto
Bumper began electroplating operations, and
discharged wastewater from the electroplating and
stripping process to an onsite drainage duch/swale
area west of the facility. In 1972. a wastewater
treatment system was constructed to convert
hexavalent chromium to insoluble trivalent chromium.
Between 1972 and 1979, the effluent from this
treatment system was discharged to an underground,
drainage trench onsite. In 1979, use of this trench
was discontinued wben the Hialeah sewer system
began receiving effluent discharge. Dade County also
documented numerous improper discharges from the
facility between 1977 and 1982. EPA rnvesngauons
of soil and ground water in 1985 identified elevated
concentrations of metals in the ground water beneath
the former disposal areas. In 1989 and 1990. a
removal action included soil excavation of the
discharge trench area and offsite disposal of the
matenal, The primary source of coruaminanon was
determined to be the electroplating process waste
streams. This ROD addresses onsite contaminated
soil to reduce the migration of these contaminants to
the ground water. Remediation of contaminated
ground water will be addressed in a subsequent ROD
The pnmary contanunants of concern affecting the
soil are metals, including chromium and lead
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on the
exceedance of a 10’ risk level, including hexavalent
chromium 52 mg/kg; nickel 370 mg/kg; and total
chromium 519 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act;
Direct Contact; Excavation; Filling; Ground Water
Monitoring; Lead; Metals; Offsite Disposal; RCRA;
Soil; Stale Standards/Regulations.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 2.500 cubic yards of contaminated soil
with concentrations exceeding a l0 risk level and
disposing of the sod offsite, backiilling the excavated
areas with clean till, and monitoring ground water
The estunated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $338,186, which includes a present worth
O&M cost of $40,186
180
-------
REGION 4
USDOE OAK RIDGE RESERVATION (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 6), TN
September 30, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
Tbe Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6) site is
located within the K-25 plant, a former uranium
ennchment facility in Oak Ridge, Roane County,
Tennessee. Land use in the area is mixed mdustnal,
recreational, residential, and agricultural. Since the
1940’s, the fabrication, decontanunation, and
maintenance processes associated with activities at the
site, known as K-25, have produced hazardous and
radioactive wastes. To dispose of these wastes,
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities were
constructed at the K-25 site. In the mid-1970’s, the
swampy spring discharge area at the base of one of
the waste disposal units, the K-1070-C/D Burial
Grounds, was filled and a pipe was inserted into the
hillside to collect natural seepage for routing to a
storm drain The pipe discharge is referred to as
SW3I. In 1989, K-25 was divided into OUs to
address and isolate environmental problems into more
manageable entities, and the K-1070-CID Burial
Ground and SW31 became part of the K-1070 OU
The K-lOb OU is presently undergoing an RI under
CERCLA; however, SW3I has been isolated for
interim action This ROD addresses an intenm
remedy to reduce the migration of contaminants and
degradation of the environment caused by the SW3 I
discharge while the investigation of the K- 1070 OU
continues The objective of this ROD, which
addresses 0U6, is to terminate the direct discharge of
contaminants to surface water by intercepting and
routing contaminated waters for treatment via an
NPDES-permitted outfall pnor to discharge to surface
water Future RODs will address source control
actions to remediate the K- 1070-CJD disposal pits and
trenches, which are suspected of causing releases of
hazardous substances to ground water and a final
remediation action to address ground waxer
contamination problems at the K-25 site as a whole
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
surface water are VOCs, including benzene, PCE,
ICE, toluene, and xylenes, other orgamcs, including
PCBs and PAHs, and metals, including lead.
carbon polishing to remove PCBs; discharging the
water offsite to a NPDES-pernutted facility for final
treatment prior to discharge; controlling air emissions
from the air stripping process using carbon
adsorption, if necessary, with regeneration or disposal
of the spent carbon; and conducting quarterly surface
water monitoring. The estimated capital cost for this
remedial action is $350,000, with an annual O&M
cost of $117,700.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific surface waler clean-up goals are
based or SDWA MCLs and primary health advisory.
These include benzene 0.005 mg/I; PCE 0.005 mg/I;
ICE 0.005 mg/I, toluene 1 mg/I, xylenes (total)
10 mg/I; naphthalene 0.13 mg/I; and lead 0.05 mg/I.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact; Interim Remedy; Lead; MCLs; Metals,
O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Organics;
PANs; PCBs; PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act,
Solvents; Stale Standards/Regulations; Surface Water,
Surface Water Treatment, ICE; Toluene; VOCs;
Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/28/91, 09/19191,
09/19/91, 09/21191
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
collecting and pretreaung surface water using
oxidation. pH adjustment, and flocculation!
clarification to remove heavy metals, followed by
treatment by an air stripper to remove VOCs. and
181
-------
REGION 4
USDOE OAK RIDGE RESERVATiON (OPERABLE UNIT 18), TN
September 30, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit
18) site is located adjacent to the City of Oak Ridge,
Anderson County, Tennessee. The Oak Ridge Y-12
plant was built in 1943 by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers as part of the Manhattan Project. Y-12
occupies the upper reaches of East Fork Poplar Creek
in Bear Creek Valley, which lies between Pine Ridge
to the north and Chestnut Ridge to the south. The
ongrnal mission of the plant was to separate the
fissionable isotope of uranium using electromagnetic
separation. Recent activities at Y- 12 have included
the chemical processing of lithium and uranium
compounds, precision fabrication of components from
these and many other matenals, and assembly of the
components into major subassemblies for nuclear
weapons. In support of these activities, the plant
conducts metallurgical and machine shop operations,
including electroplating. The Plating Shop Container
Areas, which are within the fenced security area of Y-
12. receive spent plating solutions and sludge. Spills
in the Plating Shop Container Areas have released
inorganic and organic contaminants to the surrounding
subsurface soil; however, migration of contaminants
to ground water and surface water is unlikely because
they are present at low concentrations The physical
and chemical properties of soil and contammants are
not conducive to the transport of inorganics to the
ground water, and the gravel and asphalt surfaces of
the site act to reduce erosion. This ROD addresses
0U18, the soil in the Plating Shop Container Areas
A subsequent ROD may address future contaminants
in ground water, surface water, and runoff, if
necessary. for the UEFPC Integrator OU Because
the Plating Shop Container Areas are within the
fenced security of Y- 12 and are devoid of vegetation.
the probability of detectable impacts to terrestrial and
aquatic plants and animals is low. Currently, the total
excess cancer nsk is below the EPA-established range
of concern, and noncarcinogeruc health effects are
also below the threshold for potential concern, based
on a conservauve exposure to protect human health at
the Y-12 Plating Shop Container Areas. Therefore,
there are no contaminants of concern affecting this
site.
protect human health and the environn nL There are
no costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not apphcable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/28/91, 09/19/91,
09/19/91, 09/30/92
Lead: Federal Facihty
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action No additional action is necessary to
182
-------
USMC CAMP LEJEUNE MILITARY RESERVATION, NC
September 23, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 500-acre USMC Camp Lejeune Military
Reservation is located 15 miles southeast of
Jacksonville, in Onslow County, North Carolina.
Within the site lies the Hadnot Point Industrial Area
(HPIA), which was constructed in the late 1930’s. It
is composed of 75 buildings and facilities, which
include gas stations, offices, storage yards,
maintenance shops, and a dry cleaning plant. A
transformer storage area, industrial area fly ash dump,
and a fuel tank farm also are located near the HPIA.
Several areas of the HPIA have been investigated for
potential contamination attributed to Marine Corps
activities and operations that resulted in a generation
of potentially hazardous wastes. This ROD addresses
an interim remedial action for the shallow aquifer at
the HPIA to protect human health from exposure to
VOCs and metals. Subsequent actions are planned to
fully address all of the impacted media at the site;
specifically, soil and the deeper aquifer The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the shallow ground
water aquifer are VOCs, including benzene and ICE;
and metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extracting and pretreaung contaminated ground water
using an oillwater separator; creating the water onsite
using precipitation, chemical reduction, and
sedimentation to remove inorganics. and air stripping
to remove VOCs; creating emissions using carbon
adsorption, based on the results of a treatability study.
discharging the created water offsite io the Hadnot
Point Sewage treatment plant for ex-situ biological
treatment, prior to final onsite discharge to the New
River, transporting the free product to a waste oil
recycler or incinerator offsite, conducting long-term
ground water monitoring, and implementing
institutional controls including ground water use
restrictions The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $7,600,000, which includes an
estimated annual O&M cost of $351,500 for 30 years
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented to restrict
the use of ground water and prevent installation of
new wells in the area.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Waler; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment, Incineration.!
Thermal Destruction; Institutional Controls; Interim
Remedy; Lead, MCLs; Metals, O&M; Offsite
Discharge; Offsite Disposal; Offsitelreatrnent; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTW); Safe Drinking Water Act;
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations; ICE;
Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up standards are
based -on SDWA MCLs and state standards and
include benzene I ugh, TCE 2 8 ugh, lead 15 ug/l.
arsenic 50 ugh, and chromium 50 ugh
183
-------
WHITEHOUSE WASTE OIL PITS (AMENDMENT), FL
June 16, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 7-acre Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits sue was used
by Allied Petroleum Products (Allied) to dispose of
acidic waste oil sludges from its oil reclamation
process in Whitehouse, Duval County, Flonda. A
cypress swamp system and residential area are
immediately adjacent to the site. The northeast
tributary of McGizts Creek traverses the north site
boundary. The Floridian surficial aquifer underlies
the site and is the dnnking water source for local
residents. In Allied’s reclamation process,
contaminants were removed from waste oil treatment
with concentrated sulfuric acid, which precipitated
most of the additives and sediment as well as a large
portion of the metals and other contaminants in the
waste oil. The acid sludge produced in the first step
and clay used to decolorize the oil were dumped into
the unlined pits at the site. In 1976, following a
200,000-gallon waste oil spill that occurred during
dike wall reconstruction, a treatment system to drain
the liquid portion of the pits was constructed. In
1979, under the supervision of the state and city, the
pits were capped with clay and top soil. A 1985
ROD addressed source control as a containment
remedy consisting of a slurry wall construction, soil
cap, and a ground water recovery and treatment
system. however, EPA has re-evaluated the 1985
ROD selection and determined that the containment
remedy failed to meet the req uLrements of SARA As
a result, this ROD amendment addresses an
alternative for treating Whitehouse wastes by
eliminating direct contact nsk associated with pit
soil/sludge wastes and preventing contaminated
ground water in the surficial aquifer from migrating
laterally. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, debris, ground water, and surface
water are VOCs, including benzene. toluene. and
xylenes. other organics. including PCBs and phenols,
and metals, including arsenic. chromium. and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
excavating and screening the soil and sludge wastes
from within seven waste pits to remove coarse debris.
with decontamination and offsire disposal of the
debns not amenable to biotreatment, treating
56,930 cubic yards of screened soil and sludge/wastes
using soil washing, followed by onsite ex-situ
biotreatment of soil wash water and suspended
contaminated fines using a slurry-phase bioreactor,
with discharge of the treated water to an onsite
drainage ditch if discharge levels are met, or further
treatment in the onsite treatment system prior to
discharge; treating contaminated fines and sludge
onsite using solidification/stabilization, with
replacement in the drainage ditch; extracting
contaminated ground waler with analysis and onsite
treatment using granular activated carbon (GAC)
adsorption and chemical precipitation units, prior to
discharge to surface water; installing and maintaining
a 6-inch vegetative cover over the excavated area
fencing the site; conducting a pilot-scale ueatability
study to further develop the treatment train; and
monitoring ground water. If the ground water
treatment system is not capable of achieving the
clean-up goals at the end of any 5-year period. the
following contingencies will apply: containment
measures to prevent further migration of the ground
water plume; consideration of a waiver of chemical-
specific ARARs for the aquifer, implementation of
institutional controls, including deed restrictions, to
restrict access to certain portions of the aquifer, and
monitoring onsite and offsite wells. The estimated
present worth for this remedial action is $15,500,000,
with O&M costs of $3,400,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil clean-up levels axe based on a direct contact
exposure pathway (nsk-based). Chemical-specific
goals for soil include arsenic 42 mg/kg; benzene 04
mg/kg; chromium 526 mg/kg; lead 500 mg/kg:
napbthalene 317 mg/kg; PCB 1 mg/kg, phenol 47,467
mg/kg, PCE 4 mg/kg; toluene 2.000 mg/kg: and TCE
0.7 mg/kg. The ground water clean-up levels are in
accordance with the fedetal and stale water quality
standards. Chemical-specific goals for ground water
include arsenic 50 ugh, benzene I ug/l;
benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 ugh; chromium 100 ugh; lead 15
ugh, 3,4-methyl phenol 850 ugh. naphthalene 10 ugh,
phenol 10,000 ugh. toluene 24 ugh; ICE 3 ug/l, and
xylenes 50 ughl.
INSTiTUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions may be implemented as part of the
contingency remedy, as needed, to restrict access to
the aquifer.
184
-------
REGION 4
WHITEHOUSE WASTE OIL PITS (AMENDMENT), FL (Continued)
June 16, 1992
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver; Arsenic; Benzene; Biodegradation/
Land Application; Carbon Adsorptio’i (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act;
Clean Water Act; Contingent Remedy, Debns;
Decontamination; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls; Lead, MCLs; MCLGs; Metals;
O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal, Onsite
Treatment; Organics; PCBs; Phenols; Plume
Management, RCRA; ROD Amendment, Safe
Dnnking Water Act; Sludge; Soil; Soil Washing!
Flushing; Solidificauon/Stabilizanon, Solvents; State
Standards/Regulauons; Surface Water Monitoring;
Toluene; Treatment Technology; VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 05/30/85
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
185
-------
WILSON CONCEPTS OF FLORIDA, FL
September 22, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 2-acre Wilson Concepts of Florida site operated
as a manufacturing and metal-finishing facility in
Pompano Beach, Broward County, Florida. Land use
in the area is predominantly industrial. The site
overlies the Biscayne Aquifer, a sole-source aquifer
that supplies all potable water for Broward County.
From 1974 to 1987, Wilson Concepts of Florida, Inc.,
used the site to manufacture jet aircraft engine pans,
metal-working machinery, and for associated
operations. such as precision machining, drilling, and
milling of metal parts, vibratory deburring,
degreasmg, steam cleaning, and spray coating of
parts Chemicals used at the site included a variety of
hydraulic and lubricating oils, metal protection agents,
water coolants, methylene chloride, methyl ethyl
ketone, and chemical cleaners. As a result of several
inspections from 1976 through 1989, the Broward
County Environmental Quality Control Board
(BCEQCB) identified poor waste handling practices,
including discharge of industrial wastes onto the
ground. This ROD addresses onsite soil and ground
water EPA investigations have shown that the soil
and ground water contamination associated with the
site is no longer considered a health threat under
current or likely land use conditions Therefore, there
are no contaminants of concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action with ground water monitoring at and
around the site for I year The estimated total cost
for the ground water monitoring is $48,000, which
includes an O&M cost of $36,000 for 1 year
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring, No Action Remedy,
O&M, Sole-Source Aquifer
186
-------
W000BURY CHEMICAL (PRINCETON PLANT), FL
June 25, 1992
REGION 4
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 5-acre Woodbury Chemical (Princeton Plant) site
is a pesticide and fertilizer formulation and storage
facihty located approximately one-half mile southwest
of Princeton, Dade County, Flonda. Land use in the
area is predominantly agricultural, with two
residences located just north and west of the site.
The estimated 20,000 people who reside in Princeton
use the underlying sole-source Biscayne aquifer as
their dnnking waxer supply. From 1927 to 1959, the
site was used as a tomato and potato packing house.
From 1959 to the present, the site has been used for
formulating technical-grade matenals to produce
pesticides and fertilizers. As a result of a tank leak or
spill in the late 1970’s, EPA conducted numerous
investigations that revealed toxaphene contamination
in soil. In 1990, a removal action was conducted at
the site, which resulted in the excavation of
contaminated soil Soil contaminated with greater
than 100 mg/kg of toxaphene was sent offsite to the
GSX facility in Pinewood, South Carolina, and soil
contaminated with less than 100 mg/kg was sent to
the South Dade County landfill The previous
removal action has eliminated the principal threat at
the site, and no additional action is necessary to
protect human health or the envuonment. Therefore,
there are no contaminants of concern affecting this
site.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: Noi
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
‘Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, with quarterly ground water monitoring The
estimated total cost for this remedial action is
$22,500, which includes an O&M cost of $10,000 for
1 year
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring, No Action Remedy;
O&M, Sole-Source Aquifer.
187
-------
YELLOW WATER ROAD DUMP, FL
June 30, 1992
4
SITE HISTORYFDESCRIPTION :
The 14-acre Yellow Water Road Dump site is a
former storage area for PCB-contanunated liquids and
electrical equipment in Baldwin, Duval County,
Florida. Dense woodlands are located along the
perimeter of the site, and surrounding land use is
mixed commercial and residential. The property,
onginally purchased in 1940 for commercial
development, was later acquired by the American
Environmental Energy Corporation (AEEC). In 1981,
AEEC entered into a joint venture with two other
corporations with the intent of moving an iiicinerator
to the site to destroy PCBs and began onsite storage
of PCB-contaminated liquids and electrical equipment
at the former operational area in anticipation of
upcoming onsite incineration operations The proper
permits for the incinerator were never obtained. In
1982, PCB-contaminated oils were spilled at the site
during onsite salvage operations to remove valuable
metal parts from transformer carcasses As a result of
onsite PCB contamination, EPA conducted a number
of investigations that revealed PCB contamination in
the soil and ground water In 1984, EPA conducted
a removal action that included cleaning and storing
719 electrical transformers; securing 100,000 gallons
of PCB liquids in onsite holding tanks, and
excavating and storing 3,000 cubic yards of PCB-
contaminated soil onsite In 1988, EPA directed a
second removal action that included demolishing an
onsite warehouse, disposing of warehouse debris and
stockpiling contaminated soil offsite, incinerating
78,854 gallons of PCB liquids offsite, and disposing
of 704 transformers and 18,690 pounds Of capacitors
offsite The remedy selected by EPA for this site has
been conducted in two separate operable units A
1990 ROD addressed the source of the contamination
by excavating, stabilizing, and solidifying the PCB
contaminated soil This ROD addresses the
appropriate rernediation for the contaminated ground
water as 0U2 This is the second and final planned
remedial action for this site The primary
contaminant of concern affecting the ground water is
PCB, an organic
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing four additional ground water monitoring
wells downgi’adient of the former operational area.
installing a security fence, conducting long-term
ground water monitoring; and implementing
institutional controls, including deed and ground water
use restrictions, to control exposure to contaminated
ground water. Downgradient monitoring will be
performed quarterly for 2 years, after which the
ground water monitoring frequency will be
reevaluated if no PCB contamination is detected. If
PCB contamination is identified above MCLs in
compliance wells, additional contingent remedial
activities would be implemented, including
construction of ground water extraction wells:
installation of a ground water filtration system, with
a granular activated carbon (GAC) treatment system,
and a treated effluent discharge system, which uses
onsite infiltration ponds or drainage swales, and
transporting and disposing and/or treatment of the
residual carbon and filtration waste offsite. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $407,620 for initial implementation and $1,377,600
for full implementation of the contingent remedy,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $575,105 for
30 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The chemical-specific ground water clean-up goal is
based on the SDWA MCLs for PCBs of 05 ug/I
However, because of the technical impracticability of
using a treatment system to remove PCBs from
ground water, a waiver of SDWA MCLs is required
for ground water located directly beneath and in
proximity to the former operational area
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed and ground water use restrictions, zoning
controls, and water supply well permitting
prohibitions will be implemented to prevent exposure
of human health and the environment to PCB-
contaminated ground water
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver, Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Air Act, Clean
Water Act; Contingent Remedy, Direct Contact,
Ground Water Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment, Institutional Controls, MCLs,
O&M, Offsite Disposal, Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Treatment, Organics, PCBs, Safe Drinking Water Act,
State Standards/Regulations, Toxic Substances Control
Act ________
188
-------
YELLOW WATER ROAD DUMP, FL (Continued)
June 30, 1992
REGION 4 _____
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 09128/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: GW
Major Contaminants: Organics
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
189
-------
ALSCO ANACONDA, OH
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRJPTION :
The 4.8-acre Aisco Anaconda site is located in
Gnadenhutten, Tuscarawas County, Ohio, within the
50- and 100-year floodplains of the Tuscarawas River.
It consists of four source areas which contained F0i9
waste (wastewater treatment sludge) generated by the
adjacent aluminum products manufacturing facility.
Lend use in the general area of the site is mixed
industrial, recreational, and residential. Several
municipal, industrial, and residential wells are located
within a 1.5 mile radius of the site; however,
contaminated site ground water flows towards and
into the Tuscarawas River where it discharges at
concentrations below any regulatory levels. Site
ground water is not used as draining water
Aluminum products have been produced at
neighboring manufactunng facility since 1945 when
it was incorporated as Alsco, Inc. From 1965 through
1978, contamination at the Alsco Anaconda site
occurred when wastewater and wastewater treatment
sludge (F0l9) from the aluminum plant were disposed
of in an unlined settling basin (which consisted of two
impoundments) and a sludge pit. The F019 waste
contained hazardous constituents such as cyanide and
chromium. As a result of overflow from the settling
basin and plant wastewater treatment discharge,
sludge also became located in a wooded area between
the settling basin and the nver l’he total volume of
sludge and contaminated soil excavated from the
source areas to date is approximately 45,000 tons A
1989 ROD addressed the Source Matenai Operable
Unit, which involved the excavation and offsite
treatment and disposal of the contarrunated sludge and
soil, incineration of a small amount of matenal
containing high levels of PCBs. and backfilhng and
revegetaung excavated areas of the site Most of this
work has been completed dunng 1992 This ROD
addresses the contaminated ground water and
sediment which constitute the second operable unit at
the site The pnmary contanunarits of concern
affecting the ground water include organics such as
cyanide, fluonde, PCBs, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate. and metals, including chromium and lead
onsite ground water monitoring wells; installing and
sampling background wells; sampling Tuscarawas
River sediment and benthic organisms; and
implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions to prevent installation of drinking water
wells onsite until remedial action levels for ground
water have been achieved. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $504,600, which
includes a present worth O&M cost of $455,400.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up levels
include the following, which are SDWA MCLs or
proposed MCLs; chromium 0.1 mg/i. cyanide 0.2
mg/I; fluoride 4 mg/i; and bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
0 004 mg/i. Lead levels will meet an action level of
0.0 15 mg/i. Clean-up below background levels will
not be required.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed restrictions, will
be implemented to prevent installation of drinking
water wells within the site boundaries until remedial
action levels for ground water have been achieved.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium, Clean Water
Act, Direct Contact. Floodplain. Ground Water
Ground Water Monitoring, lno ganics. Institutional
Controls, Lead, MCLs. Metals: O&M. Onsite
Discharge, Organics; PCBS, RCRA. Safe Drinking
Water Act, Sediment. State Standards/RegulatIons;
Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/08/89
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
natural flushing and attenuation of contaminants from
the contaminated aquifer, and allowing ground water
to discharge onsite to the Tuscarawas River, installing
190
-------
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 36-acre Arnencan Chemical Services (ACS) site
is a chemical manufacturing facility in Griffith,
Indiana, which was formerly involved in solvent
recovery. Land use in the area is predominantly
residential and industrial with a wetlands area located
north of the Chesapeake and Ohio railway on the west
of the site. Nine upper aquifer wells and 16 lower
aquifer wells are locaied within 1/2 mile of the site,
with area residents using most of the lower aquifer
wells for drinlang water. From the late 1960’s to
early 1970’s, ACS manufactured barium naphtherate,
brominated vegetable oil, lacquers and paints, liquid
soldering fluid, and polyethylene solutions in
polybutene. Two onsite incinerators burned still
bottoms, nonreclaimable materials generated from the
site, anti offsite wastes, however, in the 1970’s, the
incinerators were dismantled, the shells were cut up
and scrapped, and the burners and blowers remain
onsite. From 1970 to 1975, batch manufacturing
expanded, and additives, lubricants, detergents, and
soldenng flux were manufactured. In 1980, a 31-acre
part of the property to the west of the offsire
containment area was sold to the City of Gnffith to
expand the City’s municipal landfill. Solvent
recoveiy operations continued until 1990 when ACS
lost interim status under RCRA regulations because of
failure to obtain required insurance policies Three
identified disposal areas on the ACS property are the
Onsite Containment Area, where approximately
400 drums containing sludge and semi-solids of
unknown types were reportedly disposed of, the Still
Bottoms, Treatment Lagoon #1. and adjacent areas.
which received still bottoms from the solvern recovery
process, including a pond and lagoon that were takec
out of service in 1972, drained, and filled with an
estimated 3,200 drums containing sludge matenals,
and the Offsite Containment Area and Kapica/Pazmey
property, which was used as a waste disposal area and
received wastes that included onsite incinerator ash,
general refuse, a tank truck containing solidified paint.
and an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 drums that were
reportedly punctured prior to disposal Disposal
practices in the Offsite Containment Area ceased in
1975. This ROD addresses a final remedy for the
buried drums, as well as waste, contaminated soil,
debris, and ground water. The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil, debns, and ground water
are VOCs, including benzene, ICE. totuene. and
xylenes; other organics, including PCBs, PARS, and
phenols; and metals, including arsenic, chromium, and
1ea
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this sue includes
excavation and offsite incineration of approximately
400 intact buried drums, decontaminating and
disposing of miscellaneous debris offsite; treating
contaminated soil using in-situ vapor extraction;
conducting an in-situ vapor extraction pilot study for
Onsite Area buried waste; excavating and treating
buried waste or PCB-contaminated soil onsite using
low temperature thermal treatment, with vapor
emission control during excavation, and possible
immobilization of inorganics after treatment;
depositing the treated residuals that meet health-based
levels onsite and covering the area with a soil cover,
pumping and onsue treatment of contaminated ground
water along with wash water from the
decontamination processes and condensate from the
soil treatment processes using a method to be
determined during the RD phase, with onsite
discharge of the treated waxer to surface water and
wetlands; continuing to evaluate and monitor
wetlands, with mitigation of affected wetlands if
necessary, Controlling and monitoring air emissions
from excavation and treatment processes; conducting
long-term ground water monitoring; and
implementing, to the extent possible, institutional
controls including deed restrictions, and sue access
restrictions such as fencing. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action ranges from
$37,800,000 to $46,800,000, which includes an annual
O&M cost of $17,670,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific sod clean-up goals are based on
risk-based levels and include benzene 1.0 mg/kg;
toluene 167-5,000 mg/kg; xylenes 867-26,000 mg/kg;
PCBs 10 mg/kg (with 10-inch soil cover), chromium
47-1,400 mg/kg, and lead 500 mg/kg. The lead
clean-up level for soil is based on the Interim
Guidance on Establishing Soil Lead Cleanup Levels
at Superfund Sites and the PCB clean-up level for soil
is based on TSCA policy for unrestricted access.
Chemical-specific ground waler clean-up goals are
based on risk-based levels, SDWA MCLs, and include
AMERICAN CHEMICAL SERVICES, IN
September 30, 1992
REGIONS
191
-------
REGiON 5
AMERICAN CHEMICAL SERVICES, IN (Continued)
September 30, 1992
benzene 5 ugh; PCE 5 ugh; PCBs 0.06 ugh; and
arsenic 8.8 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls may be implemented in the form
of deed restrictions, and site access restrictions such
as fencing, to provide protection from contaminants
until clean-up standards are met.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Arsenic; Benzene; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water
Act; Debris; Decontamination; Deferred Decision;
Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment,
lncinerauonIThermal Destruction, Institutional
Controls; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal, Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge,
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics, PAHs;
PCBs; Phenols; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act,
Soil, Solvents; State Standards/Regulations; Toluene;
Toxic Substances Control Act, TCE, Treatability
Studies, Treatment Technology; Vacuum Extraction,
VOCs; Wetlands, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federa Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
192
-------
BOFORS NOBEL (AMENDMENT), MI
July 22, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 85-acre Bofors Nobel site contains an active
specialty chemical production plant in Egeiston
Township, Muskegon County. Michigan. Site
features include an unused landfill, an active ground
water pumping and treatment system, and
10 abandoned sludge lagoons. Onsite wetlands lie
within the floodplain of Big Black Creek, which runs
through the southern portion of the site. The site
overlies a lacustrine aquifer, a potential drinking
water source, which has been contaminated as a result
of site activities. From 1960 to 1976, the plant
produced alcohol-based detergents, saccharin,
pesticides and dye intermediates, discharging sludge,
waslewater, and waste liquids into the 10 onsite
lagoons. Subsequent state investigations identified
eight of the onsite lagoons as potential sources of
ground waxer contamination, in 1976, the state
restricted wastewazer discharge from the site, and a
ground water pump and treatment system was
installed to pretreat waste pnor to discharge to the
POTW and to treat contaminated ground water in the
Iacustzme aquifer This ROD amends a 1990 ROD
written by the state, which consisted of onsite
Inctneratlon and onsite landfilling of lagoon area soil,
construction of RCRA-type secure landfill cells to
hold non-incinerated material and ash from the
incinerated sludge, and construction of an onsite
ground water treatment facility with extraction and
onsite treatment of contaminated ground water Since
that time, an EPA predesign site investigation was
conducted as pan of the remedial design which
revealed that a larger volume of contaminated
material was present at the site than was originally
believed, and that there would be inconsistent
treatment of contazmnated material with the same
level of risk. Additionally, the cost and logistics
involved in incineration were greater than originally
believed, and the large increase in volume would also
significantly lessen the effective reduction in risk
achieved by incineration. A subsequent final ROD
will address other contaminated sod and establish
clean-up criteria for ground water. This ROD
amendment replaces incineration as the treatment
technology for soil and sludge The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and sludge
are semi-VOCs including benzidine and
dichiorobetizidine.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected amended remedial action for this site
includes excavation and onsite disposal of
approRimnrely 767,000 cubic yards of contaminated
sludge and soil in onsite RCRA-type secure landfill
cells, constructed as part of the original remedial
action; expanding and upgrading the unused landfill
adjacent to the lagoon area to meet the ROtA
standards; storing lesser contaminated material in the
unused landfill; installing extraction wells
downgrathent of the unused landfill as a tethary
leachate containment system; and monitoring the
landfill and existing leachate collection system. This
ROD amendment does not address any issue
associated with ground water treatment. The
estimated present worth cost for this amended
remedial action is $45,498,216, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $89,030 for 3 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
EPA has determined that landfilling of contaminated
soil and sludge without treatment provides the
equivalent level of protection to human health and the
environment from site-related risks as that provided
by the remedy in the 1990 ROD Ground water
clean-up critena will be addressed in a subsequent
final ROD
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds, Closure
Requirements, Direct Contact. Excavation. Aoodplam;
Landfill Closure; Leachate Collection/Treatment;
O&M, Onsne Containment; Onsice Disposal;
Organics. RCRA; ROD Amendment, Sludge: Soil,
Solvents; State Standards/Regulations, Temporary
Storage, Treatability Studies, VOCs, Wetlands
193
-------
REGION 5
BOFORS NOBEL (AMENDMENT), MI (Continued)
July 22, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/17/90
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, S’udge
Major Contaminants: SVOCs
Category: Source Control - Interim
Ground Water - Inter im
194
-------
BUTTERWORTH #2 LANDFILL, MI
September 29, 1992
REGION 5
SiTE IUSTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 180-acre Buuerworth #2 Landfill is a municipal
landfill m Grand Rapids, Kent County, Michigan.
Land use in the area is predonunandy residential and
industrial. The site, which lies within the 100-year
floodplain of the Grand River, contains wetland
drainage areas with emergent aquatic communities.
Prior to 1967, the area to the east of the storrnwater
out-fall was used as a municipal landfill (Butterworth
#1). This portion of the site was operated as an open
landfill where daily cover of refuse was not provided.
After the enactment of Michigan Act 87 in 1965.
Bunerworth #1 was closed, and Butterworth #2 and
#3 were opened. Several high-voltage power
transmission lines pass through the landfill, and
landfilling was not allowed in the areas below the
power lines, however, it was discovered that the area
was allegedly used to dispose of liquid wastes, such
as solvents and paint sludge. Records indicate that
from 1967 to 1971, approximately 3,000 to 4,000
cubic yards of waste per day were received at the
landfill In 1988, a surface soil/test pit assay
identified PCBs at levels of 800 mg/kg and chromium
at levels of 43,000 mg/kg In 1990, a removal action
was initiated to address this contanunauon, which
resulted in 1.100 tons of material being removed from
the site This ROD addresses a final remedy for the
landfill via capping and establishing ACLs for site-
specific contaminants of concern in ground water.
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil are VOCs. including benzene. ICE, and xylenes,
other organics, including PCBs and pesticides. and
metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
removing and disposing of exposed drums containing
hazardous matenals at an offsite RCRA facility.
upgrading the landfill cover to include a clay cap, and
gas venting and treatment systems to meet state
standards, revegetaung the area, installing additional
monitoring wells in the upper and lower uifers. and
implementing a long-term monitoring program for
ground water, surface water, sediment, and biota,
establishing ACLs for site ground water based on the
currern level of contamination, mitigating affected
wetlands; implementing institutional controls
including deed and ground water use restrictions The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $15,230,000, which includes an anniiai O&M cost
of $110,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals were
not established in this ROD because cunenr
contamination levels will be determined through
sampling of compliance momtonng wells for eight
consecutive quarters over a 2-year period. The
indicator parameters to be analyzed quailetly will
include all chemicals established as chemicals of
concern. After the initial 2-year period of quarterly
sampling, ground water shall be monitored for the
next 3 years on a quarterly basis; then, analysis will
be made for the pninary contaminants of concern.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
lnstiruuonai controls in the form of deed and ground
water use restrictions will be implemented to control
future development of the landfill area, and to
prohibit the installation of ground water drinking
water wells outside the point of compliance (the
landfill boundary).
KEY WORDS :
ACL (Alternate Concentration Limit); Arsenic;
Benzene, Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Water Act: Direct Contact;
Floodplain, Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional
Controls. Landfill Closure, Lead, Metals; O&M,
Offsite Disposal, Onsite Containment; Onsite
Disposal, Organics. PCBs, Pesticides, RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act, Soil; Solvents State
Standards/Regulations, Surface Water Morntonng,
ICE, VOCs, Wetlands, Xylenes.
SUTE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgaiiics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
195
-------
CANNELTON INDUSTRIES, MI
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE ifiSTORY/DESCRIFflON :
ibe 75-acre Cannelton Industries site is a former
tannery facihty located in the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan. in Sauli Sainte Marie, Chippewa County.
Land use in the area is predominantly residential and
light industnal. with 400 single-family residences and
an elementary school located within 1/2 mile of the
site. Nearby residents and the school are connected
to the City’s municipal water system, the source of
which is the Saint Marys River intake, I mile
upstream of the Cannelton site. The Saint Marys
River, which is used both as a drinking water source
and for recreational purposes, is adjacent to the lower
area of the site. Part of the site lies within the 100-
year floodplain of the flyer, and several wetlands
areas surround the site. Additionally, the site overlies
two aquifers that are hydraulically connected. From
1900 to 1958, Northwestern Leather Company
operated a tannery facility onsite. The plant had no
sewer system , and three drains discharged
approximately 250.000 gallons per day of chemical
waste to the Saint Marys River and adjacent wetlands.
Discharge wastes from the tannery included metals,
cyanide, sulfide, calcium carbonate, salts,
formaldehydes, thinners, acids, and alcohols The
pnmary discharge area covers 4 acres along the nver
to the north of the former plant site. Of this,
approximately I acre (“the barren zone”) contains
multi-colored soil and waste residues, has little
vegetation, and has had reportedly spontaneous fires
occur in the past A second area along the river at
the west end of the site was used as a dump site for
barrels and “general” waste from the tannery In
1958, the tannery was destroyed by a fire, since then,
the property has remained unoccupied EPA’s
removal program has been involved at the site on
three different occasions In 1988, they responded to
recurring fires and excavated five trenches in the
barren zone area. In 1989 and 1991, shoreline
stabilization systems were developed around the site
to prevent waste materials from eroding into the nver
a fence currently exists around the majority of the
site This ROD addresses a final remedy for onsite
contaminated soil, sediment, and debris and will
mitigate impacts to surface water and ground water
through the containment of source materials The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, and debns are VOCs, including TCE and
xylenes. other organics. including PAHs, pesticides.
phenols, and PCBs; metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead; and inorganics.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating, dredging, and dewatenng debris, waste,
soil, and sediment that exceed the clean-up cntena
placing these media in an onsite solid waste landfill,
and closing the landfill in accordance with RCRA
subtitle D, or more stringent state standards; filling in
onsite excavated areas with clean soil to stabilize the
shoreline; collecting ground water from the
dewateing/construction activities and treating the
water, if needed, prior to offsite discharge to P011W,
or onsite discharge to surface water, conducting
additional ecological studies; monitonng ground water
and surface water, and implementing institutional
controls to control land use, and potentially, deed
restrictions to control ground waxer use. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $19,700,000, which includes an annual 0&M cost
of $458,000 for years 0-I; $449,000 for years 2-3;
$579,000 for year 4, and $303,000 for years 5-30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical-specific soil, sediment, and debns
excavation standards are based on state direct human
contact (DHC) standards and include cadmium
100 mg/kg (DHC), lead 400 mg/kg (DHC); arsenic
12.8 mg/kg (background); and carcinogenic PAHs
0.33 mg/kg (MDL) A chemical-specific excavation
goal for chromium was established using back
calculations based on a I0 cancer risk level for
hexavalent chromium and an III of 1 for trivalent
chromium, resulting in a clean-up standard of
5,300 mg/kg for trivalent chromium and 54 mg/kg for
hexavalent chromium.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of land use
restrictions will be implemented at the site If it is
found that health-based dnnlung water standards are
not met after removal of source materials, deed
restrictions will be sought for ground water beneath
the site so that no dnnking water wells will be
installed.
196
-------
REGIONS
CANNELTON INDUSTRIES, MI (Continued)
September 30, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris;
Direct Contact; Dredging; Excavation, Floodplain;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring; Inorganics;
Institutional Controls; Landfill Closure; Leachability
Tests; Lead; Metals; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge;
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs;
PCBs; Pesticides; Phenols; Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (POTW); RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Sediment; Soil; Solvents; State Standards/Regulations;
Surface Water. Surface Water Monitoring; TCE;
Treatability Tests; VOCs; Water Quality Critena.
Wetlands; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contamianted Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
197
-------
CENTRAL ILLINOIS PUBLIC SERVICE, IL
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWflON :
The 1-acm Central Illinois Public Service (CII’S) site
is a former manufactured gas plant in Taylorville,
Christian County, Illinois. Land use in the area is
predominantly residential, with Manners Park. a
multi-use recreational facility, located adjacent to the
site. Seaman Estate pond, located south of the site, is
used for fishing and swimming. Ground water
beneath the site IS DO longer used as a dnnking water
source, and residences have been connected to a
municipal water supply. The CIPSR’aylorville plant.
constructed in 1892, was operated by CII ’S from 1912
until 1932. The plant produced a low-quality gas
from coal, which was used for lighting and heating
Coal tar, produced as a by-product, was typically
disposed of offsite, sold, or given away to be used for
various purposes. After higher quality natural gas
became available in the area, the plant was closed.
Onsite contamination by coal tar was discovered in
1985 dunag site construction As a result of state
investigations, an immediate removal action (IRA)
was performed by CIPS in 1987 to remove all buried
tanks, contaminated soil, and sediment at the site, to
provide an alternanve water supply to affected
residences, and to implement institutional controls.
This ROD addresses a final remedy for the remaining
principal threat posed by ground water contanunation
at the site, and also documents the pnor 1987 removal
action The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, debns, and ground water
at the site are VOCs, including benzene, toluene, and
xylenes, and other organics, including PAHs and
phenols
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
documenting the previously implemented source
control measures which included removal and offsite
disposal of the structures associated with the onginal
gas plant. excavation and offsite disposal of
approximately 9,000 cubic yards of visibly
contaminated soil down to the ground water table
level and excavation and offsite disposal of
3,000 cubic yards of soil and sediment from the
drainageway section leading to Seaman Estate pond,
backfilling excavated areas with clean soil from
offsite, plugging and abandoning private drinking
water wells, and connecting affected residents to a
public water supply The selected remedial actions to
be implemented now include extracting and
neutralizing contaminated ground water prior to onsite
treatment in a liquid phase carbon adsorption column,
with onsite discharge of the treated water to the
drainageway downgradient of Seaman Estate pond;
transporting contaminated carbon offsite to a facility
for regeneration or incineration; removing precipitated
solids from the treatment process, and testing them
for hazardous waste characteristics, prior to
appropriate disposal; conducting long-term ground
water and suiface water monitoring; and
implementing erosion controls, institutional controls,
including deed and land use restrictions, and site
access restnctions, including fencing. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$9,346,034, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$401,400 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up standards,
which are based on state and federal drinking water
criteria, include benzene 0.005 mg/I, toluene
I mg/I; ethylbenzene 0.7 mg/I, xylenes 10 mg/I,
anthracene 2.1 mg/I; benzo(a)pyrene 0.00023 mg/I;
and 2-methylphenol 0.35 mg/I In addition to meeting
the individual ground water objectives indicated
certain toxicity equations as defined in the ROD must
be satisfied to protect against liver tumors and liver,
kidney, and blood toxicity
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented in the form
of land use and deed restrictions to further protect the
public health and environment.
KEY WORDS :
Alternate Water Supply. Benzene, Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Air Act,
Clean Water Act; Debris, Direct Contact: Drinking
Water Contaminants, Excavation, Filling; Ground
Water. Ground Water Monitonng, Ground Water
Treatment, Incineration/Thermal Destruction,
Institutional Controls, O&M, Offsite Discharge,
Offsite Disposal, Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment;
Organics, PAHs, Phenols, RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Sediment, Soil, Solvents, State Standards/
Regulations, Surface Waler Monitoring; Toluene;
Treatability Studies, Treatment Technology; VOCs;
Xvlenes
198
-------
REGION 5
CENTRAL ILLINOIS PUBUC SERVICE, IL (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
199
-------
CITY DISPOSAL SANITARY LANDFiLL, WI
September 28, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 38-acre City Disposal Sanitary Landfill site is an
inactive landfill located in Dane County, Wisconsin.
The landfihled portion of the sfle , wtuch occupies
approximately 24 acres, contains an estimated
700,000 cubic yards of waste. Land use in the area
is predominantly agricultural with minor wooded
areas. The site is bordered to the east by Badfish
Creek. All residents in the vicinity use ground waler
from private drinking water wells, however, no
contamination has been detected in the wells. From
1966 to 1977, City Disposal Corporation, and later
Acme Services, Inc., used the site for disposal of
household, construction, debris, and industrial wastes
Industrial wastes included solvents from the plastic
fabrication industry, mixtures of lubrication oil and
water, and paint wastes. During the period of
operation, the landfill was subdivided into 12 cells, of
which cells I and 12 were used for initial disposal
until 1975. Cells 2, 3, 4, and 6 were filled or
partially filled from 1974 until closure in 1977 Cell
5 and cells 7 to 11 were never developed After
closure of the site, both City Disposal Corporation
and Acme Services, Inc., were acquired by Waste
Management of Wisconsin, Inc. (WMWI) Records
indicated that cells 6 and 12 were used to dispose of
liquid industrial waste, which was subsequently mixed
with refuse Because of the mobility and toxicity of
the industrial waste, cells 6 and 12 are considered to
be the principal threats of contamination at the site
This ROD addresses the final remedy for
contaminated soil, debris, and ground water The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
debns, and ground water are VOCs, including
benzene, TCE, toluene, and xylenes, other organics,
including phenols. metals, including arsenic.
chromium, and lead, and inorganics
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing a landfill gas control system to control air
emissions; treating contaminated soil and debns in
cells 6 and 12 using an in-situ vapor extraction
(ISVE) system with an air intrusion cut-off wall to
remove and treat VOCs, treating the extracted vapors
by flaring, installing a hazardous waste landfill cover,
Design C, over cells 6 and 12, and a solid waste
landfill cover, Design B, over the rest of the landfill.
extractln2 Qround water. and conducting trearabiliry
studies to determine the best ueaw nt pretreating
ground water onsite using precipitation to remove
metals, followed by treatment using chemical
oxidation or another comparable technology, with
onsite discharge to Badflsh Creek; monitoring ground
water and residential wells, and implementing deed.
land and ground water use restrictions. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$14,851,387, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$90,978 for years 0-5 and $21,258 for years 6-25 for
source control; and $645,859 for years 0-20 and
$114,487 for years 20-40 for ground water.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on Preventative Action Limits (PALs)
established in NR 140 of the Wisconsin
Admimsuanve Code and include benzene 0.067 ugh;
2-butanone (PAL or MCL not established), 1,1
dichloroethane 85 ugh, methylene chloride 15 ugh;
toluene 686 ug/l. vinyl chloride 00015 ugh; and
xylenes 124 ugh Air emissions from the gas control
and ISVE systems will meet the CAA requirements.
RCRA standards will apply to the construction of the
landfill caps
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions, will be implemented to limit
the use of the landfill and landfill properly
KEY WORDS :
Arsenic. Benzene: Capping, Carcinogenic
Compounds. Chromium, Clean Air Act, Clean Water
Act, Closure Requirements, Debns, Direct Contact,
Ground Water. Ground Water Monitonng. Ground
Water Treatment, Inorganics. hisutuuonal Controls,
Landfill Closure, Lead, Metals, O&M, Onsite
Containment, Onsite Discharge. Onsite Treatment,
Organics, Phenols, RCRA, Safe Dnnking Water Act,
Soil, Solvents, State Standards/Regulations; ICE,
Toluene, Treatability Studies, Treatment Technology,
Vacuum Extraction. Venting, VOCs, Wetlands,
Xylenes
200
-------
REGION 5
CITY DISPOSAL SANITARY LANDFILL, WI (Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
201
-------
CLARE WATER SUPPLY, MI
September 16, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The dare Water Supply sire is a municipal well field
in the City of Clare, Clare County, Michigan. Land
use in the area iS predominantly commercial,
industrial, and residential with wetlands neighboring
the site. In addition, a drainage ditch runs though an
industrial area directly northwest of the site across the
well field, discharges into the wetlands, and recharges
the underlying aquifer. An estimated 3,300 residents
of Clare use the municipal water supply as their
drinking water supply. In 1981, state investigations
of the municipal wells showed VOC contamination in
the ground water. In 1982. soil samples taken during
the installation of monitoring wells showed soil
contamination from seven industrial facilities
bordering the well field and attributed contamination
of the shallow perched aquifer to the leaching of
contaminants from these areas A 1990 interim action
ROD for the site provided for air stripping to remove
VOCs from the city’s water supply. The air strippers
were installed and began operating in 1991. This
ROD addresses the cont.anunated soil, sediment. and
ground water as a final remedial action for the site.
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil, sediment, and ground water are VOCs, including
benzene, PCE, TCE, and xylenes.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
dewatering and treating 54,800 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and sediment, including the soil
under buildings, using in-situ vapor extraction (ISVE)
to remove VOCs, treating air emissions from the
ISVE process using granular activated carbon.
returning spent carbon units to the supplier for offsite
regeneration; possibly enhancing the effectiveness of
the remedy with limited excavation of hot spots.
where SVE may not be practicable, temporarily
capping treated areas, or adding nutrients, based on
the results of pre-design studies, extracting and
treating contaminated ground water onsite using
UV/chemical oxidation, with remjecuon of the treated
ground water into the aquifer; treating water from the
dewatering process using carbon adsorption pnor to
discharge. monitoring ground water, and
implementing institutional controls, including deed
and ground water use restrictions The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$11,754,247, which includes an average annual O&M
cost of $431,183 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
protection of ground water and include benzene
20 ug/kg, vinyl chloride 0.4 ug/kg; TCE 60 ug/kg;
PCE 14 ug/kg; methylene chloride 100 ug/kg; trans-
I ,2-DCE 2.000 ug/kg; cis-I .2-DCE 1.400 ug/kg;
xylenes 6,000 ug/kg; toluene 20,000 mg/kg,
ethylbenzene 1,000 mg/kg: 1,1-DCA 14,000 mg/kg;
1,2-DCA 8 mg/kg; 1,1,2-TCA 12 mg/kg; l,1,1-TCA
4,000 mg/kg; and styrene 20 mg/kg. Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals are based on
SDWA MCLs, and State MCLs under Michigan’s Act
307 Type B Cleanup Levels and include benzene
I mg/I; vinyl chlonde 0.02 mg/I, TCE 3 mg/I; PCE
0.7 mg/I; methylene chloride 5 mg/I, trans-1,2-DCE
100 mg/I, cis-I,2-DCE 70 mg/I, xylenes 300 mg/I;
toluene 800 mg/I, ethylbenzene 70 mg/I; 1,1-DCA
700 mg/I, 1,2-DCA 0.4 mg/I, 1,I,2-TCA 0.6 mg/I;
1,I,I-TCA 200 mg/I; and styrene I mg/I
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed and/or ground water use restrictions will be
implemented to limit access to contaminated soil areas
and use of contaminated ground water until the
remedial action objectives are achieved
KEYWORDS :
Benzene, Capping, Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Water Act, Direct
Contact: Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitonng. Ground Water
Treatment, Institutional Controls, MCLs, O&M,
Offsite Disposal, Offsite Treatment, Onsite
Containment, Onsite Discharge. Onsite Disposal,
Onsire Treatment, PCE, RCRA, Safe Drinking Water
Act, Sediment, Soil. Solvents, State Standards!
Regulations, ICE, Treatment Technology; Vacuum
Extraction, VOCs, Wetlands. Xylenes
202
-------
REGION 5
CLARE WATER SUPPLY, MI (Continued)
September 16, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 08(30/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
203
-------
COLUMBUS OLD MUNICIPAL LANDFILL IN
March 31, 1992
REGION 5 -
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 19-acre Old Municipal Landfill site is located
near the City of Columbus in Bartholomew County,
Indiana. The site, located in the 100-year floodplain
of the East Fork of the White River, is bounded by
farmland, state roads, and an inactive gravel quairy
pond. Current land use in the vicinity of the site
includes an abandoned shooting range. concrete
mixing operation, and the City of Columbus P01W
From 1938 to the 1960’s, the site was operated as a
municipal landfill accumulating an estimated 500,000
cubic yards of fill matenal. After the landfill reached
a maximum of 20 feet, operations ceased and the
landfill was closed by placing two to three feet of
dredged nver sediments over the entire area.
Deposited maienals were mainly municipal and
household wastes, although wastes from industrial
sources were reportedly disposed of at the landfill.
Limited dumping by unauthorized parties may also
have occurred. No records of site operations were
kept The waste matenal was dumped directly on the
ground surface and was exposed to the elements.
Open burning of waste inatenal occurred regularly.
Annual spring flooding caused the waste material to
become submerged periodically. Eventually, the
landfill began to function as a berm between the
floodplain and the adjacent farmland In 1981.
Cumnuns Engine Company notified EPA of waste
matenais, including solvents, acids, lubricants, cutting
fluids, and metals, that were generated and reportedly
disposed of at the landfill In 1990, the PRPs, under
direct guidance of the state and EPA. conducted an
investigation to assess the potential impacts of the
waste matenal deposited in the landfill on soil,
ground water, surface water, and river sediments in
the vicinity of the site Based upon findings of the
remedial investigation and evaluation of current site
risks. EPA concluded that the site currently poses no
immediate or long-term risks to human health and the
environment This conclusion is based on current site
conditions with the assumption that these conditions
will not change
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, which includes ground water monitonng and
a five-year review of site conditions to evaluate the
protectiveness of the remedy In the event that the
Indiana Department of Transportation and the City of
Columbus proceed with construction of the proposed
roadway across the site, EPA will require the
implementation of a contingency remedy, which
includes implementing a landfill cover maintenance
program; developing a ground water recovery system
implementation plan; installing a minimum of two
additional ground water monitoring wells installing
fencing with appropriate warning signs; implementing
a ground water monitoring program; and
implementing institutional controls, including deed
restrictions on land and ground water use There are
no costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed restrictions will
be implemented on Land and ground water use
KEYWORDS :
Contingency Remedy; Floodplain; Ground Water
Monitoring, Institutional Controls, No Action
Remedy
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
204
-------
ELECTROVOICE, MI
June 23, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFTION :
The Electrovoice (EV) site is an active manufacturing
facility for audio equipment in Buchanan, Michigan.
Land use in the area is predominantly residential.
McCoy Creek, the nearest surface waxer body, is
located approximately 2,000 feet north of the facility.
All residents axe connected to the city waxer supply
and city wells are located 4,000 feet west of the
property. Electrovoice has been in operation at its
present location since 1946. Current activities at the
facility include painting, electroplating. assembly, die
casting, and machining. The site contains a dry well
area, where disposal of paint wastes occurred between
1964 to 1973; a fuel tank area, which stored no.
6 fuel oil from 1946 to 1960; and a lagoon area.
where disposal of electroplating waste Waters occurred
from 1952 to 1962. In 1979, the state was notified of
a release of plating waste into one of the lagoons.
which prompted an inspection of the site. That same
year, Electrovoice hired a contractor to remediate the
two lagoons and install ground water monitoring wells
onsite. In 1980, the north lagoon and its contents
were removed, and the south lagoon was backfllled
However, no contaiTunated materials were removed
from the south lagoon. Ground water monitoring
conducted in 1980 revealed significant concentrations
of VOCs and metals The dry well area soils are the
principal ons lte threat because they are the source of
the ground water contamination This ROD addresses
remediation of onsite ground water and soil as a final
remedial action A future ROD will address all
offsite ground water contamination, which extends
from the EV property boundary about one-half mile
north to McCoy Creek The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, sludge. and onsite ground
water at the site axe VOCs. including benzene. PCE,
T . toluene. and xylenes. other organics. including
PAHs. metals, including arsenic. chromium. and lead,
and uiorganics
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating contaminated soil in the dry well area onsite
using vapor extraction; excavating the 2.100 cubic
yards of remaining sludge, with offsite solidification
and landfiuing; collecting and treating onsite
contaminated ground waxer using either granular or
powdered activated carbon, air stripping, chemical
oxidation/reduction or photolysis/oxidaUOfl. with
discharge of the treated water offsite to a POTW; and
monitoring off-property ground water. I L following
these actions, the dry well soil does not meet
trnntment standards, further remedial action consistent
with RCRA closure will be evaluated, which include
installing a hazardous waste cap over the lagoon area
soil; conducting an investigation of the potential
existence of a lower aquifer in the area of the former
dry well &ea monitoring on and offsite ground waxer,
and implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions for the property and surrounding
properties to prohibit future installation of drinking
water wells. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $4,100,000, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $330,000 for 2-5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
state standards and include arsenic 0.4 ug/kg; benzene
20 ug/kg; PCE 14 ug/kg; TCE 60 ug/kg: toluene
16,000 ug/kg, and xylenes 6,000 ug/kg. Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals axe also based
on state standards and include benzene I ugh; TCE
3 ugh; toluene 800 ugh; and xylenes 20 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions on the EV property will prohibit
installation of dnnking waxer wells and construction
in the lagoon area and dry well area if clean-up levels
are not attained. Deed restrictions will also be
included for offsite properties under which the EV
plume travels.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping. Arsenic; Benzene. Capping; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act: Clean Closure; Clean
Water Act. Closure Requirements: Contingency
Remedy: Direct Contact. Excavation. Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Inorganics; Institutional Controls; Landfill Closure,
Leachahility Tests. Lead; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Discharge; Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment: Onsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment. Organics: PARs. PCE;
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW); RCRA;
Safe Drinking Water Act. Sludge; Soil. Solidificationl
Stabilization; Solvents; State Standards/Regulations;
ICE; Toluene; Treatability Studies; Treatment
205
-------
REGION 5
ELECTROVOICE, MI (Continued)
June 23, 1992
Technology; Vacuum Extraction; VOCs; Water
Quality Cnteria; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sludge. GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals. Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Intenm
206
-------
GRAND TRAVERSE OVERALL SUPPLY, MI
February 3, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 3.9-acre Grand Traverse Overall Supply (GTOS)
site is an active commercial laundering facility in
Greiickville, Leelanau County, Michigan. Land use
in the area is residential, with an elementary school
directly east of the site. The site overlies both an
unconfined aquifer and a semi-confined aquifer.
Surface water in the area includes Cedar Creek, winch
is dammed and discharges to the unconfined aquifer
located upstream of the dam, and ground water
discharges into the creek downstream of the dam.
From 1953 to 1977, the GTOS facility discharged
laundry and process wastes from dry cleaning
operations onsite to seepage lagoons and a dry-well.
After 1977 laundry and process wastes were diverted
to the sanitary sewer system. From 1968 to 1978,
cooling water used in onsite dry cleaning operations
was discharged to Cedar Creek. In 1978, the state
detected VOCs, including PCE, TCE, and 1,2 DCE,
in the water supply of the adjacent elementary school
and condemned the well Additional well sampling
by the state determined that, as a result of dlsp3sal
operations, the GTOS site was the likely source of the
contaminants. From 1978 to 1980, the state required
GTOS to conduct removal actions, which included
replacing the contaminated drinking water wells and
excavating the onsite dry well and adjar.ent
contaminated soil, followed by offsue disposal of
excavated materials, filling three of the four seepage
lagoons with gravel, followed by paving. backfilhing
the remaining lagoon and revegetaung the area In
1978, dry cleaning operations were discontinued. but
the GTOS site remains active and continues to
discharge wastes into the sanitary sewer system This
ROD addresses the potential nsks posed by onsite
ground water. As a result of previous removal
actions, organic compounds present in low levels in
soil, and organic and inorganic compounds present in
ground water no longer pose an unacceptable nsk to
human health or the environment, therefore, there are
no cont mItnants of concern affecting this site.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTiON :
The selected remedial action for this site is the no
action, however, ground water monitonng for
inorganics will continue for 1 year. EPA has
determined that conditions at the site due to
contaminauon by organic compounds pose no current
or potential threat to human health or the
environment There are no costs associated with this
no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Ground Waler Monitoring; No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
207
-------
H. BROWN COMPANY, MI
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The H. Brown Company, Inc., site is a former landfill
and battery reclamation facility in Walker, Kent
County, Michigan. Land use in the area is
predominantly recreational and industrial, with a
wetland area located approximately at the northern
half of a marshy area within the current eastern
boundary of the site In addition, part of the site lies
within the 500-year floodplain of the Grand River.
Before 1961, the site was an uncontrolled dump that
received unknown types and quantities of waste
From 1961 to 1982, the owner reclaimed lead from
wet-cell batteries. From 1961 and 1978, the owner
reclaimed lead from wet-cell batteries and poured
battery acid directly on the ground surface. The total
volume of battery acid disposed of is estimated to be
between 170,000 and 460,000 gallons From 1978
until the owner ceased active reclamation activities in
1981 or 1982, battery acid was not drained to the
ground. instead, it was muted to a stainless-steel catch
pan and tank. In 1970, the state inspected the site
and noticed acidic waters draining into a culvert that
discharged into the Grand River. In 1978, the state
sampled wastewater at the facility and found elevated
levels of lead. copper, and nickel EPA became
involved with the site in the early 1980’s and
sampling of surface water from the culvert leading to
the Grand River indicated elevated levels of
chromium and lead In 1989, the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry and the state
investigated the site and determined that the site
posed a nsk to onsite workers and the community In
response to an EPA-issued unilateral administrative
order to 10 PRPs in April 1991, the owner’s widow
and the H Brown Company erected a fence and
performed limited air monitonng around the site
This ROD addresses the final remedy for the site
The pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil, sediment, debns (battery casings). ground water.
surface water, and air are VOCs, including benzene,
toluene, and xylenes; other organics. including PAHs.
PCBs, pesticides, and phenols. and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
demolishing onsite buildings to allow cleanup of
contaminated soil beneath structures, and disposing of
the debris in an onsite or offsite landfill. onsite
deconf2mlnanon of buildings not requiring demolition;
consolidating contaminated surface soil onsite;
treating an estimated 180,000 cubic yards of soil,
sediments, and battery chips onsite using in-situ
solidificauonlstabiization; constructing a containment
wall around the treated soil, sediment, and debris, and
covering the solidified matenal using a multi-layer
cap; extracting contaminated ground water from the
shallow aquifer beneath the site; treating collected
ground water and surface water onsite using aeration,
filtration, carbon adsorption, and ion exchange. prior
to onsite discharge to the Grand River, conducting
additional studies to further define the extent of
contamination in the intermediate and bedrock
aquifers; monitonng ground water and surface water,
and implementing institutional controls including deed
and ground water use restrictions, and site access
restrictions such as fencing. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $15,000,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $220,000 for
2-3 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
site risks, state ARARs, or background levels and
include PCBs 1 mg/kg (state), arsenic 6.6 mg/kg
(background), lead 5 mg/kg (state) Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals include benzene 1 ugh
(state), arsenic 17 9 ugh (state), and lead 1,423 ug/l
(background)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed restrictions and
ground water use restrictions, will be implemented to
prevent exposure to site contaminants, prevent cap
erosion, and provide security for the remedial action
equipment.
KEYWORDS :
Aeration; Air: Arsenic, Benzene; Capping; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Debris,
Decontamination; Direct Contact; Floodplain; Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitonng, Institutional
Controls, Landfill Closure, Lead, MCLs; Metals;
O&M, Offsite Disposal; Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs; PCB5;
Pesticides; Phenols; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Vn1. I. , nnlcuthill7ifllnfl: Solvents:
208
-------
REGIONS
H. BROWN COMPANY, Ml (Continued)
September 30, 1992
State Standaxth/RegulañOflS Surface Water, Surface
Water Monitoring; Surface Water Treatment; Toluene;
Treatment Technology; VOCs; Water Quality Ciiteria
Wetlands; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris,
GW, SW, Air
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
209
-------
HAGEN FARM, WI
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Hagen Farm site is a former waste disposal
facility approximately I mile east of the City of
Stoughton, Dane County, Wisconsin. The site is
defined as the area within the property boundary and
the contaminant plume. The property IS
approximately 28 acres in size, and within the
property boundary is a 10-acre area that was used for
waste disposal. The site is located in a rural area that
is largely dominated by sand and gravel mining and
agricultural activities. Eleven private wells axe
located within 1,000 to 4,000 feet of the site. In
addition, a wetland area is located adjacent to and just
south of the site. Prior to the 1950’s, the site was
operated as a sand and gravel pit. The gravel pit was
then used for disposal of waste materials from the late
1950’s to the mid-1960’s. Waste matenals were
disposed of in three onsite subareas designated A, B,
and C. Waste materials included municipal and
industrial wastes, such as solvents and other various
organic materials. From 1980 to 1986, state
investigations revealed organic compounds in nearby
pnvate water supply wells. A 1990 ROD addressed
contaminated soil in the three disposal areas as OU 1
and provided for excavation of soil in subareas B and
C with consolidation in disposal area A, construction
of a landfill cover at disposal area A, and
implementation of a soil vapor extraction system in
sub-waste soil under disposal area A. This ROD
provides a final remedy for the ground water control
on the property and off the property. as 0U2 The
ROD defines on-property ground water as
contaminated ground water in the immediate vicinity
of the main disposal area and off-property ground
water at any location within the plume other than in
the area defined as on-property ground water. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water are VOCs, including l,l-dichloroethene,
ethylbenzene. benzene. tetrahydrofuran, toluene, vinyl
chloride, and xylenes, and metals, including arsenic
and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extracting and pretreaung on- and off-property ground
water to remove metals and inorganic solids: treating
on-property ground water using an activated
biological sludge treatment system; treating off-
nmnertv cround water using a treatment technology to
be determined during the remedial design stage,
discharging the treated ground water onsite to the
wetlands, surface water, or possibly reinjecting the
treated waxer into the aquifer to promote in situ
biodegradation, based on the results of a bench-scale
study; treating sludge generated from the treatment
process, prior to disposal in a RCRA landfill; treating
off-gases emissions from the treatment process using
carbon adsorption, with regeneration or Ixeaunent of
the spent carbon; monitoring private wells located
around the site; implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions, and access restrictions.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action (depending on the treatment selected for the
off-property ground water) ranges from $13,612,000
to $24,163,000, which includes an annual O&M cost
ranging from $550,000 to $1,062,000 for the first
year.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on the Stale of Wisconsin Preventive Action
Limits (PALs) and include benzene 0067 ugfl: 1,1-
dichloroethene 0.024 ugh, ethylbenzene 272 ug/l,
tetrahydrofuran 10 ugh; toluene 68.6 ugh, vinyl
chloride 0.0015 ug/l; xylenes 124 ugh, arsenic 5 ugh;
and lead 5 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed restrictions, will
be implemented to prevent use of the land or ground
water and to safeguard human health and the
environment during remedial activities
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Benzene, Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean Water Act; Deferred
Decision: Direct Contact, Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitonng; Institutional Controls; Lead,
Metals, O&M, Offsite Discharge, Offsite Disposal,
Onsite Discharge, Onsite Treatment, RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations; Toluene; Treat.ability Studies,
VOCs, Xylenes.
210
-------
REGION 5
HAGEN FARM, WI (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/17/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Waier• Final Action
211
-------
KOHLER LANDFiLL, WI
March 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 40-acre Kohler Company Landfill site is an
operating landfill at the Kohier manufacturing facility
in Kohler, Sheboygan County, Wisconsin. Land use
in the area is a mixture of business and residential,
and an 800-acre wildlife reserve owned by Kohler
Company surrounds the site. Wetlands are located
along the landfill’s edge. The site lies within, but
rises above, the 100-year floodplain of the Sheboygan
River, which is located east and south of the plant.
The estimated 57,000 people who reside within
3 miles of the site use the Sheboygan municipal
system from Lake Michigan as their drinking water
supply. Two residences located 1/4 mile from the site
share a private well as their drinking water supply.
From the early 1950’s to the present, the Kobler
Company has used the landfill as the primary location
for disposing of manufacturing and foundry wastes
generated at the Kohler manufacturing facilities The
majority of the wastes disposed of in the landfill is
non-RCRA hazardous waste, including sand, cores,
molds, clarifier wastes, slag, clay, and pottery. and
dust collector wastes. Between 1950 and the mid-
1970’s, several waste disposal pits were constructed
in the landfill for disposal of hydraulic oils, solvents,
paint wastes, enamel powder. Lint from brass
polishing, and chrome-plating sludge By 1975, these
pits were closed and covered with nonhazardous fill
Beginning in 1975, all RCRA hazardous liquids were
disposed of offsite. Disposal of solid RCRA
hazardous wastes ceased pnor to 1980, however solid
non-hazardous wastes have continued to be disposed
of in the landfill In 1983. EPA detected
contaminated surface water runoff at the landfill
Studies have revealed that ground water is
contarrunated due to leaching of chemical constituents
from the landfill This ROD addresses source
contamination through containment of the waste mass
as the first of two remedial actions planned for this
site A future ROD will address the contaminated
ground water The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil and leachate are VOCs. including
benzene, toluene, TCE, and xylenes, other orgamcs,
including PAHs and phenols, and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
closm! the landfill according to state regulations,
constructing a multi-layer cap over the fill material to
reduce infiltration into the waste mass; installing a
perimeter leachate collection drain and treating
leachate onsite using air stripping, prior to onsite
discharge to the Sheboygan River, and implementing
institutional controls including deed restrictions and
site access restrictions. The estimated total present
worth cost for this remedial action is $4,700,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $1,000,000
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Clean-up goals will be met in accordance with state
landfill closure codes, and discharge codes.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals will be
addressed in a future ROD
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed and site access
restrictions will be implemented onsite to reduce site
usage, maintain cap integrity, and prevent exposure to
the affected ground water
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic: Benzene; Capping,
Carcinogenic Compounds: Chromium: Clean Water
Act, Direct Contact, Floodplain. Institutional Controls,
Leachate CollectionlTreatment; Lead; Metals, O&M,
Onsite Containment, Onsite Discharge: Onsite
Disposal: Onsite Treatment, Org inics, PAHs, Phenols,
Soil, Solvents, State Standards/Regulations: ICE,
Toluene, VOCs. Water Quality Criteria: Wetlands,
Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of prv ious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Leachate
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
212
-------
LA GRANDE SANITARY LANDFiLL, MN
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HIST0RYIDESCRWrION :
The 80-acre La Grande Sanitary Landfill site is
located in west-central Douglas County, Minnesota,
5 miles west of the town of Alexandria and 3 miles
south of the town of Garfield. The main fill area
occupies 6 acres of a small, north-trending gully,
which is surrounded by forest, steep uncultivated hills,
and low lying wetlands. A sand and gravel water
table exists under a portion of the site, and residents
downgradient are using the aquifer for drinking water.
From 1974 to 1984, the landfill was in operation and
accepted mixed municipal solid waste and
nonhazardous industrial wastes. In 1982, a state
ground waler investigation revealed the presence of
low level organic compounds. The landfill was
closed in 1984, and a final cover was installed in
accordance with state regulations. Sampling dunng
the Ri revealed that only one contaminant,
manganese, was found in high levels in the Old Shop
Well onsite, which required action to reduce the
potential nsk of exposure. This ROD provides a final
remedy for the site and addresses the onsite landfill
and ground water. The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, debris, and ground water
are orgamcs and metals.
by the site, treatment of onsite media is not
considered necessary.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of ground water use
restrictions and possibly deed restrictions will be
implemented.
KEYWORDS :
Capping; Carcmogemc Compounds; Debris; Direct
Contact; Ground Water, Ground Waxer Monitonng;
Institutional Controls; Metals; O&M; Onsite Disposal;
Organics; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; State
Standards/Regulations; Venting; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: Organics. Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
converting a gas monitoring well to a gas vent to
control the accumulation of explosive gases, sealing
off and abandoning the onsite Shop Well to ensure
that it will not be used as a potable water source,
stabilizing the west slope of the landfill, and placing
a soil cover over the exposed landfill waste on the
northwest corner: sloping and reconstructing the
borrow pit area adjacent to the west slope to ensure
long-term integnly of the existing cover system,
conducting long-term inonitonng of ground water and
combustible gas. and implementing institutional
controls, including deed and ground water use
restrictions, and restricting site access The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$501.000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$22,000 for 30 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals were
not specified Because of the low level risks posed
213
-------
METAL WORKING SHOP, MI
June 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 2.7-acre Metal Working Shop (MWS) site is a
manufacturing facility in Lake Ann, Benzie County,
Michigan. Land use in the area includes residential,
recreational, agricultural, and timberlands. The site is
adjacent to three lakes: Lake View to the north,
Bryan Lake to the east, and Lake Ann to the south.
The surrounding residents use private well systems for
drinking water. A variety of metal finishing and tool
and die operations have been conducted at the site
during the past 26 years. It was reported that from
1975 to 1977, water from two site operation nnse
tanks was disposed of on the ground surface onsite.
Subsequently, from 1983 to present, Lake Ann
Manufacturing used the site for assembling
mechanical shaft seals for pumps and compressors.
As a result of an 1984 investigation, EPA identified
three suspected areas of disposal that included the
alleged disposal area, the alternate disposal area, and
the septic system Although samples were not
collected, historical information was gathered during
the site investigation A 1987 investigation conducted
by an independent con actor included collecting
several soil samples and installing three ground water
monitonng wells. This investigation revealed that
there was no soil or ground water contamination,
however, it did not prove the absence of potentially
present contamination based on histoncal dumping
This ROD provides a final action, and no additional
OUs or additional separate actions are contemplated
No site-organic contamination was identified during
the RI and inorganic constituents approxunated
background levels, therefore, there are no
contaminants of concern affecting the site.
KEYWORDS :
No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action because no significant levels of
contaminants exist onsite, and no additional action is
necessary to protect human health or the environment
There are no costs associated with this no action
remedy
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
214
-------
MIDCO I (AMENDMENT), IN
April 13, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 4-acre MIDCO I site is an abandoned, industnal
waste recycling. storage. and disposal facility in Gary,
indiana The surrounding land use is mixed
industrial, commercial, and residential. The nearest
residential area is about l 4-mile west of the site.
The Calurnet Aquifer underlies the site and provides
drinking water to wells within I mile of the site.
From 1973 to 1979, two different owners operated the
facility and stockpiled thousands of drums of buLk
liquid and chemical waste. In 1976. a fire at the site
destroyed an eswnated 14,000 waste drums. In 1981,
EPA installed a fence around the site. In 1982, EPA
removed all surface wastes, including thousands of
drums and an underground storage tank, excavated
and disposed of contaminated surface soil, and placed
a clay cover over much of the sate. This ROD
amends a 1989 ROD that addressed the remaining
contaminated soil and ground water by treatment of
an estimated 12.400 cubic yards of soil using soil
vapor extraction and sobdification/st.abilizaflon,
followed by onsite disposal; excavation and
solidificalion/stabilization of an estimated 1.200 cubic
yards of contaminated sediments, followed by onsite
disposal: and covering the site in accordance with
RCR.A landfill closure requirements, ground waler
pumping and injection into a shallow or deep aquifer
The amended remedy reduces the estimated amount
of soil to be treated, as a result of new information on
arsenic data and amended soil CAL.s, further defines
the site cover requirements, and further defines the
requirements of deep well injection of contaminated
ground water The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the subsurface soil, sediment, and ground
water are VOCs, including TCE. toluene. and xylenes.
metals, including chromium and lead, and inorganics
SELECFED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
reducing the amount of soil to be treated to a
minimum of 5,200 cubic yards because of the
amendment to soil CALs and the detemunaflon that
arsenic may not be present above background levels
ax the site, treating the contammated soil onsite using
with soil vapor extraction, followed by rn-situ
solidification/stabilization, excavating and treating an
estimated 500 cubic yards of contaminated sediment
from the surrounding wetlands onsite using
solidification/stabilization: pumping and treatment of
contaminated ground waxer using air stnpping and
carbon absorption. followed by onsite deep well
injection; constructing a final RCRA cover over the
entire site; implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions, and site access
restrictions; conducting long-term monitoring and
providing for a contingency remedy in the event that
ground water clean-up action levels for the Calumet
Aquifer are technically impracticable to attain, which
includes low-level pumping to contain contaminated
ground water and additional institutional controls.
The ground water treatment or underground injection
portions of this remedy may be combined with
remedial actions for the nearby Midco II site. The
estimated preseut worth cost for this amended
remedial action is $10,000,000. which includes an
annual O&M cost of $4 0,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Ground water clean-up standards for the Calumet
Aquifer are not changed from the 1989 ROD.
Treatment requuements prior to DWI are further
defined compared to the 1989 ROD and include, at a
minimum, treatment to MACs. which are required for
RCRA delisung. Specific MACs include methylene
chloride 31.5 ug/l; tnchloroethene 315 ug/l; toluene
6,300 ugh; chromium 630 ug!l; nickel 630 ugh; and
lead 950 ugh. Treatment below MACs will be
required, if necessary, to protect underground sources
of drinking water. Soil treatment action levels are
increased from lxlO 4 and 111=1 in the 1989 ROD to
5xl0 and Hl=5 in this amendment
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including access and deed
restrictions will be implemented to protect the
integrity of the sate cover and operational aspects of
the remedy.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping. ARAR Waiver, Capping; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC). Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Water Act; Closure Requirements.
Contingent Remedy; Excavation; Ground Water,
Ground Water Momtonng, Ground Water Treatment;
Inorganics; Institutional Controls; Lead, MCLs,
Metals; O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal,
Onsite Treatment; Plume Management; RCRA; ROD
Amendment, Safe Drinking Water Act; Sediment ;
215
-------
REGION 5
MIDCO I (AMENDMENT), IN (Continued)
AprIl 13, 1992
Soil; Sohdificauon/Stabiization; Solvents; TCE;
Toluene; Treatabihty Studies; Treatment Technology;
Vacuum Extraction; VOCs; Wetlands; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/30/89
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Subsuiface Soil,
Sediment, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Finai Action
Ground Water - Final Action
216
-------
MIDCO II (AMENDMENT), IN
April 13, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 7-acre MIDCO II site is an abandoned chemical
waste storage and disposal facility in Gary. Indiana.
Land use in the sutTounding area is predominantly
industrial. The underlying aquifer, which is used
primarily for non-drinking purposes. is highly
susceptible to contamination from surface sources.
From 1976 to 1978, this site was used for treatment,
storage, and disposal of chemical and bulk liquid
wastes. Onsite pits were used for disposal. from
which wastes percolated into and contaminated the
ground water. An overflow pipe from a filter bed
disposal pit discharged direcdy into a ditch draining
directly into the nearby Grand Calumet River.
Additionally, an estimated 10 waste storage tanks
were detenorated and leaking In 1977, a fire at the
site destroyed an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 waste
drums. In 1981, EPA installed a fence around the
site. From 1984 to 1989, EPA removed all surface
wastes, including thousands of drums and numerous
tanks of chemical waste, excavated and disposed
offsite subsurface soils and wastes from the sludge
pits and the filter bed; and extended the site fence.
This ROD amends a 1989 ROD that addressed the
remaining contaminated soil, pit wastes, and ground
water by treatment of an estimated 35.000 cubic yards
of soil wastes using solidafication/stabiliZatiOn
followed by onsite disposal, excavation and
solidification/stabilization of 500 cubic yards of
contaminated sediments followed by onsite disposal.
covenng the site in accordance with RCRA landfill
closure requirements: ground waler pumping and
injection into a shallow or deep aquifer with or
without treatment, depending on treatment studies,
and implementing deed and access restrictions The
amended remedy reduces the estimated amount of soil
to be treated, as a result of amended soil CALs and a
determination that arsenic may not be present above
background levels The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the subsurface soil, sediment. and
ground water are VOCs. including toluene, ICE, and
xylenes. metals, including chromium and lead, and
inorgaiucS.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
reducing the amount of soil to be treated from an
estimated 35,000 cubic yards to an estimated
12200 cubic yards, excavating and treating the
contaminated soil onsite using soil vapor extraction,
followed by in-situ solidification! stabilization;
excavating an estimated 500 cubic yards of
contaminated sediment from a ditch adjacent to the
northeast boundary of the site, with onsire
solidification/stabilization; pumping and onsite
ti-canDent of contaminated ground water using air
stripping and carbon adsorption, or possibly
precipitation, with deep well injection of the treated
wa1er constructing a final vegetated RCRA cover
over the entire site; implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions, and site access
iesthctions; conducting long-term momtonng and
providing for a contingency remedy if clean-up action
levels for the Calumet Aquifer are technically
impracticable to attain which includes low-level
pumping to contain contaminated ground water and
additional institutional controls. The ground water
treatment or underground injection portions of this
remedy may be combined with remedial actions for
the adjacent Midco I site. The estimated present
worth cost for this amended remedial action is
$13,000,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$660,000
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Ground water clean-up standards are not changed
from the 1989 ROD Treatment required pnor to
OU1 are funher defined compa.ed to the 1989 ROD,
and include at a minimum treatment to MACs. which
are required for RCRA delisting Specific MACs
include methylene chloride 31.5 ugh, tnchloroethene
31.5 ug/l, toluene 6,300 ugh; chromium 630 ugh:
nickel 630 ugh, and lead 99.5 ugh Treatment below
the MACs will be required if necessary to protect
underground sources of drinking water. Soil
treatment action levels are increased from lxlO 4 and
111=1 in the 1989 ROD to 5x10 4 and -11=5 in ihis
ROD
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed and access
restrictions will be implemented to protect the
integrity of the site cover and operational aspects of
the remedy
217
-------
REGION 5
MIDCO II (AMENDMENT), IN (Continued)
April 13, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Capping; Cafoon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium Ctean Water
Act; Contingent Remedy; Direcf Contact; Excavation;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitonng; Ground
Water Treatment; Inorganics; Institutional Controls;
Landfill Closure; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Plume
Management; RCRA; ROD Amendment; Safe Water
Drinking Act, Sediment; Soil; Solidification/
Stabilization; Solvents; ICE; Toluene; Treatment
Technology; Vacuum Extraction; VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: O6 3OI89
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, lnorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waxer - Final Action
218
-------
MUSKEGO SANITARY LANDFILL, WI
June 12, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY,DESCRWrION :
The 56-acre Muskego Sanitary Landfill site is located
in the City of Muskego, Waukesha County,
Wisconsin. Land use in the area is predominantly
residential and agricultural, with wetland areas located
in the nearby vicinity. All of the site hes within the
100-year floodplain. The upper glacial drift aquifer,
one of three principal sources of ground water in
Waukesha County, is used for human consumption.
From the 1950’s to 1981, municipal waste, waste oils,
paint products, and other wastes were disposed of at
the site. The site is separated into three disposal
areas: the Old Fill Area (38 acres); the Southeast Fill
Area (16 acres); and the Non-Contiguous Fill Area
(4.2 acres), composed of a drum trench, north and
south refuse trenches, and an L-shaped fill area, all
containing waste similar to the Old Fill Area. As a
result of deteriorating water quality at onsite ground
water monitoring wells, Waste Management of
Wisconsin Inc. (WMWI) and the state conducted
numerous investigations that revealed elevated levels
of contaminants in the ground water In 1985,
WMWI installed a methane extraction system to
alleviate the gas migration along the western portion
of the Old Fill Area. hi 1986, public water was
supplied to the site and pnvate wells in the area
Two separate areas at the site were discovered to
contain buried drums and contaminated soil The first
area was located east of the Non-Contiguous Fill
Area The second area, known as the drum trench,
was discovered in a portion of the Non-Contiguous
Fill Area and contained 989 drums and 2.500 cubic
yards of contaminated soil. In 1991, the drums and
soil from both areas were disposed of offsite at
appropriate hazardous waste disposai faciLities
Liquid wastes and drums were also sent offsite for
incineration This interim ROD addresses the control
and remedaauon of the contamination sources.
including landfill waste, contaminated soils. leachale.
and landfill gas Future RODs will address the
control and remedianon of the contamination in the
ground water aquifer as a separate operable unit The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and sediment are VOCs, including betizene. TCE.
toluene, and xylenes. and other organics, including
PARs, PCBs, pesticides. and phenols
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
installing a cap over the Old and Southeast Fill Areas;
adding a landfill leachate control system at the Otd
Fill Area and improving the existing leachate control
system at the Southeast Fill Area; discharging the
collected leachale onsite to the sewer if pretreatment
requirements are met, or treating leachate along with
contaminated ground water as part of the subsequent
OU; managing sludge residuals from the treatment
processes as a hazardous waste, if it exhibits the
characteristic of toxicity; capping of the Non-
Contiguous Fill Area; treating soil within the drum
trench and north and south refuse areas using in-situ
vapor extraction to remove VOCs; neaung the
extracted gas using either activated carbon or thermal
destruction with catalytic oxidation, or another
treatment method prior to emission to the atmosphere;
utilizing an active gas control system. in conjunction
with the leachate collection system at both the Old
and Southeast Fill Areas to destroy extracted gases
with a ground flare; and conducting semi-annual
ground water monitoring and implementing
institutional controls including deed restrictions and
site access resmct lons including fencing. The
estimated present net worth cost for this remedial
action is $9,914,000. which includes an annual O&M
cost of $309,500 for years 0-5, and $134,200 for
years 6-30
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
A performance based clean-up standard will be
applied to the area covered by the ISVE system in the
Non-Contiguous Fill Area. The clean-up standard
will be based on residual soil gas concentrations that
are low enough to assure compliance with ground
water clean-up standards, which will be specified in
the subsequent ROD for the contaminated ground
water
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed restrictions will
be implemented to prevent access, excavation, and
disturbance of the cap and installation of the wells.
219
-------
REGION 5
MUSKEGO SANITARY LANDFiLL, WI (Continued)
June 12, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Benzene; Capping; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact: Floodplain; Ground Waler
Monitonng; Institutional Controls; Interim Remedy;
Leachate CollecuonIrreatment; O&M; Onsite
Containment; Onsite Dicharge; Onsue Disposal;
Onsite Treatment; Organics; PANs; PCBs; Pesticides;
Phenols; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sediment;
Soil; Solvents; State Standards/Regulations; TCE;
Toluene; Treatment Technology; Vacuum Extraction;
Venting, VOCs; Wetlands, Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
220
-------
NEW BRIGHTON/ARDEN HILLS, MN
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 25-square-mile New Brighton/Arden Hills site
includes the 4-square-mile Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) in Ramsey County,
Mrnnesota Land use in the atea is predominantly
residential with commercial and industrial sectors.
The estimated 100,000 residences, located within
2 miles of the site, along with adjacent townships use
various glacial and bedrock aquifers as their drinlung
water supply. The TCA.AP facility, a small arms
manufactunng facility, is currently operated by the
Federal Cartridge Company (FCC) and used by two
manufacturing lessees, Alliant Techsystems and 3M
Corporation. Since 1941, the plant has manufactured,
stored, and tested small arms ammunition and related
materials. From 1941 to 1981. waste materials, which
included VOCs, heavy metals, corrosive materials,
and explosives, were disposed of ax 14 source areas
located within TCAAP. In addition, breaks and leaks
in sewer lines, where other disposal occurred, may
have contributed to onsite and offsite ground water
and soil contamination. In 1981, state investigations
of municipal and pnvate drinking water wells in and
around TCAAP identified contamination of ground
water, onsite soil, sediment, and surface water by
VOCs, other organics. and metals. Past removal
actions and seven previous RODs, signed from 1983
to 1989, addressed interim remedial actions conducted
by the Army and Alliant Techsystems and provided
for the establishment of alternate drinking water
supplies for surrounding communities. onsite in-situ
soil vapor extraction, installing ground water pump
and treat systems to remediate ground water onsite.
boundary ground water recovery systems to prevent
further migration of VOCs, thermal treatment of
PCB-cornaininated soil, and the cleaning, repairing,
and testing of contaminated sewer lines This ROD
addresses remediation of the south plume of offsite
contaminated ground water, as 0U3 Future RODs
will address the offsite north plume of contaminated
ground water, as OUI, and the onsite soil, sediment,
surface water, and ground water, as 0U2 The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water are VOCs, including benzene, TCE, and
xylenes, other orgamcs including phenoLs, and metals,
including chromium, lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
pumping and off site treatment of contaminated ground
water at the Leading edge of the south plume using
precipitation and filtration to remove inorganic solids
and a pressurized granular activated carbon system to
remove VOCs; discharging the treated ground water
offsite to the potable water supply of the City of New
Brighton; disposing of filtration residuals and spent
carbon offsite: implementing institutional controls
including ground water use restrictions; and
monitoring ground water. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $4,851,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $276,000 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up standards,
which are based on state standards and SDWA MCLs
and MCLGs, include I,1-dichloroethane 70 ugh;
(state); 1,1-dichloroethene 6 ugh (state); cis-l,2-
dichlomethene 70 ugh (MCL); 1,1.1 -trichloroethane
200 ug/l (MCL); 1.1,2-trichloroethane 3 ugh
(proposed MCLG); and TCE 5 ugh (MCL)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
institutional controls to restrict the drilling of private
wells will prevent consumption of contaminated waler
until clean-up standards are achieved.
KEYWORDS :
Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC), Carcinogenic
Compounds. Chromium, Direct Contact; Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitonng. Ground Water
Treatment, initial Remedial Measure, Institutional
Controls: Interim Remedy, Lead. MCLs, MCLGs,
Metals, O&M, Ofisite Discharge. Offsite Disposal,
Offsite Treatment, Organics. Phenols, RCRA, Safe
Drinking Water Act, Solvents. State Standards/
Regulations, TCE, VOCs. Xylenes
221
-------
REGIONS
NEW BRIGHTON/ARDEN HILLS, MN (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/23/83, 08/02/84,
06130/86. 03131/87.
09/25/87, 08/11/89
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgarncs.
Metals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
222
-------
PEERLESS PLATING, MI
September 21, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 1-acre Peerless Plating site is a former
electroplating facility in Muskegon Township.
Michigan, and is located northwest of Little Black
Creek and I mile north of Mona Lake. Land use in
the area is mixed use with urban, light industrial, and
residential. Lake Michigan supplies drinking water
for residential and commercial businesses within a 3-
mile radius of the site. From 1937 to 1983, onsite
electroplating operations and processes included
copper, nickel, chronuurn, cadmium, and zinc plating,
in addition to burnishing, polishing, pickling, oiling.
passivating, stress relieving, and dichromate dipping.
The processes required the use of toxic, reactive,
corrosive and flammable chemicals. Over the years,
Peerless Plating discharged process waste with pH
extremes and high heavy metal concentrations into
seepage lagoons at the rear of the facility. In the
1970s, the state directed Peerless Plating to monitor
waste discharge daily and to install a treatment system
to meet reduced effluent limitations. The site violated
the requirements and was charged by the state. In
1980. the seepage lagoon sludge was removed and
disposed of. and the excavated lagoon area was
backfilled and capped. In 1983, subsequent
investigations concluded that treatment facilities had
not been upgraded adequately and discharge
limitations were still being exceeded for chromium,
cyanide, cadmium, and zinc As a result, Peerless
Plating closed in June 1983, and the owners
abandoned the plant. In 1983, after the state and
local government detected hydrocyanic acid gas
within the facility atmosphere, EPA camed out an
Emergency Response Action onsite, which involved
removing 37,000 gallons of hazardous liquids,
draining the lagoons. excavating lagoon soil and
sludge. sealing sewer lines, and neutralizing onsite the
cyanides and nitric acid. In 1984. EPA investigations
revealed that ground water was contaminated with
VOCs and chloroform. Additionally, surface water
and sediment in Little Black Creek were contaminated
with heavy metals 1 March 1990, EPA conducted
a second removal action to remove and dispose of
liquids and sludge contained in above-ground tanks
onsite, encapsulate an asbestos oven, and install a
fence around the facility. This ROD addresses the
onsite contaminated soil and ground water as a final
remedy The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil. debris, and ground water are VOCs.
including benzene, ICE, toluene, and xylenes; metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead; and
inorganics.
SELECITEI) REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for the site includes
demolishing onsite buildings to facilitate soil sampling
beneath the buildings, and disposing of the associated
debns offsite; treating approximately 6500 cubic yards
of contaminated soil onsite using in-situ vapor
extraction, followed by onsite stabilization of
excavated soil; testing the stabilized soil, prior to
offsite disposal ax a RCRA facility; controlling air
emissions using carbon adsorption; pumping and
onsite treamient of ground water using air snipping,
followed by precipitation, pH adjustment, and
chemical coagulation, with discharge of the treated
ground water onsite to surface water, controlling air
emissions using a carbon filter, treating the residual
sludge to meet LDR standards, prior to offsite
disposal at the RCRA Subtitle C facility; regenerating
the spent carbon at an offsite thermal treatment
facility; and monitoring ground water. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$7,971,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$323,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and State standards and
include benzene I ugh: arsenic 0.2 ug/l; cadnuum
4 ug/l, and lead 5 ugll. Chemical-specific soil clean-
up goals are based on RCRA LDRs and health-based
levels and include benzene 002 mg/kg; arsenic
1.7 mg/kg, cadmium 0.8 mg/kg, and barium
40 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Arsenic: Benzene; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds: Chromium, Clean
Air Act, Clean Waxer Act, Debris, Direct Contact;
Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Inorganics;
Lead; MCLGs; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Offsite Treatment, Onsite Discharge; Onsne
Disposal: Onsite Treatment, RCRA, Safe Drinking
223
-------
REGION 5
PEERLESS PLATING, MI (Continued)
September 21, 1992
Waxer Act; Soil; Solidification/Stabiization; Solvents;
State Permit; State Standards/Regulations; ICE;
Toluene; Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology;
Vacuum Extraction; VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
224
-------
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL (INDIANAPOLIS PLANT), IN
June 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWflON :
The 120-acre Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis
Plant) site is a former coal tar refinery and creosote
wood treatment plant located in Indianapolis, Indiana
The site is divided into the 40-acre Oak Park property
and the 80-acre Maywood property. The Oak Park
property contains the majority of the operating
facilities, including above-ground storage tanks,
distillation towers, and ahoveground and underground
utilities. The Maywood property contains operating
facilities on its northern end. This property was
formerly the site of chemical process and wood
preserving activities and currently contains four waste
disposal areas The area surrounding the site is mixed
residential, industrial, and commercial. The site lies
within the White River drainage basin. From 1921
until 1972, coal tar refinery and creosote wood
treatment plants operated onsite. Beginning in 1941,
several chemical plants were constructed and operated
on the Oak Park property. Environmental problems
at the site were found to be related to the improper
use and disposal of creosoting process wastes and
substances used in manufacwnng chemicals. In 1955,
alpha picoline, a chemical manufactured onsite, was
identified in nearby residential wells, and in 1964,
three contaminants from the sue were detected in
offsite ground water samples and onsite surface water
samples In 1975, state investigations identified
several onsite problems believed to be contributing to
ground water contamination with organic chemicals
In 1980, state investigations revealed various organic
chemicals in soil and subsequently in 1987. 60.000
gallons of waste fuel were accidentally spilled on the
Oak Park property The spilled fuel oil was
recovered, and some of the contaminated soil was
excavated This ROD provides an interim remedy for
OUt and addresses offsite migration of contaminated
ground water Several additional operable units are
planned to address contanunation of onsite source and
onsite and offsite ground water impacted by the site.
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
ground water are VOCs, including benzene and
toluene, other organics. including PAHs, metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead, and
inorganics.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
either extracting contaminated ground water
downgradient of the site and aearing the waxer using
biological treatment, followed by filtration and
activated carbon adsorption, with offsite discharge of
Snigd to a POTW, with the remainder reinjected to
the aquifer; or combining ground water extraction
from up-gradient wells, with treatment using
precipitation/clarification, followed by activated
carbon, with reinjection to the aquifer in conjunction
with extracting ground water from interior of the site,
and treating this by precipitation/clarification,
followed by air stripping, with offsite discharge to a
P01W; monitoring ground water and implementing
engineering controls. The final selection of’ options
and specific design parameters will be determined
during the remedial design, based on the results of
treatability tests to determine the optimum design and
operating requirements. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $15,000,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $1,000,000 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
lntenm ground water clean-up levels are based on the
more stringent of a 106 cumulative lifetime cancer
risk, or MCLs for carcinogens, and MCLGs, MCLs,
or a HI = I for noncarcmogens Chemical-specific
ground water goals include benzene 5 ugh (MCL);
toluene 1.000 ugh (MCL); xylenes 10,000 ugh
(MCL), pyndine and pyridine denvauves 35 ugh
(HI). arsenic 50 ugh (MCL), chromium (MCL). lead
5 ugh (MCL). and ammonia 30 ugh (MCL) Treated
ground water discharged to the P01W must meet
separate clean-up criteria under CWA
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping: Arsenic: Benzene; BiodegradanonlLand
Application. Carbon Adsorption (GAC), Caranogenic
Compounds; Chromium; Clean Waxer Act, Defen d
Decision; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Waler; Ground Water
Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment, Inorganics;
Interim Remedy; Leachabiity Tests. Lead; MCLGs,
MCLs; Metals, O&M, Offsite Discharge; Onsite
Discharge, Onsite Treatment; Organics: PAHs. Plume
Management, Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(P01W), RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Solvents ;
225
-------
— REGION 5
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL (INDIANAPOUS PLANT), IN (Continued)
June 30, 1992
State Standards/ReguIations Toluene; Treatability
Studies; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Ground Water - Interim
226
-------
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL (ST. LOUIS PARK), MN
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HiSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 80-acre Reilly Tar and Chemical (St. Louis Park)
site is a former coal tar distillation and wood
preserving plant in St. Louis Park. Minnesota.
Surrounding land use is predominantly residential.
The site overhes a complex system of six aquifers,
including the St. Peter Aquifer, that provide drinking
water to area residences. The St. Peter Aquifer
contains one municipal well, which is used during
periods of peak demand; however, the majority of the
dnnking water in St. Louis Park is obtained from
deeper bedrock aquifers. From 1917 to 1972, coal tar
distillation process wastewaler was discharged to
onsite surface water; as a result, small wastewater
spills occurred into onsite soil, in 1972, the site was
purchased by the City in response to complaints about
wastewater contamination and the plant was
dismantled. State investigations from 1978 to 1981
identified site-related ground waler contamination.
Four previous RODs in 1984, 1986. 1990. and 1992
addressed remediation of specific aquifers, the filling
of a small onsite wetland, and offsite soil
contamination This ROD addresses a final remedy
for the contaminated Northern Area of the Drift
Aquifer, which is a surficial aquifer that is not used
as a drinking water source This aquifer does provide
recharge water for the bedrock aquifers axx( is
hydrauhcally and geologically connected to the
Planeville and St Peter Aquifers Future RODs will
address the remaining contamination problems
presented by the site. The pnmaiy contaminants of
concern affecting the ground water are organics,
including PAHs.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
intercepting and containing cont.anunated ground
water using gradient control wells, discharging the
water offsite for treatment at the local P01W. and
continued monitoring the discharged water to
determine if within 3 to 5 years. this could be
discharged directly to a storm sewer and then to
surface water Ai that time, if necessary, an onsite or
offsite treatment facility will be built to treat the
water using activated carbon, prior to discharge. with
regeneration and reuse of any spent carbon The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$370,000. per extraction well, and if the offsite
treatment facility is deemed necessary. additional
capital costs are estimated at $300,000. with an
estimated annual 0&M cost of $45,000 per extraction
well for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on site-specific Drinking Water Criteria. These
levels, developed by state and EPA experts, include
benzo(a)pyrene and dibenzo(a,h)anthraceiie 5.6 ag/I;
carcinogenic PAHs 28 ng/l; and other PAHs 15 ag/I.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Carbon Adsorption (GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds;
Clean Water Act; Contingent Remedy; Direct Contact;
Ground Water, Ground Water Momtonng. Ground
Water Treatment; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsire
Disposal. Offsite Treatment; Organics; PAils;
Phenols; Plume Management; Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTW); RCRA; State Standards/
Regulations.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06106/84, 05/30/86.
09/28/90. 06/30/92
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: Organics
Category: Ground Water - Interim
227
-------
SAVANNA ARMY DEPOT, IL
March 31, 1992
REGION 5
SITE IUSTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The Savanna Army Depot activity (SVADA) site, an
active military installation, is located 70 miles west of
Rockford, illinois, in a remote and sparsely populated
area. Land use in the area is predominantly
agncultural and recreational, with a wetlands area
located onsite. Part of the site lies within the 50-year
floodplain of the Mississippi River. From 1943 to
1969, ammunitIon washout operations were conducted
in the northwestern portion of the facility. As a
result, wastewater containing explosive compounds
was produced, discharged to a drain trough. and piped
to four unlined lagoons, referred to as the “lower
lagoons,” which drained into a ditch and on to the
Mississippi River In 1961, two new unlined lagoons.
or “upper lagoons,” began receiving the wastewater,
thus replacing the lower lagoons. Wastes that flowed
into the upper lagoons drained into the soil below
them The trmitrotoluene (TNT) washout facility has
not been operational since 1969, and the lagoon areas
are currently not in use. Since 1979, the SVADA
lagoon areas have been the subject of several U.S.
Array investigations, which revealed significant
contamination of the soil with high concentrations of
the explosive TNT and other organic compounds.
The soil is also a continued source of ground water
contamination This ROD addresses a final remedy
for the Washout Lagoon Area Soil at SVADA as
OU I A future ROD will address the ground water in
the vicinity of the lagoons The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil, debns, and surface water
are VOCs and organics, including TNT, nitrobenzene
(NB), 2,4-dinitrotoluene (DNT); 2-amino-4,6-DNT;
l.3.5-tnnitrobenzene (TNB); and hexahydro-1.3,5-
trinnro-l,3,5-triazine (RDX). a pesticide
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating an eswnated 18.230 cubic yards of
contaminated soil from the upper and lower lagoons.
drain troughs, and piping, treating the soil onsite
using a rotary kiln incineration thermal treatment
process, followed by onsite disposal of the treated soil
and flyash in the upper lagoon area: reprocessing any
treated soil, which fails the hazardous waste
characteristic tests, treating soil that does not meet
TCLP standards using stabilization, prior to disposal,
decanting standing water in the lagoons, with
treatment. if necessary: restoring any affected
wetlands; and conducting penmeter air monitoring.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $10,251,000, which includes an annual O&M
cost of $11,400 for 2 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
health-based cnteria and include TNT 21 mg/kg; 2.4-
DNT 9.3 mg/kg; 2-A-4,6-DNT 1,191 mg/kg; 1,3.5-
TNB 3.7 mg/kg; RDX 5.75 mg/kg; and NB
37.2 mg/kg. Treated soil will be subjected to TCLP
and testing for other hazardous waste characteristics.
Residual soil left in the ground will have no
concentrations of explosive compounds that are
greater than health-based criteria
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng; Carcinogenic Compounds; Debris,
Direct Contact; Excavation; floodplain, lncinerauon/
Thermal Destruction; O&M; Onsite Disposal: Onsite
Treatment; Orgamcs; Pesticides: RCRA; Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; State Standards/
Regulations; Surface Water, Surface Water Treatment;
Treatment Technology; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
228
-------
SKINNER LANDFILL, OH
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 78-acre Skinner Landfill site is located in West
Chester, Butler County, Ohio. Land use in the
immediate vicinity includes business and residential
uses to the west and crop farming to the north.
Several geologic units that underlie the site are used
as aquifers by local residents. The site was used in
the past for the mining of sand and gravel, and was
operated for the landfillmg of a wide variety of
materials from approximately 1934 through 1990.
Matenals deposited onsite include demolition debris,
household refuse, and a wide variety of chemical
wastes. A low area of the site, referred to as the
waste lagoon, was used for disposal of paint and ink
wastes, creosote, pesticides, and other chemicals. In
1976, in response to a fire onsite and reports of
observations of a black, oily liquid in a waste lagoon
onsne. EPA investigated the landfill. The owner
asserted that nerve gas, mustard gas. incendiary
bombs, and other explosive devices were buned at the
landfill in the lagoon area, but subsequently retracted
this claim. The U.S. Army and EPA dug several
trenches into the buried waste lagoon and found black
ooze and numerous barrels of waste; no munitions of
any sort were found. In 1982, EPA conducted an
investigation that showed that the ground waxer
southeast of the buned waste lagoon was
contaminated with VOCs. RI studies conducted
between 1986 and 1989 investigated the site ground
water, surface water, soil, and sediment. In 1990. the
state closed the site to further landfiuing activities
EPA has organized this project into two operable
units. This ROD is an intenm action to protect
human health by limiting site access to prevent
ingestion of and direct contact with contaminated soil.
and to protect the potentially affected users of ground
water on and near the site. A future ROD will
provide source control measures and the remaining
onsite contaminants as the final response action for
this site The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil and ground water axe VOCs,
including benzene, other organics, including PCBs
and pesticides. and metals, including arsenic
conducting quarterly ground waler monitoring; and
providing an alternative water supply to residents who
are potentially impacted by offsite migration of
contaminated ground water. The capital cost for this
remedial action is $160,000, with an annual O&M
cost is $30,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
No performance clean-up goals were provided for
remedial action. The subsequent ROD will address
the clean-up goals for the chemicals of concern in
soil, sediment, ground water, and surface water.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Alternate Water Supply; Arsenic. Benzene;
Carcinogenic Compounds, Direct Contact: Drinking
Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Intenm Remedy; Metals: O&M;
Organics; PCBs: Pesticides; Soil; Solvents; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, GW
VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes implementing site access restrictions at the
area of the site that was used for landfillmg and
disoosal of liauid wastes; posting warning signs ;
229
-------
SOUTH ANDOVER (OPERABLE UNIT 1) (AMENDMENT), MN
June 9, 1992
REGION 5
SITE H1STORYIDESCRIflION :
The 50-acre South Andover site is composed of
several privately owned parcels of land near
Minneapolis in Anoka County; Minnesota. Land use
in the area is predominately commercial and
residential, and several auto salvage and repair yards
are located at, and adjacent to, the site. The site
contains part of a wetlands area with several small
recreational lakes in the vicinity. The site overlies
three shallow aquifers. A lower bedrock aquifer
supplies the surrounding community with drinking
waler. Between 1954 and 1981, multiple waste
storage and disposal activities occurred on several
properties within the site boundaries. There are
several source areas where former activities included
drum storage, waste storage, and waste burning.
Solid and liquid chemical waste dumping and open pit
burning of solvents occurred during the 1960’s and
1970’s. Investigations showed that drum storage and
chemical waste disposal sites were partially obscured
by auto salvage operations and more than 3 million
waste ares. in 1976, citizen complaints of well
contamination prompted the state to investigate the
site and issue violations for improper storage of
chemical waste and, in 1980, for improper disposal of
industrial waste Waste processing was discontinued
in early 1977, and waste acceptance ceased in 1978
In 1981, the contents of approximately 700 drums
were disposed of by mixing with waste oil and using
the mixture as fuel, in 1988 and 1989. two tire fires
occurred onsite EPA investigations have determined
contamination of soil and ground water resulting from
soil that came into contact with leaking drums.
electrical transformers, and/or salvaged automobiles
A 1988 ROD addressed a ground water remedy that
provided extraction of the ground water from a
surficiai aquifer, provided municipal water to private
well users onsite, placed resmcuons on new wells
near the site, and monitored ground water This ROD
amendment changes the 1988 ROD for ground water
based on current data from a 1990 Design
investigation The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water are VOCs. including PCE,
TCE, and toluene. and metals, including arsenic,
chromium, and lead.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
monitonn around water at the site, abandoning
nonessential wells; and resampling wells, if action
levels are exceeded. The remedial design
investigation showed that there is no definable plume
at the site; rather, there are random detections of
compounds below background and regulatory
standards. Therefore, EPA and the state are deleting
three of four components identified in the 1988 ROD
remedy selection. The present worth cost for this
amended remedial action is $150,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Action levels for ground water at the site are based on
SDWA MCLs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Background Levels; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring. ROD Amendment: Treatability Tests:
Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 03/30/88
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
230
-------
SOUTH ANDOVER (OPERABLE UNIT 2), MN
December 24, 1991
REGION 5
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 50-acre South Andover site is composed of
several privately owned parcels of land near
Minneapolis in Anoka County. Minnesota. Land use
in the area is predominately commercial and
residential, and several auto salvage and repair yards
are located at, or adjacent to, the site. The site
contains part of a wetlands area with several small
recreational lakes in the vicinity. The site overlies
three aquifurs, one of which supplies the surrounding
community with drinking water. Between 1954 and
1981, multiple waste storage and disposal activities
occurred on several properties within the site
boundaries. Source areas include a drum storage
area, waste storage area, and waste burrnng area.
During the 1960’s and 1970’s. solid and liquid
chemical waste dumping and open pit burning of
solvents occurred. Investigations showed that drum
storage and chemical waste disposal sites were
partially obscured by both auto salvage operations and
an estimated 3 million waste tires. In 1976, citizen
complaints of well contanunation prompted the state
to investigate the site arid issue violations for
improper chemical waste storage, and in 1980. for
improper disposal of industrial waste. Waste
processing was discontinued in 1977, and waste
acceptance ceased in 1978. In 1981, the contents of
approximately 700 drums were disposed of by mixing
them with waste oil and using the rruxture as fuel,
then, in 1988 and 1989, two tire fires occurred onsite
EPA investigations determined that soil and ground
water contanunauon had resulted from contact with
leaking drums, electrical transformers, and/or salvaged
automobiles A 1988 ROD previously addressed the
contaminated ground waler onsite as OU 1 This ROD
addresses the contaminated onsite soil as 0U2 The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and debns are organics, including PAHs and PCBs.
and metals, including lead.
surface water and sediment. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $2,470,000,
which includes an O&M cost of $195,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil clean-up goals will meet AWQCs and Minnesota
surface water quality standards. Noncarcinogenic nsk
will be to a HI=1. Chemical-specific goals for soil
cleanup include PAHs 2 mg/kg; PCBs 2 mg/kg,
antimony 25 mg/kg; and lead 500 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
None.
KEYWORDS :
BiodegradationlLand Application; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Debris; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation, Lead; Metals; O&M;
Offsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs;
PCBs; Soil: Solvents; State Standards/Regulations;
Surface Water Monitoring, Treatment Technology;
Water Quality Criteria. Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 03130188
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil. Debris
Major Contaminants: Organics. Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and onsite treatment of 2,100 cubic yards
of PAH-contaminated soil using ex-situ biological
treatment, excavating and disposing of the remaining
9,300 cubic yards of PAIl-. PCB-, and metal-
contaminated soil from areas 2, 3, 4, and 7 in an
offsite solid waste landfill; sampling and removing
offsite approximately 20 onsite drums, and monitoring
231
-------
SPICKLER LANDFILL, WI
June 3, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWrION :
The 10-acre Spickler Landfill site is an inactive
municipal and industrial landfill located in Spencer.
Marathon County, Wisconsin. The site consists of a
mercury brine pit and two fill areas called the Old
and New Fill Areas. The two fill areas are separated
by a crude oil pipeline nght-of-way. The area
surrounding the site is sparsely populated and mainly
rural. Ownership of the Spickler Landfill site
changed frequently during its years of operation. In
1970. the site began operations as a municipal open
dump The same year. the state authorized the
construction of a clay-lined sludge disposal area at the
sue No documentation exists that venfles that the pit
was clay-lined as planned. In 1971, mercury brine
muds were disposed of in this sludge disposal area,
and the sludge disposal area was closed with a clay
cap Other industrial wastes known to have been
disposed of at the site include kalo dust, which
contained asbestos, and toluene. xylenes, methyl-ethyl
ketone, and rnethylene chloride. In 1972, the landfill
was licensed to accept solid wastes, including
industrial waste, with the exception of toxic and
hazardous materials Dunng 1973, numerous
violauons were noted by the state, including failure to
perform daily cover operations and ineffective
drainage control In 1974, the state ordered the
owners of the site to terminate operations and close
the landfill Between 1974 and 1975, most closure
and abandonment work was completed. including
placement, grading, and seeding of the landfill cover
A 1984 assessment revealed not only that areas of
leachate seepage occurred on both the north and south
faces of the New Fill Area. but also that the mercury
brine pit had subsided and appeared to be collecung
surface water This ROD provides a final remedy for
the first operable unit (01.11), which consists of the
mercury brine pit, and the landfill A future ROD
will address final remediation of ground water as
0U2 The primary contaminants of concern affecting
the soil, sludge, and leachate are VOCs, including
benzene, PCE. toluene, TCE, and xylenes, other
orgarncs, including pesticides, metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead, and inorgamcs ,
including asbestos
solidification and/or stabilization, based on results of
a treaiabihty test, and installing an impermeable cap
over the treated material; installing a solid waste cap
over the New and Old Fill areas with an active
leachate collection treatment system and a gas
collection system; discharging the treated leachate to
wetlands, surface water, or a POTW, based on the
results of TCLP testing; monitoring ground water,
leachate, and landfill gases, maintaining the landfill
caps; and implementing engineering and institutional
controls including deed restrictions. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$4,859,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$113,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Extracted leachate will be treated to appropriate
discharge levels as specified by federal and state
requirements prior to discharge to the wetlands,
surface water, or a POTW. Capping and closure of
the mercury brine pit are subject to the requirements
of RCRA, Subtitle C.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including access and deed
restrictions will be implemented onsite to prohibit
installation of drinking water wells and prohibit
construction on the landfill itself
KEYWORDS :
Acids, Arsenic, Asbestos; Benzene, Capping;
Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium: Clean Air Act;
Clean Water Act. Closure Requirements, Direct
Contact, Ground Water Monitoring, Inorganics;
Institutional Controls, Landfill Closure; Leachability
Tests; Leachate Collectionlrreatment, Lead, Metals;
O&M, Offsite Discharge; Onsite Discharge, Onsite
Disposal; Onsute Treatment, Organics, PCE,
Pesticides. Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW), RCRA. Sludge. Soil, Solidification.!
Stabilization, Solvents; State Permit, State
Standards/Regulations; TCE, Toluene, Trearability
Studies; Treatment Technology, VOCs, Xylenes
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating wastes in the mercury brine pit either by
232
-------
SPICKLER
LANDFILL, WI (Continued)
June 3, 1992
REGION 5
SITE SUMMARY
Date of prnious RODs: Notie
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, Sludge, Leachate
VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
233
-------
TAR LAKE, MI
September 29, 1992
REGION 5
SITE H1STORY/DESCRIFFION :
The 200-acre Tar Lake site is a former manufacturing
site in Antnm County, Michigan. located I mile south
of Mancelona, Michigan. near the village of Antrim.
Land use in the area is industrial/residential, with
several lakes and ponds in the vicinity of the site.
From 1882 to 1945. the site was the location of iron
production by the charcoal method. In 1910, Antnm
Iron Works Company began producing charcoal in
sealed retorts from which pyroligneous liquor was
recovered. This liquor was further processed into
calcium acetate, methanol, acetone, creosote oil, and
wood tar. Wastes from these processes were
discharged into Tar Lake, a large natural surface
depression. Investigations performed by EPA and
responsible parties revealed soil and ground water
contamination with concentrations above federal and
state regulatory levels. Ground water contamination
extends 3.5 miles downgradient from the site, and Tar
Lake has a strong chemical odor This ROD
addresses a final remedy for the soil and tar sludge,
as well as an intenm remedy to limit further
contamination of ground waler, as OUt. A future
ROD will address 0U2 as the final remedy for the
ground water and surface water contamination The
pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the soil, tar
sludge, ground water, and surface water are VOCs,
including benzene. toluene, and xylenes: and other
organics, including PAHs and phenols
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 30,000 cubic yards of tar
sludge and approximately 40,000 cubic yards of
conianunated soil in and around Tar Lake, with
dewatenng using extraction wells to facilitate
excavation, consolidating the excavated matenals into
Iwo adjoining RCR.A containment cells to be
constructed within the contamination area, adding
solidification agents, such as bentonite and cement to
the tar sludge. and capping the cell with a RCR.A
Subtitle C cap, installing a leacbate collection system,
pumping to contain the contaminated ground water,
water from the dewatenng process, and the ponded
water on Tar Lake, and treating these using carbon
adsorption or another technology based on the results
of a treatability study to be conducted during the pre-
design stage, injecting the treated water upgradient of
the extraction wells to perform a closed loop system ,
monitoring ground waxer and implementing
institutional controls, including ground water use
restrictions. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $20,100,000, which includes an
annual Q&M cost of $791,800.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
All soil and sludge with an excess cancer nsk level
greater than lx iO will be excavated from the site.
Chemical-specific soil and sludge clean-up levels
were based on the Michigan Environmental Response
Act and health-based criteria and include 2-
meth’ :phenol 8,000 ug/kg; benzene 0.4 uglkg;
benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, and
benzo(k)fluoranthene all at 100 ug/kg, phenols
6,000 uglkg; toluene 16,000 ug/kg; and xylenes
6 ,Q00 ug/kg. Because the ground water containment
is an intenm measure, ground waler clean-up
standards are waived. Chemical-specific clean-up
levels will be provided in the final action for ground
water onsite.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Ground water usage will be restricted within the areas
of the existing or potential contaminant plume.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver, Benzene, Capping, Carbon
Adsorption (GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds, Clean
Air Act. Direct Contact, Excavation, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring: Ground Water Treatment,
institutional Controls, Intenm Remedy, Landfill
Closure, Leachate Collecnonlrreatment; MCLGs;
MCLs, O&M, Onsite Containment: Onsite Disposal,
Onsite Treatment; Organics, PAHs, Phenols; Plume
Management, RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act,
Sludge. Soil, Sohdiflcation/Siabihzation, Solvents,
State Standards/Regulations, Surface Water, Surface
Water Collection/Diversion: Surface Water Treatment;
Toluene. Treatability Studies, Treatment Technology;
VOCs, Xylenes.
234
-------
REGION 5
TAR LAKE, MI (Continued)
September 29, 1992
Slit SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sludge, GW, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Waxer- Interim
235
-------
TORCH LAKE (OPERABLE UNITS I AND 3), MI
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE H1STORY/DESCRWFION :
The 2,700-acre Torch Lake site is a copper milling
and smelting facility in Houghton County, Michigan.
The site includes tailings/slag piles and beaches on
Torch Lake, the west shore of Torch Lake. the
northern portion of Portage Lake, Portage Lake Canal,
Keweenaw Waterway, the North Entry to Lake
Supenor, Boston Pond, and Calumet Lake in Lake
Linden, HubbelllTamarack City, Mason, Michigan
Smelter, Isle-Royale, Lake Supenor, Grosse Point,
Quincy Smelter, Hubbell, and other areas associated
with the Keweenaw Basin. Land use in the area is
predominantly residential and recreational. Wetlands
are located in proximity of some of the tailing piles
The lake, which was a repository of milling wastes,
served as the waterway for transportation to support
the mining industry Over 5 million tons of native
copper were produced from the Keweenaw Peninsula,
and more than half of this was processed along the
shores of Torch Lake Between 1868 and 1968,
approximately 200 million tons of tailings were
dumped into Torch Lake, filling at least 20 percent of
the lake’s onginal volume. In the late 1960’s, copper
milling ceased In 1972, a discharge of
27,000 gallons of cupnc ainmonium carbonate
leaching liquor occurred into the north end of Torch
Lake from the storage vats at the Lake Linden
Leaching Plant The state investigated the spill and
found no harmful effects associated with the spill,
however, discoloration of several acres of lake bottom
was noted In the 1970’s, high concentrations of
heavy metals in the lake’s sediment, toxic discharges
into the lakes, and fish abnormalities prompted many
investigations into the impact of mine waste disposal
From 1988 to 1989, EPA performed a removal action
that included removing drums and soil to an offsite
hazardous waste landfill This ROD addresses
removal of debns, surface tailings, and slag
pile/beach. and disposal of drums on the western
shore of the site, as OU I; and rernediauon of slag pile
locations through the mid-Keweenaw Peninsula. as
0U3. A subsequent ROD will address areas of
potential contamination in arid around Torch Lake,
including ground water, submerged tailings at the
bottom of the lake, sediment, and surface water, as
0U2. The pnmazy contaminants of concern affecting
the soil, debris, and slag pile/beach are organics,
including PANs: and metals, including arsenic,
chromium. and lead - ____________
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
placing a soil cover with vegetation over 442 acres of
tailings in Lake Linden, HubbelL/Tamarack City, and
Mason, and 9 acres in Hubbell; placing a soil cover
with vegetation over 229 acres of tailings in Calumet
Lake, Boston Pond, Michigan Smelter, Dollar Bay
slag pile, and Grosse Point; removing debns such as
wood, empty drums, and other garbage for offsiie
disposal; and implementing institutional controls,
including deed restrictions to control the use of tailing
piles and slag piles/beach. The Isle Royale taihngs
will be excluded from the area to be covered with sod
and vegetation. Twelve acres out of the
approximately 223-acres of the Isle-Royale tailings
will be developed as a sewage treatment plant; 90-
acres are designated to be developed as a residential
area; and 60-acres are currently being used as a
source material to make cement blocks. Also
excluded from the area to be covered are the area
designated by the Houghton County Road
Commission for use as source material for road
traction during the winter, the Quincy Smelter area
(based on the assumption that this area will be
developed as part of a National Historic Park); and
the North Entry, Redridge, and Freda tailings. If any
of these excluded areas has not been addressed as
planned within 5 years after RD submittal, that area
will then be subject to the requirements of this ROD
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $6,126,000, which includes an annual O&M
cost of $109,000 for 10 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil clean-up levels are not establisbed for this
remedial action
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to control the
use of tailing piles and slag piles/beach so that the
tailings and/or slag will not expose human beings and
animals to contaminants or increase the potential for
runoff of contaminants into the lake If the Quincy
Smelter area is not developed as a national park, deed
restrictions will be sought to prevent development of
residences in the slag pile area.
236
-------
REGION 5
TORCH LAKE (OPERABLE UNITS 1 AND 3), MI (Continued)
September 30, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium; Clean Air Act; Debris; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Lead; Metals; Mining Waste; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Onsite Containment; Onsite
Disposal; Organics; PAils; Soil; State Standards!
Regulations; Treatability Studies; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, Slag Pile/Beach
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - Intenm
237
-------
TRI COUNTY LANDFILL IL
September 30, 1992
REGION 5
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 66-acre In County Landfill (TCL) site comprises
two former landfills the Tn County Landfill and the
Elgin Landfill, located near the junction of Kane,
Cook and DuPage Counties, illinois. The two
disposal operations overlapped to the point where the
two landfills were indistinguishable. Land use in the
area is predominantly agncultural. The local residents
and businesses use private wells as their drinking
water supply. Prior to the 1940’s, both landfills were
used for gravel mining operations. From 1968 to
1976, the TCL received liquid and industrial waste.
State and county inspection reports revealed that open
dumping, area filling, and dumping into the
abandoned gravel quarry had occurred at the site In
addition, confined dumping, inadequate daily cover,
blowing litter, fires, lack of access restrictions, and
leachate flows were typical problems reported In
1981, the landfill was closed with a final cover.
From 1961 to 1976, the Elgin landfill received brush,
commercial rubbish, industrial wastes, and incinerator
ash without a formal waste disposal method. As a
result of residents’ complaints of suspected surface
and ground water contanunauon, the state ordered the
landfills to stop contaminating, pay penalties. and post
bonds The landfills never fully complied. Further
investigations revealed contamination in the soil and
ground waler from VOCs, SVOCs, metals, and
pesticides as well as venting of methane gas This
ROD addresses a final remedy for the soil, sediment.
debns, ground water, surface water, and air at the
site The primary contaminants of concern affecting
these media are VOCs, including benzene and TCE;
other organics, including PAHs, PCBs. and pesticides.
and metals, including arsenic.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and consolidating contaminated sediment
from the leachate ditch with contaminated onsite soil
and drummed drill cuttings; installing a clay cap over
these materials and regrading and revegetating the
site; installing interceptor trenches to collect
contaminated onsite ground water and leachate with
preireamient, if necessary, pnor to either onsite
discharge to surface water or offsite discharge to a
POTW, as determined during the RD. diverting
surface water from the waste areas, and collecting and
treaun surface water offsite: treating landfill gases
using a series of gas extraction wells connected to a
blower/flaring facility, prior to discharge to the
atmosphere; assessing and mitigating affected
wetlands, providing for contingency measures to
address changed conditions or previously unknown
contamination problems; allowing offsite
contaminated ground water to naturally attenuate;
monitoring soil, sediment, and surfaee waxer, and
implementing institutional controls including deed.
land, and ground waxer use restrictions, and site
access restrictions such as fencing. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$12,624,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$243,500 for 2 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
There are no chemical-specific standards established
for soil and sediment, however, nsk-based levels or
local background concentrations may be utilized. The
selected remedy will reduce potential exposure to
contaminated ground water to within acceptable nsks
of I x 10 to I x 10 excess cancer risk and an HI of
less than I
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions
will be implemented to regulate land use and prevent
future development or installation of drinking water
wells near the site
KEYWORDS :
Air, Arsenic, Renzene, Capping, Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act,
Contingent Remedy, Direct Contact, Drrnlung Water
Contaminants, Excavation, Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitonng, Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls, Landfill Closure, Leachate
Collecuonfrreatment, MCLGs. MCLs, Metals; O&M,
Offsite Discharge; Offsite Treatment. Onsite
Containment, Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PAHs, PCBs; PCE; Pesticides, Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW), RCRA. Safe
Drinking Water Act, Sediment, Soil, Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations, Surface Water, Surface Water
Collection/Diversion, Surface Waxer Monitoring;
Surface Water Treatment; TCE. Vacuum Extraction;
VOCs; Water Quality Cntena. Wetlands
238
-------
REGiON 5
TRI COUNTY LANDFILL, IL (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris,
GW, SW, Air
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
239
-------
TWIN CITIES AF RESERVE (SAR LANDFILL), MN
March 31, 1992
REGIONS
SITE HISTORYFDESCRIPTION :
The 2-acre Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill)
site is a former disposal area for U.S. Air Force
(USAF) main Base refuse in Minneapolis, Hennepin
County, Minnesota- Land use in the area consists of
a Small Arms Range, Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport, and Fort Snellmg State Park.
The site is within the 100-year flood plain of the
Minnesota River, and a wetlands associated with the
National Wildlife Refuge is located adjacent to the
site. The Small Arms Range Landfill (SARL),
acquired by the USAF in 1955, was used for disposal
of main Base refuse from 1963 to 1972. Industrial
wastes, which included paint sludge, paint filters, and
leaded aviation gasoline sludge, were buried at the
landfill. The SARL was closed in 1972. In 1982 and
1983, the state constructed a storrnwater retention and
settling pond, serving Interstate 494, in the eastern
part of the landfill The landfill overlies two aquifer
systems that receive recharge from the stormwater
retention areas. Additionally, the upper aquifer has
been shown to be connected hydraulically to the
Minnesota River. In 1983, the site was identified as
a hazardous waste site, and in 1987, was placed on
the NPL list because of suspected contaminant release
to ground water Based on preliminary investigations
VOCs, metals, and other organics were detected in the
soils, surface water, and ground water. This ROD is
the first and final action for the site and addresses
remediauon of the ground water The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground
water did not exceed ARARs and, therefore, are not
considered a threat since access restrictions addressed
in this ROD will be implemented at the site. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and ground water are VOCs, including 2-butanone
and ICE, and metals, including arsenic and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
allowing contaminated ground water to naturally
attenuate, maintaining the site, monitonog ground
water and surface water; and implementing
institutional controls, including deed restrictions, and
site access restrictions, such as fencing. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $737,000. which includes a present worth O&M
cost of $684,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The remediauon goal is to reduce the levels of
contaminants in the ground water to below MCLs
established under the SDWA and to ensure that
contaminant levels do not exceed federal or state
Water Quality Criteria for freshwater species or
potential drinking water sources. The remediation
will achieve a carcinogenic risk level within EPA’s
target range for acceptable excess carcinogenic risk of
l0 to 10k. Chemical-specific ground water clean-up
goals are based on SDWA MCLs or Minnesota RAL,
including arsenic 10 ug/l (RAL); beryllium I ug/l
(RAL);cadimum4 ugh (RAL); lead l5ug(l(SDWA);
nickel 70 ugh (RAL); selenium 10 ugh (RAL); ICE
5 ugh (SDWA); and vanadium 20 ugh (RAL)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to limit
development of the site and future ground water usage
if the property is relinquished by the USAF.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Floodplain; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls; Metals,
O&M: Safe Drinking Water Act: Solvents: State
Standards/Regulations; Surface Water Momtonng,
TCE; VOCs, Water Quality CntenL
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
24.0
-------
CAL WEST METALS, NM
September 29, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 43.8-aa e Cal West Metals site is a former
battery breaking, recycling, and secondary lead
smelting facility located one-half mile northwest of
Lemitar, Socono County, New Mexico. Land use in
the area is predominantly agricultural and residential,
with three households located within 1,100 feet south
of the site. From 1979 to 1981, Cal West used a 12-
acre fenced portion of the site for processing
automobile batteries for lead, rubber, and plastics
recovery. Batteries were crushed onsite and
components separated using flotation and
centrifugation in a rotating separator drum. Water
was recycled and ultimately discharged to a hned
pond, and piles of crushed battery components were
stored outdoors From 1982 to 1984, the facility was
used for research and development on methods of
lead recovery. Since 1985, the company has
conducted intermittent work onsite with the battery
waste piles to extract lead oxides, rubber, and plastics.
Current site features include two evaporation ponds.
three buildings. berms, soil and battery waste piles, a
concrete pad, and a salvage area. From 1979 to 1985,
the state conducted investigations to assess air and
ground water quality onsite In 1985, EPA
investigations showed elevated levels of lead in soil,
sediment. and ground water. This source control
ROD addresses the principal threat of lead
cont.aminanon at the site as a final remedy The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the battery
waste piles, soil, sediment, and debris are organics.
including PAHs, and metals, including arsenic and
lead.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS :
Chemical-specific soil and sediment clean-up goals
are established on health-based levels for carcinogenic
and noncarcinogenic risks and include arsenic
037 mg/kg; lead 640 mg/kg; mercury 0.82 mg/kg;
and PANs 3 mg/kg benzo(a)pyrene equivalents.
Contaminated matenals with lead concentrations
exceeding 640 mg/kg will be treated to meet the
RCRA TCLP standard of 5 mg/kg leachable lead
prior to onsite disposal.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Debris, Decontamination; Direct Contact
Excavation; Ground Water Monitoring: Lead; Metals:
O&M; Onsite Disposal: Onsite Treatment; Organics;
PAHs; RCRA; Sediment: Soil, Solidificanon/
Stabilization; Treatment Technology.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Spil. Debris. Sediment.
Waste Piles
Major Contaminants: Organics. Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating, consolidating, and treating an estimated
15,000 cubic yards of contaminated battery waste
matenals, soil, and sediment onsite using
stabihzauonisolidificauon, disposing of the treated
materials in the southwest corner of the fenced area
and capping the disposal area with cement and a 12-
inch soil cover: decontaminating onsite buildings and
equipment. and sampling ground water. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $1,557,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$5,000 for 30 years
241
-------
CRYSTAL CHEMICAL (AMENDMENT), TX
June 16, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWflON :
The 24.4-acre Crystal Chemical site consists of a 6.8-
acre abandoned herbicide manufacturing facility
(referred to as the onsite area) and 17.6 acres of
affected surrounding properties (referred to as the
offsite area) in Houston, Hams County, Texas. The
site, which lies within the 100-year floodplain of an
edjacent flood control channel, overhes a shallow
aquifer system. Surrounding land use is commercial
and industrial. From 1968 to 1981, herbicides,
including arsenic compounds. were manufactured
onsite. During that time several structures, tour
evaporation ponds, and many storage tanks were
utilized in site operations, and drums of raw and
finished product were routinely stored in the open.
During transfer of raw materials from rail cars, onsite
soil was contaminated by herbicides spilled from
drums. Contamination of offsite soil and sediment
was a result of penodic flooding, which caused
arsenic-contaminated onsite wastewater to move
offsite. In 1981, the site was abandoned, and
approximately 99,000 gallons of chenucal liquids in
a storage tank and 600,000 gallons of wastewater in
the evaporation ponds were left onsite Emergency
removal actions, conducted intermittently by EPA
from 1981 to 1988, included removing chemical
liquids and wastewater, temporarily capping the site,
dismantling and decontaminating sire structures.
constructing drains and fencing, and placing fill
material onsite. A 1990 ROD addressed onsite and
offsite soil and ground waxer. This ROD amends the
remedy for soil and replaces in-situ vitrification with
onsite disposal and capping The ground water
remedy will not change and will be implemented as
called for in the 1990 ROD The primary
contaminant of concern affecting the soil is the metal
arsenic
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The cap will comply with RCRA requirements for
landfill closure. The excavation goal for arsenic in
soil is 30 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including land use restrictions,
will be implemented at the site to prevent future use.
KEYWORDS :
Arseruc; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact; Excavation; Floodplain;
Institutional Controls; Landfill Closure; Metals; Onsne
Containment; Onsite Disposal; RCRA; ROD
Amendment; Soil
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 09127/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
excavating 55,000 cubic yards of contaminated offsite
soil with arsenic levels above 30 mg/kg and placing
the soil onsite, constructing a multi-layer cap over the
entire site, and implementing institutional controls,
including land use restrictions The estimated present
worth cost for this amended remedial action is
$5,803,300, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$140,079.
242
-------
DOUBLE EAGLE REFINERY, OK
September 28, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 12-acre Double Eagle Refinery (DER) site is a
former oil reclamation plant in Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. Land use in the area
is predommantly mixed industrial and residential with
a wetlands onsite. The residents and industries within
I mile of the DER site use city water from reservoirs
as their dnnking water supply. Additionally, the
North Canadian river is located one-half mile south of
DER. The Fourth Street Refinery Superfund site is
located 500 feet northeast of the DER site. The
Radio Tower Area and Parcel H Area are located to
the south and east of the site, respectively. The DER
site includes 13 steel buildings, a fire tube boiler, two
pipe heat exchangers, an undetermined number of
steel tanks, concrete cells, and five vacuum
precoatlscrapper filters. From 1929 to approximately
1970, DER used the site to recycle approximately
600.000 gallons of used oil each month into finished
lubncatmg oil. From approximately 1970 until 1980,
DER accepted used oil onto the site for storage only
The recycling process included adding sulfuric acid.
settling, and filtrating with bleaching clays via a filter
press, which generated approximately 80.000 gallons
of sludge monthly Sludge was initially sent offsite
for disposal, but later was disposed of in onsite
impoundments and a sludge lagoon Offsite drainage
from DER occurred onto Parcel H, which includes
oily sediments in two surface ponds, and onto Radio
Tower, which contains a surficiai tar matrix EPA
investigations revealed 42,000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil, sediment, surface water, and air.
Contaminated areas included a sludge lagoon, surface
spill area. surface impoundments. and process
equipment. This ROD addresses a final remedy for
OU1, Source Control Operable Unit. A subsequent
ROD will address ground water contamination The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, sludge, debris, and surface water are VOCs,
including benzene and PCE, other orgaxucs. including
PAHs and PCBs. metals, including arsenic and lead.
and acids.
contaminated materials from the DER impoundment
and open areas; treating the 42,000 cubic yards of
consolidated materials onsite using neutralizing agents
for the acidic wastes and solidification/stabilization to
remove inorgarucs; using surface water from the
impoundments in the stabilization processes;
excavating the solidified material and transporting this
offsite for disposal in a RCRA landfill; demolishing
contaminated onsice equipment or structures, including
above-ground storage tanks, with salvage and/or
removal; disposing of any asbestos-containing
material, as needed, and monitoring ground water.
The ectunated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $6,400,000. There are no O&M costs
associated with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific goals for soil, sediment, and sludge
are based on meeting a risk of 10 to l0 and an
H1=lO. including lead 500 mg/kg; PAHs; and PCBs
25 mg/kg. All other residual materials will meet
RCRA TCLP regulatory limits prior to offsite
disposal
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Acids, Arsenic, Asbestos, Benzene, Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Air Act, Debris, Direct Contact,
Excavation, Ground Water Monitoring: Lead, Metals,
Offsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Organics, PAHs,
PCBs, PCE. RCRA, Sediment, Sludge, Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations. Surface Water; Surface Water
Treatment; Toluene; Treatment Technology, VOCs,
Wetlands, Xylenes
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACT1ON :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 2,700 cubic yards of
contaminated materials from the two offsite areas,
Radio Tower and Parcel H, and consolidating these
onsite within the East/West_ lagoon along with
243
-------
REGION 6
DOUBLE EAGLE REFINERY, OK (Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Sludge,
Debris, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals, Acids
Category: Source Control - Final Action
244
-------
FOURTH STREET ABANDONED REFINERY, OK
September 28, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 27-acre Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery (FSR)
site is located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Land
use in the area is mixed industrial and residential.
Four schools are located within a 1-mile radius of the
site. Portions of the FSR site have been identified as
wetlands. Since the early 1940’s, used oils were
collected, stored, re-refined, and distributed as
recycled product. Another Superfund site, the Double
Eagle Refinery (DER), lies about 500 feet southwest
of the FSR site. The two adjacent sites contain very
similar waste material since both sites recycled used
oil. Contamination from FSR has contributed to
contamination in an area just south of the FSR site,
known as the “Parcel H” area. Sludge generated by
the reclamation process was disposed of in onsite
impoundments Physical dumping also occurred in a
landfill area just west of the Parcel H area, but this
waste is not attributable to either the FSR or DER
sites. Operations ceased in the late 1960’s or early
1970’s. In 1989, EPA notified the owners to conduct
a removal at the site; however, the parnes declined
Later in 1989, EPA performed a removal action.
which included fencing the site and posting warning
signs This ROD addresses both onsite and offsite
sources of contamination, including soil, sediment,
sludge, debns, and surface water as the source control
operable unit This ROD also focuses on reducing
the potential for contaminant migration to surface
water and ground water A subsequent ROD will
address the potential migration of site contaminants
via the ground water and surface water pathways
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil, sediment, sludge. and debns are orgarucs,
including PAHs and PCBs; metals, including arsenic
and lead, and inorgamcs, including asbestos
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 1200 cubic yards of the contaminated
material from the Parcel H area and consolidating this
onsite along with other contaminated material, treating
approximately 42,000 cubic yards of the consolidated
soil, sediment, sludge, and debris onsite using
neutralization of the acidic waste and stabthzaiion of
the lead-contaminated materials, disposing of the
treated wastes at a permitted landfill, and cleamng,
consolidating, demolishing, and salvaging and/or
removing contaminated equipment, structures. and
asbestos, as necessary. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $6,400,000. There are
no O&M costs associated with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil clean-up levels are established for consolidated
materials that will be stabilized to ensure that leaching
does not exceed the TCLP. Chemical-specific goals
for soil correspond to the TSCA clean-up level for
mdusmal land use, regional guidance for setting
remedial goals, and industrial land use for the FSR
site. These include lead 500 mg/kg; PAHs 30 mg/kg;
and PCBs 25 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Asbestos; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Air Act; Clean Closure, Closure Requirements;
Debris, Direct Contact; Excavation: Landfill Closure;
Lead, Metals: Offsite Disposal. Onsite Treatment,
Organics: PAHs, PCBs, RCRA; Sediment; Sludge;
Soil; Solidification/Stabilization; State
Standards/Regulations; Treatment Technology;
Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
Date or previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media:
Soil, Sediment, Sludge,
Debris
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals,
lnorgamcs
Category Source Control - Final Action
245
-------
GULF COAST VACUUM SERVICES (OPERABLE UNIT 1), LA
September 30, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWI’ION :
The 12.8-acre Gulf Coast Vacuum Services site is a
former vacuum truck and oil field plant in Vermilion
Parish, Louisiana. Land use in the area is
predorrunantly agricultural. Ten residences within
one-half mile of the site use the ground water below
the Chicot Aquifer for drinking water and irrigation.
The site is bounded to the north and west by pasture
land, and to the east and south by another Superfund
site, the D. L. Mud Superfund site, and the LeBoeuf
Canal. From 1969 to 1980, several owners used the
site as a trucking terminal to transport various metals,
including waste generated from oil exploration and
production activities. The site includes two open
waste pits—specifically, the Washout Pit and West
Pit—and two vegetated areas, known as the Former
West Pit. The Former West Pit adjoins the West Pit
to the south and was used for disposal. Other site
features include vertical storage tanks, horizontal
tanks, and three underground storage tanks. During
site operations, unpermitted disposal of primarily oil
industry-related waste occurred in the unlined pits,
ditches, and site soil. EPA investigations, which
started in 1980, led to three removal actions at the
site from 1990 to 1992. These removal actions
addressed contaminant overflow caused by critical
rainfall, from both the West Pit and Washout Pit,
provided for construction of a secondary containment
levee west of the West Pit; pumping, treatment, and
discharge of wastewaler from the two pits, and
fencing the area. This ROD addresses the final
remedial action for all of the sources of contamination
as OUI Future RODs will address the contaminated
overflow and the migration from offsite pits, as 0U2
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil, sediment, pit sludge, and ground waxer are
VOCs, including benzene, other organics, including
PCBs and naphthalene; and metals, including arsenic
and barium.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
consolidation and onsite incineration of approximately
12,000 cubic yards of organic- and inorganic-
contaminated waste pit sludge and 7,950 cubic yards
of associated soil, 12,000 gallons of tank contents,
and 155 cubic yards of tank sludge, followed by
stabilization/solidification of the residual ash, if
necessary: stabilizing and solidifying onsite
approximately 18,900 cubic yards of site inorganic-
contaminated soil, and 600 cubic yards of surface
sediment; disposing of all of these residuals in an
onsite excavation and covering the area with a clay
cover, allowing ground water to naturally attenuate;
monitoring ground water in the upper and lower
uifers; conducting onsite and offsite air monitoring;
treating air emissions as needed; and implementing
institutional controls, including deed restrictions. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $13,026,000, which includes an annual O&M cost
of $18,050 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil, sediment., and pit sludge goals
are based on SDWA MCLs, and include arsenic
16 ug/kg; barium 5,400 mg/kg; and benzene
0.66 mg/kg. Ground water is expected to meet the
National Pnmary Drinking Water and health-based
standards. Chemical-specific goals for ground water
are based on SWDA MCLs and MCLGs, and include
arsenic 50 ug/l (MCL), barium 2,000 ugh (MCL);
cadmium 5 ugh (MCL); total chromium 100 ugh
(MCL); total mercury 2 ug/1 (MCL); and benzene
5 ugh (MCL).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed resmctions, will
be implemented onsite to prevent disturbance of the
clay cover
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Benzene; Capping; Carcinogenic
Compounds, Chromium: Debris, Direct Contact;
Dredging; Excavation, Ground Water: Ground Water
Monitoring; incineration/Thermal Destruction,
institutional Controls, Lead, MCLs: Metals, O&M;.
Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal, Onsite
Treatment; Organics; PAils; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act, Sediment; Sludge; Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; Solvents; Treatability
Studies; Treatment Technology; VOCs, Xylenes
246
-------
REGION 6
GULF COAST VACUUM SERVICES (OPERABLE UNIT 1), LA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Sludge,
GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
247
-------
GULF COAST VACUUM SERVICES (OPERABLE UNIT 2), LA
September 30, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 12.8-acre Gulf Coast Vacuum Services site is a
former vacuum truck and oilfield drilling mud plant
in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana Land use in the
surrounding area is predominantly agricultural, and
the site is situated in the low-lying flatland of the
Atlantic Gulf Coastal Plain. Ten residences, located
within a half mile, use the ground waier below the
site, the Chicot Aquifer. for drinking water as well as
imgation. The site is bounded to the east and south
by the D.L. Mud Superfund site, which is being
evaluated separately. From 1969 to 1984, several
owners used the site as a trucking terminal for
transporting various materials, primarily waste
generated from oil exploration and production. The
site contains two open waste pits, specifically, the
Washout Pit and the West Pit, as well as two areas
covered with vegetation, known as the Former West
Pit. The Former West Pit, located south of the West
Pit, was used for disposal Additionally, there are
four vertical storage tanks, honzontai tanks, and three
underground storage tanks. Unpermitted disposal of
contaminated matenals, primanly oil industry-related
waste, occurred in the unlined pits, ditches, and soil
at the site in 1980, a citizen’s complaint through the
Vermilion Association for Protection of the
Environment prompted several site investigations by
EPA. EPA has conducted three removal actions at
the site, addressing contaminated overflow from the
Washout and West pits in 1990, overflow from the
West pit into a previously constructed secondary
containment area in 1991, and critical rainwater
accumulation in the Washout Pit and the West Pit in
1992 All three removals involved pumping, treating,
and discharging the wastewaters to prevent offsite
migration and human exposure This ROD addresses
an interim remedy for 0U2, the rainfall accumulation,
contaminated overflow, and offsite migration from the
Washout and West Pits The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil, sludge. and surface water
(rainwater) are VOCs, including beniene, PCE, TCE.
toluene, and xylenes, other organics, including dioxin,
PAHs, PCBs, pesticides, and phenols, and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
Washout Pit to 2 feet below where contpmInant Levels
exceed the remedial action goals, and consolidating
these materials into the West Pit to achieve positive
drainage; backfiuing excavated areas with clean soil,
and covering the We,st Pit with an impermeable
synthetic membrane cover; pumping and onsite
treatment of 1,700,000 gallons of contaminated
rainwater, with discharge of the treated rainwater
onsite: abandoning three onsite water supply wells;
and momtonng air during the excavation. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $525,200, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$5,000 for 27 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific remedial action goals were
developed for the accumulated rainwater based on
state effluent pollution concentration Limits, and for
the soil and sludge based on health-risk values. Soil
and sludge excavation levels include arsenic 16 ug/kg;
barium 5,400 mg/kg; benzene 0.66 mg/kg; and
carcinogenic PAHs 3 mg/kg Chemical-specific goals
or surface water include arsenic 137 ug/l: barium 2
ugfl, benzene 100 ugh, chromium 343 ugh: endrin
180 mgll, lead 275 ugh; PCE 100 ug;l, phenol 47
ugh I,andTCE69ug/1
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring, Arsenic, Benzene; Capping;
Carcinogenic Compounds. Chromium. Clean Air Act;
Dioxin, Direct Contact; Excavation, Interim Remedy.
Lead, Metals; O&M, Onsite Containment; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal, Onstie Treatment,
Organics, PAHs, PCBs, PCE, Pesticides, Phenols,
RCRA. Sludge, Solvents. State Standards/Regulations,
Surface Water, Surface Water Collection/Treatment,
ICE, Toluene, VOCs, Xylenes
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating 2,700 cubic yards of contaminated sludge
and 550 cubic yards of associated soil from the
248
-------
REGION 6
GULF COAST VACUUM SERVICES (OPERABLE UNIT 2), LA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 06/30192
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sludge, SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Contml - Intenm
249
-------
KOPPERS (TEXARKANA PLANT) (AMENDMENT), TX
March 4. 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWI’ION :
The 62-acre Koppers (Texarkana Plant) site is a
former wood treatment facility located in Texarkana.
Texas. The site consists of a 34-acre residential area
and a 28-acre former sand and gravel operation. The
entire site lies within a 100-year flood plain. From
1910 to 1961, the Koppers Company treated wood
onsite using PCP, creosote, and metallic salts. After
onsite operations ceased in 1961, the structures were
removed and the property was sold for residential and
industrial development. In 1964. Carver Terrace, Inc.
developed the northern 34 acres of the site for
residences. Kennedy Sand and Gravel Company
owns the remaining southern 28 acres, which operated
as a sand and gravel quarry from the late 1970s to
1984 In 1975, Mount Zion Missionary Baptist
Church purchased a small portion of the site from
Carver Terrace Inc to construct a church. In 1980,
an investigation conducted by both the state and the
Koppers Company identified onsite soil and ground
water contaminated with PCP, arsenic, and creosote.
In 1985, EPA placed clean soil and sod on some of
the yards in the subdivision as a protective measure to
reduce exposure to contaminated soil. A 1988 ROD
provided for onsite treatmern of contaminated soil
using soil washing and treating the ground water and
non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) using oil/water
separation and carbon treatment. However, the
remedial action was not initiated because of a
Congressional mandate set forth in the Conference
Report to the FY92 Appropriations Bill stipulating
that EPA purchase homes located on the site and
provide relocation assistance to the residents This
1992 ROD amendment appends the provisions of the
mandate to the remedy, as established in the 1988
ROD The pnrnazy contaminants of concern, as
provided in the 1988 ROD, affecting the soil.
sediment, debris, and ground water are VOCs,
including benzene, toluene, and xylenes. other
organics. including PAHs and PCP, and metals,
including arsenic
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The amended remedial action for this ROD includes
implementing all treatment actions provided for in the
1988 ROD, which include onsite soil washing as well
as treatment of ground water using an oil and water
separator and granular activated carbon treatment
nurchasina onsite residences: permanently relocating
affected residents; demolishing homes and removing
and disposing of debris offsite; implementing
institutional controls, including deed and land use
restrictions; and reclassifying the property from
residential to non-residential use. The estimated
amended present worth cost for this remedial action
is $12,400,000, which includes an annual O&M cost
ranging from $316,200 to $329,200 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific clean-up goals remain the same as
those provided in the 1988 ROD. Soil clean-up goals
include excavation to a 100 mg/kg action level of
total carcinogenic PAHs based on a risk level between
iO and 10 . Ground water clean-up goals are not
provided but were based on Best Available Treatment
Requirements (BAT) for the Organic Chemical,
Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers Industry.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed, land use, and zoning resmctions will be
implemented to prevent future residential development
of the site.
KEYWORDS :
Carbon Adsorption (GAC), Carcinogenic Compounds;
Debris, Direct Contact; Excavation, floodplain;
Institutional Controls: O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment, Organics. PAHs; Relocation: ROD
Amendment, Soil. Treatment Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/23/88
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, Debris,
GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
250
-------
MOSLEY ROAD SANITARY LANDFILL, OK
June 29, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 72-aa e Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill site is an
inactive municipal Landfill in Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma County, Oklahom& Land use in the area
is primarily residential and undeveloped with
875 residents within a one-mile radius of the site.
The North Canadian River flows about one-half mile
west of the site, and Crutcho Creek flows near the
eastern boundary of the site. The site overlies two
aquifers: an alluvial aquifer and the Garber-
Wellington aquifer, which is a source of drinking
water for three cities near the landfill. Both of these
ground water areas have been impacted by migration
of landfill contaminants. Several wetland areas are
located in the vicinity of the landfill, in 1973, the
site was permitted as a sanitary landfill, and between
February and August 1976, the state authorized the
landfill to accept industrial hazardous waste. During
this 6-month period, the Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill accepted approximately 1.7 million gallons of
mostly liquid industrial hazardous waste Types of
wastes included industrial sludge, caustic matenal,
plating sludge, acid solutions, oil emissions, alkaline
solutions, solvents, paint sludge, toxaphene. and TCE.
Waste was deposited into unlined waste pits. which
are currently buned under 80 feet of municipal refuse
In 1987, the landfill reached its permitted capacity
and was closed In 1988, a compacted clay cover was
installed in accordance with existing closure
regulations. and the area was vegetated to reduce
erosion. This ROD addresses the source (waste pits)
and the contaminated ground water as a final remedial
action for this site. The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil. debns, and ground water
are VOCs, including beazene, and metals, including
arsenic
water use restrictions. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $3,600,000. No O&M
costs were provided for this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
All potential drinking water impacted by the site will
meet SDWA MCLs. Chemical-specific cleanup goals
for ground water include arsenic 0.05 mg/I; barium
1 mg/I; selenium 0.01 mg/kg; and vinyl chloride
0.002 mg/kg. Chemical-specific clean-up goals for
the soil and debris were not provided.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented. including
deed, land, and ground water use restrictions.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Background Levels; Benzene; Capping;
Carcinogenic Compounds; Contingent Remedy,
Debris, Direct Contact: Dunking Water Contaminants;
Ground Water, Ground Waxer Monitoring; Ground
Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; MCLs;
Metals; Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal: RCRA,
Safe Dnnking Water Act; Soil; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; VOCs, Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of preiious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, GW
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
repairing and improving the existing cap and adding
a vegetative soil layer to reduce erosion and
infiltration; allowing ground water to naturally
attenuate, installing a landfill gas monitonng system,
using ground water monitoring and penodic sampling
to monitor leachate migration: providing a
contingency for active ground water extraction and
treatment, if after 5 years natural attenuation has not
decreased contaminant levels, and implementing
institutional controls including deed. land. and ground
251
-------
OKLAHOMA REFINING, OK
June 9, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTiON :
The 160-acre Oklahoma Refining site is a petroleum
tefinery located on the eastern edge of Cytil,
Oklahoma in Caddo County. Land use in the area is
predominantly rural, with the township of Cyril
bordenng the western edge of the site and creek
systems bordering the eastern and southern edges.
The facility included refinery process areas, buLk
storage tanks, waste pits, wastewater treatment ponds,
and a land treatment area. From the 1920’s until
1984, the Oklahoma Refining facility produced
refining products onsite, winch included gasoline,
naphtha. asphalt. and nonchiorinated solvents. Wastes
generated from these processes were generally
disposed of in unlined product and waste storage pits
or were applied to land. Refinery wastewaters were
directed into an oil and water separator, treated in a
senes of surface impoundments, and discharged into
an adjacent creek. In 1984, the Oklahoma Refining
Company (ORC) removed 5,000 barrels of light non-
aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) from the ground water
table. Dunng the rnid-1980’s, EPA investigations
revealed large-scale organic and heavy metal
contamination of onsite soil and ground waler. In
1990, EPA conducted a removal action, which
included chiactenzauon and removal of drums,
plugging wells, and wildlife protection measures
This ROD addresses the remedianon of onsite
contaminated soil, sediment, surface water, and
ground water as a final remedy The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, sediment,
debns, ground water, and surface water are VOCs.
including benzene, toluene, and xylenes other
organics, including PANs and phenols, and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes in-
situ bioremedianon of organic contaminated sediment,
tn-situ stabilization of inorganic contaminated
sediment, followed by capping, removing and treating
all surface water collected from surface
impoundments, excavating and onsite containment of
contaminated soil and sediment that exceed health-
based levels, excavating and neutralizing low pH
sediment, followed by replacing the treated materials
in the onginal areas, excavating and recycling
asphaltic materials: treating sediment and soil thai
cannot be treated in-situ using prepared-bed
bioremediauon, followed by stabilization, if needed,
and onsite disposal and containment; extracting and
containing LNAPLs-contaminaled ground water, and
treating the collected ground water along with surface
water and storm waxer in an onsite treatment facility
with a treannent process, which would include an oil
and water separator to remove NAPLS and air
stripping and/or activated carbon to remove organics,
and using either oxidation, reduction, precipitation,
and filtration or any combination of these to remove
inorganics: injecting nutrients along with the treated
water into the contaminated portion of the aquifer to
enhance in-situ bioremediation; recycling the
recovered hydrocarbons; monitoring ground water;
plugging all unnecessary wells; and implementing
institutional controls, including deed and ground water
use restrictions and site access restrictions, such as
fencing. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $31,712,000, which includes an
annual O&M cost of $425,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The chemical-specific standards are based on
Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) for each affected
medium. For soil, subsurface soil, and sediment.
RAOs are health-based depending on whether
exposure would result from leaching (ground water
protection) or ingestion. Chemical-specific standards
for ground water and surface water include arsenic
005 mg/kg. barium 1 mg/kg, benzene 0005 mg/kg:
chromium 0.1 mg/kg. lead 0.015 mg/kg; 2-methyl
napthalene 0 15 mg/kg; 2- and 4 -methylphenol 1 8
mg/kg; naphthalene 0.15 mg/kg: phenol 22 mg/kg;
and toluene 1 mg/kg. Chemical-specific standards for
sediment and surface soil include arsenic 25 mg/kg;
banum 13,500 mg/kg, benzene 22 mg/kg,
benzo(a)anthracene 4.i mg/kg. chromium 1.350
mg/kg: ethylbeazene 27,000 mg/kg, lead 600 mg/kg,
toluene 54,000 mg/kg; and xylenes 540.000 mg/kg.
Chemical-specific standards for subsurface soil
include arsenic 305 mg/kg, benzene 0.2 mg/kg:
chromium 770 mg/kg; lead 865 mg/kg; napbthalene
79 mg/kg; and phenol 125 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
A notice will be attached to the properly deed to
inform future land owners that the onsite ground
water is contaminated and should not be used as a
dnnlung water source .
252
-------
REGION 6
OKLAHOMA REFINING, OK (Continued)
June 9, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Arsenic; Beozene; Biodegradation/Land
Application; Capping; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act;
Defeffed Decision. Duect Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation; Filling; Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls; Leachabibty Tests; Lead;
MCLs; Metals; O&M; Onsite Containment; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PAHs; Phenols; Plume Management;
RCRA; Safe Dnnking Water Act; Sediment; Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; Surface Water; Surface Water
Collection/Diversion; Surface Water Treatment;
Toluene: Treatment Technology; VOCs; Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment. Debris,
GW. SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
253
-------
PREWIT ABANDONED REFINERY, NM
September 30, 1992
REGION 6
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 70-acre Prewitt Abandoned Refinery site is an
abandoned crude oil refinery near the City of Prewitt
in McKinley County, New Mexico. Land use in the
area is predominantly rural. Some of the estimated
75 people who reside within I mile of the site use the
Sonsela Sandstone Bed Aquifer as their drinking
water supply source. From 1938 to 1957, various
companies, including the Atlantic Richfield Company
(ARCO) and El Paso Natural Gas (EPNG) Company,
used the site for basic refining operations. The main
onsite processing units included a distillation plant,
thermal cracker, and reformer Crude oil in storage
tanks was separated into different fractions via a
distillation tower Separated fractions were stored in
tanks throughout the facility. Because of a lack of
waste management units, wastes were disposed of
onsite near the point of generation Wastewaters and
accidental spills were usually released in unlined
earthen ditches throughout the refinery area. These
ditches led to a concrete tank, which was used as an
oil/water separator. Oil portions recovered from the
separator were returned to the refinery process,
whereas water and heavier materials were released to
a nearby arroyo (gully) In the early operation of the
plant, the emergency release system consisted of
releasing partially processed oil products to bermed
containment areas on the western edge of the facility.
After the refinery closed in 1957. the accompanying
structures were dismantled, but the site still contains
processing remnants, including piping, pits, an
oil/water separator, and other waste and structural
material. As a result of a citizen’s complaint in 1980.
PRPs conducted a remedial investigation under EPA
oversight that revealed metals, PAHs, and asbestos
contamination in sods, separator wastes, and Non-
Aqueous Phase Liquids (NAPLs) in addition to lead,
1,2 dichloroethane, benzene, toluene, ethylbeozene.
and xylene in ground water located beneath the site
In 1989, EPA directed the PRPs to fence the site and
install activated carbon filtration units on five affected
residential wells. In 1991, PRPs removed
approximately 800 cubic yards of asbestos-containing
material offsite. This ROD addresses remediauon of
all contaminated media at the site as a final action
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil, sludge, and ground water are VOCs, including
benzene, TCE, toluene, and xylenes; other orgamcs,
including PMIs; metals, including lead; and
inorganics, including asbestos.
SELECrED REMEDIAL ACflON :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
extracting contaminated ground water and using an oil
and water separator to remove NAPLs; treating
approximately 43,000 gallons of extracted NAPLs
onsite using soil vapor extraction to remove VOCs
from soil, along with a thermal catalytic oxidizer to
destroy VOC vapor emissions; excavating,
consolidating, and onsite landfarrning of
approximately 1,175 cubic yards of waste from the
West Pits area and approximately 1,500 cubic yards
of soil contaminated with high levels of hydrocarbons,
and placing a vegetative cover over the area after
completion of treatment; excavating, containerizing,
and removing offsite 15 cubic yards of asbestos
contaminated material and soil; excavating and
treating as necessary, 1,900 cubic yards of lead-
contaminated surface soil with levels in excess of 500
mg/kg or subsurface soil with lead levels greater than
1,000 mg/kg, followed by offsite disposal; excavating
any sludge retrieved from the oil/water separator, with
offsite pretreatment and/or disposal, treating any
contaminated soil identified beneath the separator
onsite by landlarming or offsite by incineration,
pending testing results, and backfllhng the separator
area, pumping and onsue treatment of the
contaminated ground water using air sparging to
remove orgazucs, and reinjecting the treated water
onsite. installing and maintaining activated carbon
treatment units ax domestic wells that exceed MCLs;
monitoring soil, ground water, private wells, and air;
and implementing institutional controls, including
deed, land, and ground water use restrictions, and site
access restrictions. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $16,301,576, which
includes a total O&M cost of$1,097,844 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Clean-up standards for soil and waste are based on
health-based levels and EPA policy and provide for
the complete removal of asbestos, and the cleanup of
lead to 500 mg/kg within the top 2 feet of soil and
1.000 mg/kg of lead for soil depths greater than
2 feet. Chemical-specific ground water clean-up
goals are based on state standards and SDWA MCLs
254
-------
REGION 6
PREWITT ABANDONED REFINERY, NM (Continued)
September 30, 1992
and include benzene 5 ugh; toluene 750 ugh; xylenes
620 ugfl; and lead 15 ugh. Chemical-specific goals
for soil and sludge include benzo(a)pyrene 0.9 mg/kg;
benzo(a)anthracene 9 mg/kg; and lead.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions will be implemented onsite to
prevent well installation.
KEYWORDS :
Aeration; Air Monitonng; Asbestos, Benzene:
Biodegradation/Land Application; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Debns; Direct
Contact; Excavation, Ground Water, Ground Water
Monitoring. Ground Water Treatment, Inorganics;
Institutional Controls; Leachability Tests; Lead.
MCLs; Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal, Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment; Orgamcs. PAHs. RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act, Sludge, Soil; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations. Toluene, Treatability Studies,
Treatment Technology. Vacuum Extraction, VOCs.
Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federai Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sludge, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs Other Organics.
Metals. lnorgaiucs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
255
-------
29TH AND MEAD GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION, KS
September 29, 1992
REGION 7
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 1,440-acre 29th and Mend Groundwater
Contamination site is an active manufacturing facility
in north-central Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas.
Since I 887, land use in the area has been
predominantly industrial. In 1947, the property was
purchased by Coleman, Inc., for the manufacture of
household furnace and air conditioning units
Previous onsite activities had included the
manufacture of railway cars, automobiles, light
aircraft, and electronically controlled aircraft. In
1987, Recreational Vehickes Products (RV) purchased
approximately 10 percent of the property to use for
manufacturing air conditioners for recreational
vehicles. Since 1990, the remaining 90 percent has
been occupied by Evcon Industries. Evcon’s portion
of the site, which is the former Coleman Heating.
Ventilation and Air Conditioning facihty, includes a
manufacturing plant (North Plant) and an
administration/engineering building Several industrial
wells are currently in operation to support Evcon’s
operations, which consist of the production of
consumer furnaces and air-conditioning systems
intended for conventional residential use. The
manufacturing process uses solvents for metal
cleamng, prior to painting and fabrication of furnace
or air-conditioning umts In 1983, EPA, the U.S.
Geological Survey, and the state began investigating
the ground water at the site and found elevated levels
of several VOCs In 1988, Coleman and the state
initiated a ground water recovery and treatment
program, which uses two 40-foot air strippers and a
soil vapor extraction (SVE) program to meat
contaminated soils in a 65.000-square-foot area.
Water from the system is discharged to the Wichita
Drainage Canal under a CWA NPDES permit issued
by the state This ROD, which focuses on the
Coleman Operable Unit, addresses soil contamination
as a final remedial action and provides interim
measures for the contaminated ground water A
future ROD is planned to address a final remedy for
the ground water at the site. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground
water are VOCs, including l,l-DCA, 1,1,l-TCA,
TCE, and PCE.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
continued operation and expansion of the existing
SVE system to remediale other onsite source areas;
monitoring the performance of the SVE system, and
establishing goals during the RD phase; enhancing the
hydraulic control of the existing ground waler
extraction and air stripping treatment system by
adding a well at the southern site boundary; treating
ground water onsite using air snipping, with discharge
of the treated water offsite under a NPDES permit:
monitoring air emissions from the ground water
treatment system and the SVE system. with possible
treatment of the emissions, if necessary; and
monitoring the ground water collection/treatment
system and the contaminant plume. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is
$1,638,456. which includes an annual O&M cost
ranging from $78,900 to $182,200 for 18 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals for the
expanded SVE system will be developed during the
Remedial Design phase. Chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goals are based on SDWA MCLs and
CWA discharge hnuts and include 1,I-DCA 7 ugh,
PCE 5 ugh; l,1.l-TCA 200 ug/I; and TCE 5 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Air Stripping, Carcinogenic
Compounds, Clean Water Act, Direct Contact,
Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring. Ground Water Treatment; MCLs;
O&M; Offsite Discharge, PCE, Plume Management,
Safe Drinking Water Act. Soil. State Permit. State
Standards/Regulations, TCE; Treatment Technology;
Vacuum Extraction, VOCs; Xylenes
256
-------
REGION 7
29TH AND MEAD GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION, KS (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODS: Non
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Interim
257
-------
DES MOINES TCE, IA
September 18, 1992
REGION 7
SITE HISTORYFDESCRIFI’ION :
The Des Moines TCE site is located southwest of
downtown Des Moines, Polk County, Iowa. Land use
in the area is predominantly industhal and
commercial, and part of the site lies within the
floodplain of the Raccoon River. An underground
infiltration gallery, used by the Des Moines Waxer
Works, is located directly south of the site and serves
as a source of public drinking water. EPA site
investigations began in the m id-1970’s when
chlorinated organic contaminants were detected in the
Des Moines public water supply. Waxer from the Des
Moines Water Works north infiltration gallery was
found to be contaminated with tnchloroethylene
(TCE), dichloroetbylene (DCE). and vinyl chlonde at
levels above accepted dnnking water standards
Several businesses that handled the contaminants of
concern are or were located within the site
boundaries. A 1986 ROD addressed OU1 and
provided for extraction of ground water in the
floodplain of the Raccoon River through recovery
wells and treatment using air snipping, with discharge
to the Raccoon River. This ROD addresses 0U3,
which encompasses potential sources of ground water
contamination in an area north of the Raccoon River,
commonly known as the “North Plume” Future
RODs will address the South Area Source Control
unit as 0U2 to mitigate the release of contamination
entering the ground water, the South Pond Drainage
Area Source Control unit as 0U4 to address pesticide
soil contamination in the southeast portion of the site:
and also contaminated buildings on the adjacent Dico
property Based on samples taken ax 13 ground water
monitonng wells installed in 0U3 only one of the
13 wells showed contamination ax levels of concern.
in general, the contaminant concentrations in that well
have shown a decreasing trend in the last five
sampling rounds, and no specific source of
contamination in this well was found during EPA’s
investigation of 0U3
SELECTU) REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for 0U3 includes no
action with periodic ground water monitoring
Ground water from the 0U3 area will continue to be
captured and treated by the OUI extraction and
treatment system. There are no costs associated with
this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Floodplain; Ground Water Monitoring; No Action
Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 07/21/86
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
258
-------
FARMERS’ MUTUAL COOPERATIVE, IA
September 29, 1992
REGION 7
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWFION :
The 6-acre Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative site is an
active gram storage facility in Hospers. Sioux County,
Iowa. Land use in the area is predominantly
agricultural. The 643 residents of the City of Hospers
obtain their drinking water from municipal water
supplies and private wells. From 1908 to the present,
the Farmers Mutual Cooperative Company (FMCC)
used the site for the purchasing and storing of grain
and agricultural chemicals, including pesticides and
fertilizers. In addition, grain fumigation had been
conducted onsite. In 1984, state investigations
detected VOCs and herbicides m the ground water of
three shallow city wells adjacent to the FMCC
facility. In 1989, the state ordered FMCC to conduct
an RIIFS, which showed ground water contamination
was limited to the shallow wells and did not impact
the deeper aquifer The City of Hospers uses three
deep aquifer wells and installed an additional deep
well to meet their water supply needs. Pnor actions,
including removal of bulk pesticides and further
handling from FMCC, have been taken to prevent
additional release of contaminants This ROD
addresses ground water contamination as a final
remedial action for this site The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water
are VOCs, including carbon tetrachionde, and other
organics, including pesticides.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and include carbon
tetachloride 0.005 mg/i; chloroform 0.1 mg/I;
alachlor 0.002 mg/l; atiuzine 0.003 mg/I; cyanazine 10
ugh; and metolachlor 100 ugh.
1NST1TUTIO AL CONTROLS :
Not Provided.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Contingent Remedy;
Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; MCLs; Organics; Pesticides;
Plume Management; Safe Drinking Water Act; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Ground Water - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
allowing ground water to naturally attenuate,
monitoring ground water to determine the
effectiveness of the remedy, and providing for a
contingency in the event that use of the impacted
aquifer as a water supply is necessary prior to
complete restoration. This contingency includes
developing and implementing a blending program for
the City of Hospers waler from the upper and lower
aquifers until MCLs have been achieved, testing the
upper aquifer prior to its use, ireaung contaminated
ground water for use as drinking waier, or containing
contaminants to enable use of the impacted aquifer
without ireatment. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action ranges from $93,000 to
$187,000, depending on the remedy employed. There
are no O&M costs associated with this remedial
action
259
-------
HYDRO-FLEX, KS
March 9, 1992
REGION 7
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWrION :
The 2.95-acre Hydro-Flex site, located in Topeka,
Kansas, was used for manufactunng flexible copper
couplings. Land use in the area is primarily
industriallcommercial, with several scattered
residences nearby. The site overhes a low-lying
alluvial plain south of Soldier Creek and north of the
Kansas River. The alluvium, which makes up part of
the Kansas River floodplain, serves as a drinking
water source for approximately 6,551 people within a
3-mile radius. From the 1970’s to the 1980’s, Hydro-
Flex discharged an average of 90 gallons per day of
process wastewaler into an onsite wasrewater disposal
system consisting of a septic tank with three concrete
manholes and a soil absorption field. In 1981, the
onsite wastewater disposal ceased and was
subsequently taken out of operation when Hydro-Flex
was connected to the Topeka sewer system. A PA/SI
performed by the state identified sludge and ground
water contaminated with chromium and copper. This
ROD addresses onsite sludge and ground water. EPA
investigations have shown that levels of chromium
and copper in the soil are not above naturally
occurring levels and, therefore, no longer pose a
health threat under current or likely land use
conditions. Therefore, there are no contaminants of
concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action because there is currently no significant
contamination in the sediment-free ground water, or
any significant continuing source of contamination to
the ground water from the site There are no costs
associated with this no action remedy
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Floodplain, No Action Remedy
260
-------
PESTER REFINERY, KS
September 30, 1992
REGION 7
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFflON :
The 10-acre Pester Refinery site is a former
petroleum refining facility located in El Dorado,
Butler County, Kansas. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial and agricultural. The City of
El Dorado draws its water supply from the El Dorado
reservoir, 2 miles east of the site. Petroleum refining
operations in the area began in 1917, and from 1958
to 1977, Fina Oil Company operated a petroleum
refinery at this site. Process wastes, such as slop-oil
emulsion solids, API separator sludge, and heat
exchanger bundle cleaning sludge were sent through
a pipe to a burn pond. Gaseous waste products were
ignited at the end of the pipe, and whatever did not
burn was discharged to the pond. The site histoncally
contained the bum pond, a stormwater pond, and a
settling pond, all of which became interconnected
over the years. In 1977, Pester purchased the
property and operated the facility until 1985.
Although other portions of the property were sold,
Pester still retains ownership of land surrounding the
burn pond area In 1986, the state RCRA division
initiated site investigations, which confirmed that
contamination had occurred In 1992, Fina
constructed an interceptor trench and pumping system
near the pond to evacuate contaminated water and
materials This ROD provides a final remedy for the
principal source of contamination at the site, the burn
pit sludge. A subsequent ROD addresses ground
water contamination The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil and sludge are VOCs,
including ethylbenzene, toluene. and xylenes: other
orgamcs, including PAHs and phenols; and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECFED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedy for this site includes dewarenng
the pond and transporting the associated sludge offsite
to a RCRA facility for re-refining into a usable
petroleum product andlor disposal, treating the soil
using in-situ soil flushing, discharging the wash water
to an oiliwater separator to remove free oils and
sediment, followed by nutrient addition with aeration
to enhance biological action, and discharging the
water to a treatment facility or back to the pond for
continued treatment until testing demonstrates that
clean-up levels have been achieved, monitoring air,
and implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions and site access resmctions such as
fencing. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $2,374,800, which includes a
present value O&M cost of $464,700 over 3 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil and sludge clean-up goals are
based on health-based levels, and include
benzo(a)anthracene 13 mg/kg and chrysene 13 mg/kg.
Other contaminants of concern will be treated to meet
EPA acceptable risk levels, if necessary.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional control measures in the form of deed
restrictions will be implemented to limit access to the
site and control future land use.
KEYWORDS :
Aeration; Air Monitoring; Arsenic; Benzene;
BiodegradationFLand Application; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act; Clean Water
Act; Direct Contact; Institutional Controls; Lead;
Metals; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite Disposal;
Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs; Phenols; Publicly
Owned Treatment Works; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act Sludge; Soil; Soil Washing/Soil Flushing;
Solvents, State Standards/Regulations; Surface Water
Monitoring; Toluene; Treatment Technology; VOCs,
Xylenes
SrI’E SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, Sludge
VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
261
-------
BRODERICK WOOD PRODUCTS, CO
March 24, 1992
REGION B
SITE HISTORY/DESCRWI1ON :
The 64-acre Broderick Wood Products (BWP) site is
a former wood preserving facility in unincorporated
Adams County, Colorado, located just outside of
Denver, Colorado. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial. There are three aquifers
below the site: the surflcial, the Denver, and the
Arapahoe. The Denver aquifer ground waxer is used
for commercial and irrigation purposes, and the
Arapahoe is tapped by several pnvate wells in the
aiea. All residences are currently connected to a
municipal water supply system for household use.
From 1947 to 1981, the BWP Company used the site
to operate a wood treatment facility, where both
creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) were mixed
with camer oil (fuel oil) and used at the site. The
major site features include two unlined surface
impoundments and 23 structures. Underground
structures at the site include the treatment basement
building and two cylinder basements There are also
16 vessels, including storage tanks, an an cylinder,
and a pressure cylinder onsite, whose capacities range
from 2,400 to 50,000 gallons Approximately
70 chums containing various chemicals, oils, and
asbestos are stored in the process area, and 65 drums
of oil from sludge are stored in the impoundment area
of the site. Process waste from the plant was
disposed of onsite, with a large amount going to the
impoundments on the northwest corner of the site In
1946. the main impoundment was constructed, and in
1956, a secondary one was constructed for additional
evaporation capacity and overflow. In 1962. both
impoundments caught fire and burned for several
hours BWP ceased operations as a woodtreater in
1981. Investigations were done by EPA and the state
under RCRA and CERCLA authorities, which
revealed contamination both onsire and on adjacent
properties In 1988, EPA issued an interim ROD to
control the major source of contamination at the site,
including restriction of site access, treatment of water
in the impoundments and buildings, excavation and
incineration of sludge, and stockpiling or onsne
incineration of visibly contaminated soil in the
impoundments. referred to as OUI. A petition was
filed with EPA to reconsider onsite incineration; and
a ROD amendment was issued in 1991 that provided
for excavation and offsite recyc [ inglincmeralion of the
sludge from the two impoundments Two temporary-
lined cells were constructed on the property, and
sludge was stockpiled temporarily until the solid
sludge storage cell was completed. Approximately
950 cubic yards of solid sludge and 1,200 cubic yards
of liquid sludge have been stored in lined cells with
leachate collection and will be removed to an offsite
recycling facility. This ROD addresses 0U2, a final
remedy for the BWP site. The primary Contaminants
of concern affecting the soil, debris, sediment, and
ground water are VOCs, including benzene, toluene,
and xylenes; organics, including PAHs, dioxins, and
other phenolic compounds; metals, including arsenic
and lead; and inorganics, including asbestos.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
demolishing and decontaminating onsite buildings,
stockpiling debris onsite temporarily, then transporting
approximately 850 cubic yards of building debris and
205 cubic yards of asbestos-contarning materials
offsite for disposal at a permitted landfill;
decontaminating 225 tons of scrap metal onsite, with
offsite reclamation; pumping or excavating sludge or
liquid contents from drums and vessels, storing the
drummed waste onsite temporarily, then transporting
the waste offsite for reclamation; pumping,
approximately 9.500 gallons of contaminated waxer
from building sumps and basements of onsite
structures, and stabilizing, drumming, and
transporting the drums offsite to a RCRA landfill;
excavating approximately 59,000 cubic yards of
orgaruc-contanunaled soil and 120 cubic yards of
Fisher Ditch sediment, dewatenng the sediment,
followed by onsite treatment of the soil and sediment
using ex-situ bioremediation in an onsite land
treatment unit (Liii) over a 7-year penod; conducting
creatability tests to determine the best stabilization
compound for the wastes, then treating 800 cubic
yards of metals-contaminated soil onsite using
siabihzation, with disposal at an offsite RCRA
landfill, closing the existing surface impoundments;
recovenng approximately 526 million gallons of
ground waxer and light non-aqueous phase liquids
(LNAPLs) from the surficial aquifer using subsurface
drain trenches and recovery wells; removing LNAPLs
in an oil/water separator, and reclaiming the LNAPLS
at an offsite recycling facility: treating the remaining
water using a two-phase fixed-film bioreactor, mixed
with nutrients and an oxygenated chemical, then
reiniected into the ax uifer to stimulate bacterial
262
-------
BRODERICK WOOD PRODUCTS, CO (Continued)
March 24, 1992
REGION 8
growth to promote further contaminant breakdown
within the shallow aquifer. and also using small
quantities within the soil remediation processes;
collecting dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs)
and ground water from existing monitoring wells in
the Denver aquifer. and treating these in the oillwater
separator, with ofisite recycling; monitoring ground
water, and also implementing institutional controls
including deed and ground water use restrictions to
control access to water in the surficial and Denver
aquifers. The estimated total present worth cost for
this selected remedial action is $15.55 1.033. which
includes a present worth O&M cost of $7,400,185 for
30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific excavation goals for soil and
sediment were based on health risk clean-up level
indices (CLIs) greater than 1. Chemical-specific soil
and sediment clean-up goals are based on health-
based criteria for organic conlanunants and RCRA
LDR standards for metal coniarnmants and include
toluene 0.5-10 mg/kg: xylenes 0.5-10 mg/kg;
benzo(a)pyrefle 15.2 mg/kg; dibenzo(a ,h) anthracene
13.9 mg/kg; 2,3.7,8 TCDD equivalent 0.0006 mg/kg,
pcnt.achlorophenol. naphthalene. and pyrene at 95-99
percent reduction, arsenic 5 mg/kg; cadmium 1 mg/kg
and lead 5 mg/kg. Chemical-specific ground water
clean-up goals ale based on SDWA MCLs and the
Colorado Basic Standards and include 2,3.7.8 TCDD
equivalent 5x10 5 ugh; trichloroethylene at 5 ugh.
tetrachloroethylene 1.6 ug/l, carbozole 4.1 ugh.
phenol 623 ugh; pentachlorophenol 1 ugh, pyrene 312
ugh, and naphthalene 41.6 ugh The ability to
achieve these clean-up levels cannot be determined
until the extraction system has been implemented.
therefore, EPA may need to modify the remedy if
necessary. This ROD provides a chemical-specific
waiver for the Denver aquifer because of technical
impracticability.
INSTITUTiONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented at this site to
prevent future residential and agricultural use of the
site, and to control access to water in the Denver and
surflcial aquifers.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver, Arsenic; Asbestos; Benzene;
Biodegradation/Land Application; Clean Air Act;
Clean Water Act; Debris; Decontamination; Dioxin;
Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Institutional Controls; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Oils; Onsite
Treatment; Organics; PAHs; Phenols; RCRA: Safe
Drinking Water Act; Sediment; Sludge; Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; Solvents; State
Standard/Regulations; Temporary Storage; Toluene;
Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology; VOCs;
Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 06t30/88, 09/24/91
(Amendment)
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Orgamcs,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
Soil, Debris. Sediment,
GW
263
-------
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 10-acre Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8) site is
a former radioactive extraction industry located in
Denver, Denver County. Colorado. The site is
divided into three areas: the 5.9-acre S.W. Shattuck
Chemical Inc. (Shattuck) property; the 4.3-acre
railroad right-of-way west of the Shattuck property;
and nearby “vicinity” properties. Land use
surrounding the sue is predominantly industrial, with
some residential areas. The site is located within the
South Platte River drainage basin. From the 1920’s
to 1984, the Shattuck property was used to treat and
process molybdenum ores, radium shines, and
uranium compounds and ores. The railroad right-of-
way has been operational daily since the late
19th century with a spur to the Shattuck property. As
a result of extensive mining and processing,
radioactive contaminated soil is widely scattered
resulting in a variety of radiation levels. A U.S.
Bureau of Mines report led EPA to field research
31 radioactive sites in Denver and Denver County. In
1983, EPA conducted remedial investigations, winch
detected elevated levels of radon gas and gamma
radiation. A 1989 emergency removal action at one
of the vicinity properties included radon mitigation
measures This ROD addresses a final remedy for
radioactive contaminated debris, ground water, and
soil, as 0U8. Future RODs will address the
remaining contaminated media at II OUs not
addressed by the previous seven RODs at the Denver
Radium sites The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil. debns, and ground water are metals
including arsenic and lead, inorganics. including
asbestos, and radioactive materials.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
demolishing and decontaminating buildings, tanks,
and equipment onsite; temporarily storing debris from
vicinity properties onsite at the Shattuck area, pending
either offsite disposal and/or scrap recycling, or
salvaging of debris, disposing of asbestos-containing
matenal from buildings offsite, conducting pilot scale
treat.abiluy studies during remedial design to optimize
stabilization design; excavating and transporting 5,000
cubic yards of radium-contaminated soil from the
railroad rights-of-way and 6,000 cubic yards from the
vicinity properties, consolidating these with 38,500
cubic yards of soil from the Shattuck prpperty, and
treating the soil onsite using cement-based
sLabilization; placing a cap over the stabilized
material, and revegetating the area; falling previously
excavated areas with clean fill; testing for,
remediating and disposing of any RCRA hazardous
waste offsite; allowing the ground water to naturally
attenuate; monitoring ground water and air , and
implementing institutional controls, including deed,
land, and ground water use restrictions. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $26,600,000, which includes an annual O&M cost
of $120,000 for 200 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil action levels are based on
Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Department of
Energy standards for Rathum-226, exceeding 5 pci/g
above background in the top 15 cm of soil and
15 pcilg above background in any layer below the top
15 cm; thonum-230, 42 pciJg; uranium; 75 pcilg; and
risk-based standards for arsenic 160 mg/kg; selenium
490 mg/kg; and lead 540 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed, land use, and ground water use restrictions will
be implemented to prevent excavation of the cover
and stabilized matenals and to prohibit construction of
enclosed structures and agricultural use on the
disposal site.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Arsenic, Asbestos, Capping;
Carcinogenic Compounds; Debris; Decontanunanon,
Direct Contact; Excavation, Filling, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monnonng, lnorganics; Institutional
Controls: Leachability Tests; Lead; MCLs; Metals;
Mining Wastes, O&M, Offsite Disposal; Onsite
Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Public Exposure.
Radioactive Matenals, Safe Drinking Water Act, Soil;
Solidification/Stabilization; State Standards/
Regulations; Temporary Storage; Treatability Studies;
Treatment Technology.
DENVER RADIUM (OPERABLE UNIT 8) , CO
January 28, 1992
REGION B
264
-------
REGION B
DENVER RADIUM (OPERABLE UNIT 8), CO (Continued)
January 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 03/24/86, 09/30/86,
06/30/87, 09/30/87.
09/29/87, 09/29/87
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris, OW
Major Contaminants: Metals, Inorganics,
Radioacuve Matenals
Category: Source Control - lntenm
Ground Water - lntenm
265
-------
DENVER RADIUM (OPERABLE UNIT 9), CO
December 23, 1991
REGION 8
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9) site is a
former radioactive mining site located in Denver,
Denver County, Colorado. The. site includes a 17-
acre former brick plant, a parking lot, and a large
amount of exposed soil. Land use in the area is
predominantly commercial and industrial, with a
residential area located several blocks east of the site
The South Platte River lies 1,000 feet from the former
brick plant. Industrial activities commenced at the
site in 1886 with the construction of the Bailey
Smelter. In 1890, the Gold and Silver Extraction
Company began a cyanide leaching operation onsite
In 1901, the Bailey Smelter burned down By 1903,
the Colorado Zinc Company had constructed a mill on
the site of the Bailey Smelter, and zinc milling
operations continued until 1910. From 1914 to 1917,
the U S Bureau of Mines operated a radium
processing facility onsite, known as the National
Radium Institute (NRJ) Other onsite industrial
activities included minerals recovery, manufacturing
and servicing of storage battenes, treating and sacking
of metallic ore insulation, oil reclamation, and
landfilling Robinson Brick Company (Robco)
acquired 13.5 acres of the site in 1941 and a
contiguous 3.5-acre parcel in 1951 Robco, the
present owner of the site, utilized the site until 1980
to manufacture bricks In 1983, EPA discovered that
30 properties. including the Robco property, contained
radiologic contamination in the soil attributable to
pnor NRI operations. In 1988. the U.S Bureau of
Mines initiated excavation of the radiologically
contaminated material in the course of the radium
cleanup, metals contamination, resulting from mining
wastes disposed of and used as fill from the mid-
1880’s to the early 1920’s. was discovered onstie
Excavation of the radiologically contaminated
materials was completed in 1991 as part of OUs 4
and 5 This ROD addresses approximately
16,500 cubic yards of metal-cornaminated soil as
0U9, on of II OUs planned for the site The
pnmary contaminarn.s of concern affecting the soil are
metals, including arsenic and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for the site includes
constructing a 3 7-acre multi-media cap over onsite
contaminated soil with metal concentranons exceeding
action levels, utilizing the existing concrete floor of
the brick plant and asphalt parking lot in concert with
the backfilled soil cap; providing Inspection and repair
of the concrete floor, as necessary; upgrading the
asphalt with geotexule fabric and an additional 6-inch
layer of asphalt; monitoring downgradient ground
water, long-term monitoring to ensure effectiveness of
the cap; and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions to Limit the ground water
use and to maintain the integrity of the cap. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $1,702,000
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Design of the cap will comply with RCRA and state
requirements. Chemical-specific soil remediation
goals, which are based on health criteria, include
prevention of exposure and direct contact with action
level concentrations exceeding arsenic 79 ugh, lead
1,000 ug/l; and zinc 17,000 ug/l
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to prevent
using the site for commercial or industrial purposes
and to prevent future development of the capped area.
which could impair the effectiveness of the remedial
action Additionally. the deed restriction will prohibit
placement of wells onsite for the purpose of supplying
drinking water.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic. Capping, Clean Air Act, Closure
Requirements. Direct Contact. Ground Water
Monitoring. Institutional Controls. Lead, Metals;
Onsite Containment. Onsite Disposal. RCRA; Soil.
State Standards/Regulations
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre%ious RODs: 03 /24/86, 09/30/86.
09/29/87, 06/30/87,
09/29/87, 09130/87
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
266
-------
HILL AtR FORCE BASE, UT
September 25, 1992
REGION B
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 6,700-acre Hill Air Force Base (AFB) is located
in north-central Utah. covering portions of Davis and
Weber Counties. Surrounding land use is
predominantly industrial. Shallow ground water in
the area is used only for agricultural purposes, and
there are no wells that currently supply drinking waler
from the shallow aquifer. This site is pail of 0U3 in
the southeastern portion of the Base, which also
includes the Industrial Waste Treatment Plant (IWTP),
sludge beds, Berman Pond, Ponds I and 3, Buildings
510 and 514, and a contaminated ground water area.
There are several areas of the Base where past
disposal practices and spills contaminated both the
soil and ground water. The Air Force has grouped
geographically adjacent contaminated areas into seven
OUs. The Sodium Hydroxide Tank Site is a 29,000-
square -foot area that surrounds two 12.000-gallon
underground storage tanks (USTs) constructed in the
1950’s. The tanks, approximately S feet below the
ground surface, are used to store sodium hydroxide
solution, which is used as an additive in wastewater
treatment at the IWTP. In 1980, an estimated
150,000 gallons of solution leaked from the inlet
connections to the tanks over a I-year period A
second series of leaks occurred in 1984, releasing
approximately 132.000 gallons Sampling
investigations revealed high soil pH and
conducuviues, indicating that most of the
contamination is probably at a depth of 2.5 to 40 feet
below surface. The presence of the sodium hydroxide
solution in the ground water is uncertain and will be
investigated in future remedial investigations A 1991
ROD addressed the intenni remediation of 0U2
subsurface soil and ground water This interim ROD
limits further degradation of ground water quality as
a result of sodium hydroxide migration through the
unsaturated zone Future RODs will address a final
remedy for contaminated soil and ground water at
0U3 and other OUs ai the Base The primary
conuminant of concern affecting the soil is an
inorganic, sodium hydroxide
SELECTED REM ED1AL ACTION :
the ground surface after removal of the tanks to
ensure drainage of precipitation into the existing
stormwater system. The tank removal project will be
conducted under a stare permit and administered by
the stare under its Underground Storage Tank (UST)
program, under a state-issued permit, which will
regulate decontamination and proper disposal of the
tanks and their associated piping. as well as testing
for contamination of the native soil underlying the
tanks and piping. The estimated present worth cost
for this interim remedial action is $55,343. which
includes an annual O&M cost of $540 for 3 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific performance standards for this
interim action will be specified in the final ROD for
all of 0U3. This ROD invokes an ARAR waiver on
the basis that this is part of an interim remedy;
therefore, RCRA closure requirements will not be
attained.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver, Capping. Clean Air Act, Debris;
Direct Contact, Filling, Inorganics, Intenmu Remedy;
O&M. Onsite Containment; Onsite Disposal; RCRA;
Soil; State Standards/Regulations.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/30191
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Interim
The selected interim remedial action for this sire
includes removing two underground storage tanks,
backfllhng the excavated area with the previously
excavated sod and clean fill; and constructing a
29.000 snuare foot sInned temnorarv asnhalt can at
267
-------
IDAHO POLE, MT
September 28, 1992
REGION B
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 50-acre Idaho Pole site is an active wood
treatment facility located in Gallaun County,
Bozeman, Montana. Land use in the area is light
industnal. The site lies within the 100-year
floodplain, and wetlands are also located onsite. The
site includes the Idaho Pole Company ( [ PC) pole
plant, Burlington Northern Railroad property,
Montana Rail Link property, and land owned by the
Montana Pole Company The IPC wood-treating
facility began operation in 1945, using creosote to
preserve wood. In 1952. the company switched to
pentachlorophenol in carrier oil (similar to fuel oil)
for the wood-creating solution. In 1978, the state
found evidence that an oiiy wood-treating fluid was
being released from the plant and disposed of in
ditches IPC stopped releasing this substance and
attempted to clean up the land. In an attempt to slow
or elinunate movement of the oily wood-treating fluid
through ground and surface water and into private
wells, [ PC installed and operated an interceptor drain
with a sump and an interceptor trench Absorbent
pads also were used in the culverts and ditches to
intercept and collect the oily wood-treating fluid.
Culverts under 1-90 were dammed to prevent runoff
of contaminated surface water to Rocky Creek The
spillage of oily wood-treating fluid has resulted in
soil, ditch sediment, and ground water contamination
both onsite and offsite in the surrounding vicinity In
addition, since the oily wood-treating fluid is lighter
or less dense than water, a product layer exist-s
beneath the site, above ground water This ROD
addresses contaminated onsite soil, sediment, and
ground water The pnmary contaminants of concern
affecting these media are organics, including djox.ins.
oils, PAHs, pesticides. and phenols, and inorganics
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and consolidating approximately
19,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil from the
pasture area. ditch sediment and bottoms, and the
former round house area, preireaung the soil onsite
using an oil/solids separator to remove the oily wood-
treating fluid, followed by biological treatment of the
contaminated soil and sediment in a land treatment
unit (LTU), and capping the LTU with a RCRA cap.
creating 23,000 cubic yards of soil in inaccessible
locations contaminated with oily wood treatment
fluids using in-situ soil flushing; enhancing rn-situ
biological degradation of soil contammants by the
addition of oxygen and nutrients; collecting the
flushed water and sktmm ng the oil: combining this
oil with recovered oil from the other site areas,
followed by recycling or offsite disposal in
accordance RCRA: filling excavated areas with clean
soil, pumping and onsue treatment of approximately
I billion gallons of contaminated ground water within
the boundaries of the oily plume, followed by transfer
to an oil/water separator-clarifier/filtration plant;
creating the water using a fixed film bioreactor,
consolidating the solids from the separation process
into the LTU for tmamient along with the
contaminated soil; treating approximately 210 million
gallons of contaminated ground water from under the
pasture area by in-situ biodegradation. reinjecting the
treated ground water onsite or creating this using
additional treatments, such as carbon polishing to
meet POTW pretreatment standards, if necessaxy,
monitoring ground water, providing any contaminated
residential wells with in-home carbon/reverse osmosis
treatment system until MCLs are reached, and
implementing engineering and institutional controls,
including deed, land, and ground water use
restrictions The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $9,074,962, which includes a total
O&M cost of $928,790 for 10-30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil and sediment goals are based on a site-specific
risk analysis levels and will correspond to a l0 to
10.6 lifetime cancer risk Chemical-specific clean-up
goals for soil include PCP 48 mg/kg (risk), total
B2 PAHs 15 mg/kg (nsk), total D PAHs 145 mg/kg
(HO), and TCDD TE 0.001 mg/kg Ground water
clean-up levels are based on SDWA MCLs and
proposed MCLs Chemical-specific goals for ground
water include pentachloropbenol I ugh (MCL),
benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 ugh (MCL), and 2,3,7,8-TCDD
3x10 1 ugh (MCL)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions, will be implemented.
KEY WORDS :
BiodegradationFLand Application; Capping; Carbon
A,4c, ,rfitlnn’ C irr ,nncen ,t Comnounds: Clean Air Act;
268
-------
REGION 8
IDAHO POLE, MT (Continued)
September 28, 1992
Clean Waxer Act; Closure Requirements; Dioxin;
Direct Cornact Drinking Waxer Contaminants;
Excavation; Filling; Floodplain; Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treaxment
Inorganics; Institutional Controls; MCLs; O&M;
Offsue Discharge; Offsite Treatment; OILS; Onsite
Containment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal;
Onsite Treatment; Organics; PAHs; Phenols; Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW); RCRA; Safe
Dnnking Water Act; Sediment; Soil; Soil Washing!
Flushing; Solvents; Temporary Storage; Treatment
Technology; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment, GW
Major Contaminants: Organics, hiorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Acuon
269
-------
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 1), UT
June 26, 1
992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORYFDESCRIPTION :
Since 1941, the 1,100-acre Ogden Defense Depot
(DDOU) site. located in Ogden, Weber County, Utah,
has been a key installation m the Department of
Defense supply system Land use in the surrounding
area is predominantly residential. In the past, both
liquid and solid matenals have been disposed of at
this site. Oily liquid matenals and combustible
solvents were burned in pits, and solid matenals were
buried, burned, or taken offsite for disposal In 1979.
the U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Agency (USATHMA) identified three locations on the
DDOU where hazardous materials might have been
used, stored, created, or disposed of A USATHMA
1980 report then broke the three locations into about
40 separate areas Operable Unit 1. which is located
in the southwest part of the DDOU. is composed of
the backfill material in the Plain City Canal, Burial
Site 1, and Burial Site 3-B The Plain City Canal
was an irrigation canal that flowed between two
branches of Mill Creek until it was backfilled from
1969 to 1973 with burning-pit debris from Bunal
Site 4-A. During 1988, a soil-gas survey revealed
that a portion of the Plain City Canal backfill was the
apparent source of elevated VOCs in the soil gas
Burial Site I was reported to have been used for the
disposal of riot control agent (chloroacetophenone)
and white smoke (hexachloroethane) containers in the
1940’s In the early 1960’s. Bunal Site 3-B was
reportedly the burying ground for over 1.000 arctic-
style rubber boots The DDOU. with concurrence
from the state and EPA. has elected to divide the site
into four operable units Ttus ROD addresses a final
remedy for OUI that will reduce the pnncipal threats
posed by contaminated soil and shallow ground water
at the site The final remedy for 0U2. which
addresses soil and ground water in the french drain
area, the pesticide storage area. and the parade ground
area, is currently under construction The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, debris, and
ground water are VOCs. including ICE, other
organics. including dioxins and pesticides, and metals.
including arsenic and lead
backfilling the area with clean fill; extracting and
creating contaminated ground water onsite using air
stripping to remove contaminants, adding a GAC
system to the air stripper if dioxins and furans are
detected in the effluent at concentrations above the
proposed MCL for dioxins and furans. transporting
wastes from the ground water treatment process,
including any spent carbon offsite for incineration,
stabilization/fixation or disposal; recharging the
aquifer with the treated water using injection wells;
monitoring air emissions, and monitoring ground
water. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is 52.200.000, which includes an
annuai O&M cost of 5146,000 for 7 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are health-risk
based and include dioxin 0.001 mg/kg; arsenic
35 mg/kg: zinc 1,500 mg/kg: and lead 500 mg/kg
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
also health-risk based and include cis-1,2-
dichloroethene 70 ugIl. ICES ugh; and vinyl cnlonde
2ug/l
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring. Air Stripping, Arsenic; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC). Carcinogenic Compounds. Clean
Air Act. Clean Closure. Clean Water Act, Debns,
Dioxin, Direct Contact. Drinking Water
Contaminants. Excavation, Filling. Ground Water.
Ground Water Monitoring. Ground Water Treatment,
Incineration/Thermal Destruction. Lead. MCLGs,
MCLs, Metals. O&M. Offsite Disposal. Offsite
Treatment. Onsite Disposal. Onsite Treatment,
Organics. Pesticides. RCRA. Safe Drinking Waler
Act, Sod. Solidification/Stabilization, Solvents, State
Standards/Regulations. TCE. Toxic Substances
Control Act. Treatment Technology. VOCs
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and transporting 4.000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and debris offsite to a RCRA
nermitted hazardous waste or industrial landfill.
270
-------
REGION 8
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 1), UT (Continued)
June 26, 1992
srr SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09t27/90
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
271
-------
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UN 3), UT
September 28, 1992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFI1ON :
The site is part of the 1,100-acre Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit 3) site is a key installation in
the Department of Defense (DOD) supply system in
Ogden, Weber County, Utah. Land use in the area is
predominantly rural and residential The site overhes
both a shallow and a deep aquifer, which appear to be
hydraulically connected. Since 1941, oily liquid
matenals and combustible solvents have been burned
in pits, and solid materials have been buried onsite.
burned, or removed for offsite disposal Several
waste disposal areas have been identified on property
previously or currently controlled by the Defense
Distribution Depot Ogden, Utah (DDOU) The main
onsite waste disposal areas include (I) the WWH
Mustard Agent Storage Facility, (2) the Bunal Site 3-
A (consisting of four subareas Chemical Warfare
Agent (CWA) Identification Kit, Riot Control and
Smoke Grenade, Miscellaneous Items, and
Compressed Gas Cylinder Reburial Areas), and (3)
the Water Punficanon Tablet Burial Area From
1942 to 1946, over I million pounds of mustard agent
were stored at the WW II Mustard Storage Facility
in 1946, the containers were moved to Dugway
Proving Ground, Utah, and subsequent onsite
sampling indicated no current contammation in this
area From the 1950’s to 1960’s. items also ere
buried intermittently at Burial Site 3-A Duruig a
1988 Army site investigation, chemical warfare
agents, VOCs, including TCE. and heavy metals were
detected in the onsite soil samples from the CWA
Identification Kit Burial Area. Pressunzed gas
cylinders with unknown contents were found in the
Compressed Gas Cylinder Reburial Area. and bottles
containing halzone water purification tablets were
found in the Water Punficauon Tablet Burial Area
In 1991, investigations confirmed that ground water
underlying the site was also contaminated by VOCs
The site has been divided into four operable units for
remediation A 1992 ROD addressed the reduction of
the principal threat posed by contaminated soil and
shallow ground water, as 0U4 This ROD addresses
the potential threats to future onsite residents and
Depot workers posed by contaminated soil and debris,
as 0U3 Another 1992 ROD will address the
contaminated ground water underlying the site, as
OU I The primary contaminants of concern affecting
the soil and debris are orgamcs. including pesticides,
metals, including arsenic, and other inorganics
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating, handsoning, and mechanically sieving
530 cubic yards of contaminated soil and debris from
the Chemical Warfare Agent Identification Kit and the
Riot Control and Smoke Grenade burial areas;
incinerating offsite any debris or soil contaminated by
chemical warfare agents or grenade fragments at a
DOD facility; excavating soil and debris from the
Miscellaneous Items Burial Area. and treating soil and
debris that does not meet TCLP treatment standards
using solidification, or another appropriate technology
pnor to disposal in an offsite RCRA landfill along
with the untreated debris, returning excavated soil that
meets criteria to the excavated areas, excavating and
disposing of offsite compressed gas cylinders and the
water punfication tablet bottles from the Compressed
Gas Cylinder and Water Punfication Tablet Burial
Areas. The total cost for this remedial action i
$393,000 There are no O&M costs associated with
this remedial action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on a
future residential exposure scenario, which was
calculated under a residential ingestion scenario where
a person was assumed to be exposed as a 15-kg child
ingesting 200 mg of soil per day for 6 years, and also
a 70-kg adult ingesting 100 mg of soil per day for
24 years These include arsenic 35 mg/kg and
mercury 2 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic. Carcinogenic Compounds. Clean Air Act,
Debris, Deferred Decision, Excavation. Incineration!
Thermal Destruction. Inorgaxucs. Leachabiliry Tests,
Metals. Offsite Disposal, Offsite Treatment. Onsite
Treatment. Organics, RCRA, Soil, Solidification!
Siabihzanon. Solvents, State Standards/Regulations.
Treatment Technology
272
-------
REGION 8
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 3), UT (Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09t21/90, 06/26/92,
09/28/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals,
Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
273
-------
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 4), UT
September 28, 1992
REGION B
SITE HISTORY(DESCRIFrION :
The 1,100-acre Ogden Defense Depot site has been a
key installation in the Department of Defense (DOD)
supply system in Ogden. Weber County, Utah Land
use in the area is predominantly residential. In the
past, both liquid and solid materials have been buried,
burned, or disposed of in several areas at the Defense
Distribution Depot, Ogden, Utah (DDOU). These
areas have been divided into four operable units.
0U4 is composed of Bunal Sites 4-A through 4-E.
From the 1950’s to 1975, a records search of Burial
Site 4-A indicated that approximately 14,000 pounds
of waste material were disposed of in this area each
month In addition, approximately 40 gallons of
waste oils per day were collected in drums and
disposed of onsite in 4A Burial Sites 4-B and 4-E
operated as a waste oil/holding/burning pit. From
1969 to 1972. Burial Site 4-C was operated as a
sanitary landfill From the mid-1940’s to mid-1960’s,
methyl bromide cylinders were reportedly disposed of
in Bunal Site 4-D, however, during site
investigations, only large quantities of halazone water
purification tablets contained in bottles were
encountered From the mid-l950’s to mid-1960’s,
Bunal Site 4-E was used as an oil holding/burning pit
for waste oils and spent solvents, and indusmal
wastes produced from various processes on the Depot
This ROD addresses the five burial sites as 0U4
DDOU’s analysis indicated that the soil in Burial Site
4-E is the primary source of ground water
contamination, whereas Bunal Site 4-A is considered
a potential secondary source 0U4 is the third final
response action and its goal is to reduce the pnncipal
threat posed by contaminated soil and shallow ground
water that may occur as a result of future exposure of
residents or onsite workers The ROD for OUI is
under review. 0U2 is being implemented. and the
ROD for 0U3 is being preparecL The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, debris, and
ground water are VOCs, including benzene, other
orgamcs. including pesticides and PCBs. and metals.
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and transporting offsite approximately
4,500 cubic yards of contaminated soil, debris, and
approximately 400 cubic yards of water purification
tablets for disposal at a RCR.A landfill, conducting
TCLP tests to confirm the characteristics of excavated
soil and debns and to determine their suitabihty for
land disposal; treating any soil and debris failing
TCLP offsite using activated carbon other
stabilization/fixation methods, or, for dioxins,
incineration; excavating and removing any
contaminated cylinders for off site treatment and
disposal; backfilling excavated areas with clean fill
and soil, with revegetation; extracting and treating
onsite 65 milLion gallons of contaminated ground
water using air stripping to remove VOCs and carbon
adsorption to remove organics followed by reinjection
into the shallow aquifer; monitoring ground water and
air emissions; and removing wastes generated during
the treatment process offsite for disposal or
incineration. The present worth cost for this remedial
action ranges from 53,800.000 to $4,500,000. which
includes an estimated annual O&M cost of $230,000
for 12 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are basea on the
TBC remediation cntenon for PCBs of 25 mg/kg
(EPA Directive 9355 4-0 IFS) and the TBC criterion
for dioxms of 0001 mg/I (General Approach Used by
the Dioxin Disposal Advisory Group Regarding
Pentachlorophenol Waste) All remaining goals are
based on a future residential exposure scenario and
include benzene 210 mg/kg (cancer risks of l0 ),
arsenic 35 mg/kg (cancer risk of l0 ), and lead
500 mg/kg Chemical-specific ground water clean-up
goals are based on federal MCLs for benzene
0005 mg/i. cis-l.2-DCE 0070 mg/I, vinyl chloride
0002 mg/I, and PCBs 0005 mg/I
IT4STITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng. Air Stripping. Arsenic, Benzene,
Carbon Adsorption (GAC). Carcinogenic Compounds;
Chromium, Clean Au Act, Clean Water Act, Debns,
Dioxin, Drinking Water Contaminants, Excavation,
Filling, Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment, lncinerauonfTherma l
Destruction, Leachability Tests. Lead, MCLGS,
MCLs, Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal. Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Treatment: Organics. PAHs, PCBs:
Pesticides. RCRA. Safe Dunking Water Act, Soil ;
274
-------
REGION B
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 4), UT (Continued)
September 28, 1992
Solidification/StabilizatiOn; Solvents; State Standards/
Regulations; Toxic Substance Control Act; Treatment
Technology; VOCs.
SITE SUMMARY
Date or previous RODs: 09127/90, 06/26/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - lntenm
275
-------
PORTLAND CEMENT (KILN DUST #2 & #3), UT
March 31, 1992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 71-acre Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3)
site, located in a pnmarily industnallcommercial area
of Salt Lake City, Utah. consists of three separate but
adjacent properties known as Site 2, Site 3, and the
West Site. The area surrounding the site is
characterized by dense residential and agncultural
land, as well as highly commercialized and
indusmaiized development in the immediate vicinity
of the site. Between 1959 and 1983, the Portland
Cement Company. which was purchased by Lone Star
Industries in 1979, deposited approxunately
495,000 cubic yards of waste cement kiln dust (CKD)
on each of the three propemes comprising the site.
Waste CKD, which consists primarily of heavy metals
and other inorganics, is highly alkaline
Approximately 360 tons of chromium-bearing
refractory bricks were disposed of with the waste
CKD In 1984, Lone Star voluntarily began
envtronmentai investigations at the site, which
included installing ground water monitoring wells
The first remedial action (OU1) selected in 1990
addressed the removal of the waste CKD and
temporary onsite storage of the chromium bricks
The waste CKD, the primary source of contamination
of onsite soil, will be removed during the OUI
remedial action This ROD addresses the onsite
contaminated soil and chrome-bearing bricks that
provide a potential source of ground water
contamination onsite The selected remedy for the
0U2 action reduces principal threats and prevents
further cont.arnination of the ground water. Ground
water contaimnation will be addressed as either a
separate operable unit or under the 5-year review of
the OUI remedial action The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil and waste CKD are
metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 27.000 cubic yards of soil
with concentrations greater than lead 500 mg/kg or
arsenic 70 mg/kg, with onsite solidification of soil
with concentrations of lead equal to or above 5 mg/I,
based on TCLP analysis, treating approximately
360 tons of chrome-bearing bricks onsite using
chenucal fixation, followed by solidification,
transporting all excavated and treated matenal offsite
to an appropriate disposal facility. placing an 18-inch
protective cover of clean fill over the entire site; and
implementing institutional controls including deed
resuictions, as necessary The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $6,400,000.
O&M costs for the selected remedial action are
assumed to be negligible.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Treatment levels for soil are dictated by federal Land
Disposal Regulations (LDRs) and state solid waste
disposal regulations. Soil will be treated to 5 ugh
lead, or less, as measured by TCLP before land
disposal; chrome-bearing bricks will be treated to
5 mg/kg by TCLP analysis pnor to disposal Federal
and state air regulations on total suspended
particulates and fugitive dust control will apply.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls and deed restrictions will be
imposed as necessary to ensure the effectiveness of
the remedy and to prevent exposure to highly alkaline
soil The length of time during which controls are
needed will be determined during remedial design
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium, Clean
Air Act, Debris, Direct Contact, Excavation.
Institutional Controls, Leachability Tests; Lead,
Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment.
RCRA, Soil, Solidification/Stabilization, State
Standards/Regulations, Treatment Technology.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 07/19/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Waste
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
276
-------
ROCKY FLATS PLANT (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 2), Co
September 1, 1992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFrION :
The Rocky Rats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2)
site is part of the 6,550-acre Department of Energy
(DOE) nuclear weapons research, development.
production, and plutonium processing complex in
Jefferson County Colorado. The plant is composed of
the 450-acre Rocky Flats Plant (RFP) secunty area
and the remaining buffer area. Land use in the area
is predominantly rural and agricultural with several
new residential areas under development. In addition,
a wetland area is located 1,000 feet from the site.
The South Walnut Creek Basin and Woman Creek
surface waxer serve as a source of drinking waxer.
Since 1951, DOE has used the site for manufacturing
components for nuclear weapons, processing
plutonium, and fabncaung, machining, and
assembling components from metals A number of
past onsite production and waste storage activities
resulted in extensive site coni.anunation. During the
1950’s and 1960’s. solvents and reactive metals
including lithium were destroyed onsite. From 1958
to 1967. drums containing radioactive contaminated
oils and solvents were stored onsite, with some of the
drums corroding and leaking approximately 5,000
gallons of liquid into the soil Prior to 1968, sanitary
sewage sludge and flattened drums contaminated with
uranium and plutonium were disposed of in onsite
trenches, and drums of urazuum-contanunated oil were
burned in onsite pits In addition, various bottled
gases were detoxified onsite between 1982 and 1983
Current waste handling practices involve onsite and
offsiie recycling of hazardous materials, and offsite
disposal of solid radioactive matenals at another DOE
facility DOE has conducted a number of
investigations that revealed VOCs, metals, and
radionuclides above background levels in soil,
sediment. ground water, and surface waler A 1969
clean-up action attempted to remove corroded and
leaking drums of radioactive waste from an onsite
area. remove contarrunated soil, and cap the soil.
Dunog the clean-up and removal effort winds
distributed plutonium to the south and east In 1970,
approximately 1,405 additional drums containing
radioactive waste were removed arid disposed of
offsite A 1990 ROD addressed contaminated ground
water lius ROD addresses 0U2, which includes the
903 Pad and Lip Area. Mound Area, and East
Trenches Area. which are located southeast of the
Rocky Flats Plant. and provides an imenm remedy for
contaminated soil and ground water. The prirnaty
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground
waxer are VOCs, including PCE. TCE, toluene, and
xylenes; other organics; metals, including arsenic,
chromium. and lend; other inorganics; and radioactive
materials.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes constructing an in-situ vacuum-enhanced soil
vapor extraction system to perform pilot scale
remedial tests; filtering extracted vapor using granular
activated carbon, with offsite regeneration of spent
carbon; instalhng ground water depression pumps at
the East Trenches Area to expose residual DNAPLs
not released through vapor extraction; collecting vapor
extraction condensates and ground water in onsite
ground water holding tanks; and transporting the
condensates and ground water offsite for treatment at
a POTW; monitoring radiation levels during
equipment construction; mitigating any affected
wetlands; and implementing a full scale remedianon
if pilot scale test results show a I ppm hydrocarbon
recovery rate. No costs were provided for this
remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil and ground water clean-up goals are based on
health based criteria of I0 to l0 levels for cancer
risk, background levels, and SDWA MCLs and
MCLGs. They include chemical-specific goals for
ground waxer for, acetone 10 ugh, TCE S ugh; xylene
10,000 ugh; t luene 1,000 ugh. methylene chloride
5 ugh, aluminum 0.2 mg/I. antimony 0.6 mg/I, arsenic
0.05 mg/I, barium I mg/I. chromium 0.01 mg/I, iron
0.3 mg/I, lead 0.005 mg/I, mercury 0.0002 mg/I.
selenium 0.01 mg/I. gross alpha ii pCi/I, gross beta
19 pCiJI. Pu Z) 0.05 pCi/I Chemical-specific’
clean-up goals for soil include arsenic 5 mg/I; barium
100 mg/I: cadmium I mg/i. chromium 5 mg/I. lead 5
mg/I; mercury 0.20 mg/I. selenium 57 mg/I, TCE 5.6
mg/kg, acetone 0.59-160 mg/kg, xylenes 28 mg/kg,
and methylene chloride 33 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
277
-------
REGION 8
ROCKY FLATS PLANT (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 2), CO (Continued)
September 1, 1992
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Background Levels; Carbon Adsorption
(GAC); Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean
Water Act; Dnnking Water Contaminants; Ground
Water, Ground Water Treatment, Inorganics; Interun
Remedy, Lead; MCLGs; MCLs; Metals; Offsite
Discharge; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment, PCE; Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW), Radioactive Materials; RCRA, Safe
Drinking Water Act; Soil; Solvents; State
Standards/Regulations; TCE, Temporary Storage,
Toluene, Treatabthty Swdies, Treatment Technology,
Vacuum Extraction, VOCs, Water Quality Crneria;
Wedands, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 01/05/90, 01/25/91,
04/06/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminant.s: VOCs, Metals,
Inorganics, Radioactive
Matenals
Category: Source Control - lntenm
Ground Water- lntenm
278
-------
ROCKY FLATS PLANT (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 4), Co
April 6, 1992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFHON :
The Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 4)
site is part of the 6,500-acre nuclear weapons
research, development, production, and plutonium
processing complex in Jefferson County, Colorado.
The plant is composed of the 450-acre Rocky Flats
Plant (RFP) security area and the remaining buffer
area. Land use in the area is predominantly rural,
agricultural, commercial, and industrial, with several
residential areas within 5 miles of the site Since
1951, the Department of Energy (DOE) has used the
site for manufacturing components of nuclear
weapons; processing plutonium: and fabricating,
machining, and assembling components from metals.
The central portion of RFP contains the Solar
Evaporation Pond (SEPs) Waste Management Unit,
including Ponds 207-A, 207-B North, 207-B Center,
207-B South, 207-C, and the Interceptor Trench
System (ITS) The SEPs were formerly used to s’ore
and treat liquid process waste having less than
100,000 picocuries per liter of total long-lived alpha
activity These process wastes also contained high
concentrations of rutrates as well as treated acidic
wastes containing aluminum hydroxide The ponds
are known to have received other wastes, including
sanitary sewer sludge, lithium chlonde. lithium metal.
sodium nitrate, femc cblonde, sulftrnc acid,
ammoruum persulfales, hydrochionc acid, nitric acid.
hexavalent chromium, tritium. and cyanide solutions
Sludge horn the SEPs was removed penodically to
implement repair work on the pond liners and as part
of routine waste management activities Removed
sludge was mixed with Portland cement and solidified
as a mixture of sludge and concrete for shipment for
offsite disposal En 1986, placement of process waste
materialintothesepondsceased From 1971101974,
construction of interceptor trenches was initiated to
prevent natural seepage and pond leakage from
entenng North Walnut Creek In 1981. the system
was replaced by the current ITS, which collects an
estimated 4 million gallons per year for discharge to
the 207-B ponds This interim ROD addresses
management and treatment of liquids contained in
ponds 207-A, 207-B North, 207-B Center. 207-B
South, and the water collected by the ITS as the 0U4
at the site Future RODs wW address removal and
solidification of sludge. further investigation,
charactenzation, and remedial activities The pnmaiy
contaminants of concern affecting the surface water
are VOCs, including TCE; metals, including
chromium and radioactive materials, including Pu 239
and Am .
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes constructing and utilizing three temporary
surge tanks and associated piping to contain and
transfer water collected by the ITS; evaporating
approximately 3 million gallons of’ water from pond
207-A and 5 million gallons of water from the 207-B
ponds using onsite flash evaporators and associated
tanks; transfemng the distillate to a holding tank for
remjection into the Raw Water System for plant
cooling tower usage; and collecting the flash
evaporator concentrate in holding tanks, and onsite
solidification of the residual: conducting treatability
studies using surrogate pond water to simulate the
proposed treatment system. The estimated total cost
for this interim remedial action is $8,017,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $1,170,000 for 3
years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific surface waxer clean-up goals are
based on site-specific radionuclide standards and
MCLGs or MCLs and attainment of relevant CWA
water quality critena.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds: Chromium; Clean Air Act;
Clean Water Act, Direct Contact, Interim Remedy,
MCLGs, MCLs; Metals; O&M, Onsite Containment;
Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment, RCRA;
Radioactive Matenals, Safe Drinking Water Act,
Solidification/StabilizatiOn: Surface Water, Surface
Water CollecnonlDiversion. Surface Water Treatment;
TCE, Temporary Storage, Treatability Studies.
Treatment Technology, VOCs, Water Quality Criteria.
279
-------
REGION 8
ROCKY FLATS PLANT (USDOE) (OPERABLE UNIT 4), CO (Continued)
April 6, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 01/05/90, 01/25/91
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: SW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals, Radioactive
Matenals
Category: Source Control - lntenm
280
-------
SILVER BOW CREEKIBUT E AREA, MT
June 30, 1992
REGION 8
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Silver Bow CreeklButte Area site is a mining and
processing area located 7 miles east of Anaconda in
the Upper Clark Fork River Basin, Deer Lodge
County, Montana. One part of the site is the Warm
Springs Pond inactive area, which covers
approximately 2,500 acres of open pond water and
interspersed wetlands just above the beginning of the
Clark Fork River. Several onsile creeks (Warm
Springs, Silver Bow, Mill, Willow) and a stream by-
pass (MW-Willow By-pass) serve as pnncipal
headwaters to Clark Fork River. Three settling ponds,
an area between the northern-most pond (Pond 1) and
the Clark Fork River’s beginning point, and a series
of wildlife ponds are located in proximity to the
creeks Site contamination is the result of over 100
years of mining and process operations in the area.
Until the early 1970’s. mining, milling, and smelting
wastes were dumped directly into Silver Bow Creek
and transported downstream. Three setthng ponds
were constructed in the early 1900’s by Anaconda
Copper Mining Company to allow wastes that were
deposited in Silver Bow Creek to settle Out before
discharging to the Clark Fork River Approximately
19 million cubic yards of tailings and metal-
contaminated sediment and sludge have collected in
the ponds and 3 million cubic yards of contaminated
tailings remain upstream of the ponds along the banks
of Silver Bow Creek Principal threats from the site
include the possibility of pond berm failure attributed
to flood and earthquake damage that could release
millions of cubic yards of tailings and sediment into
the river Several removal actions that occurred
during 1967 and 1989 have been or will be
implemented at the site, including the Mill-Willow
By-pass removal, Travona Mine Shaft Control. and
residential sod cleanups. A 1990 ROD addressed an
interim action for the Warm Spnngs Ponds area,
which included Ponds 1, 2, and 3, but deferred the
decision on the area below Pond I for a year When
it was recognized that a decision on Pond I and the
area below it might delay the remedy for Ponds 2 and
3, in 1991 EPA wrote an ESD that divided the Warm
Springs Pond area into two operable unit.s the Active
area, composed of Ponds 2 and 3, as 0U4, and the
Inactive area, composed of Pond I and the area below
it. as 0U12. This ROD addresses an interim remedy
for all media at 0U12. The primary contaminants of
concern affectina the soil, sediment, ground water ,
and surface water in the Inactive area are metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead; and
morganics.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating all tailings and contaminated soil from the
by-pass channel and the area below Pond I not
planned for wet-closure, and consolidating the wastes
over existing dry tailings within the western portion
of Pond 1; placing a cover of lime, fill, and soil over
the dry tailings and revegetating; modifying the by-
pass channel to safely route potential flood flows;
using soil and gravel that meet geotechiucal
requirements and have copper levels of less than
500 mg/kg to raise and strengthen existing berms;
constructing new berms; raising and strengthening the
north-south aspect of the Pond I berm, and stabilizing
the east-west aspect of the Pond I berm to withstand
a maximum credible earthquake for this area;
extending and armoring the north-south aspect of the
Pond I berm, relocating the lowermost portion of the
by-pass channel, converting the present channel into
a ground water interception trench, installing pumps
to allow for a pump-back system to transport ground
water and surface water to the active area for
treatment, if levels exceed specified standards;
constructing wet-closure berms to enclose the
submerged tailings and contaminated sediment;
chemically fuung tailings and sediment with lime, and
flooding the wet-closure cells with water with a pH of
greater than 8.5, constructing a run-off interception
system along the east side of the Inactive area and toe
drains, and installing a collection manifold for both
the Active and Inactive areas, and implementing
ecological monitoring and institutional controls,
including deed, ground water, and land use
restrictions The total present worth cost for this
remedial action is $18,100,000, which includes an
annual O&M cost of 567.200 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Soil at final excavation grade for this intenm action
will exhibit concentrations of metals within the ranges
of arsenic 8 4—42.1 mg/kg; cadmium 0 8—4 mg/kg,
copper 0.6—287 mg/kg; lead 8 4—45.5 mg/kg; and
zinc 0 4—573. Chemical-specific interim ground water
clean-up goals, which are based on state drinking
water cntena. include arsenic 50 u ,/l; cadmium
281
-------
REGION 8
SILVER BOW CREEKIBUUE AREA, MT (Continued)
June 30, 1992
10 ugh; copper 1.000 ugh; iron 300 ugh; lead 50 ugh;
manganese 50 ugh; and zinc 5,000 ugh. Final soil,
sediment, ground water, and surface water action
levels for the various contaminants are not identified
in this ROD and will be determined based on ongoing
risk assessment work at other OUs within the Clark
Fork Basin.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed, ground
water, and land use restrictions will be implemented
to prevent residential development; domestic well
construction, disruption of dry-closure caps; and
swimming in the area.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic. Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium, Clean
Air Act, Clean Water Act; Deferred Decision. Direct
Contact; Excavation. Filling; Floodplain; Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring. Ground Water
Treatment, Inorganics. Institutional Controls. Interim
Remedy: Lead; MCLGs, MCLs; Metals; O&M;
Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal. Onsite
Treatment, RCRA. Safe Drinking Water Act.
Sediment. Soil, State Standards/Regulations. Surface
Water, Surface Water Collection/Diversion. Surface
Water Monitoring. Surface Water Treatment. Water
Quality Criteria. Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 09 /28/90
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil. Sediment. GW. SW
Major Contaminants: Metals. inorganics
Category: Source Control - lntenm
Ground Water - Interim
282
-------
HASSAYAMPA LANDFILL, AZ
August 6, 1992
REGION 9
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Hassayampa Landfill site is a 10-acre area of a
47-acre municipal landfill that was previously used
for hazardous waste disposal. Land use in the area is
predominantly desert and is sparsely cultivated. The
Hassayampa Landfill lies within the Hassayampa
River drainage area, but outside of the 100-year
floodplain. The estimated 1,100 people who reside
within a 3-mile radius of the site use the aquifer
underlying the site for their dnnking waler. From
1961 to the present. the Mancopa County Landfill
Department owned and operated the site. Waste
disposed of at the landfill consisted chiefly of
municipal garbage, tree trimmings, and other plant
refuse. In 1979, the state requested that Hassayampa
Landfill accept hazardous waste as an alternate waste
disposal site dtrnng a prohibition at City of Phoenix
landfills, in the 18 months that the landfill accepted
hazardous waste, up to 3.28 million tons of liquid
waste and approximately 4.150 tons of solid waste
were deposited The Hazardous Waste Area consisted
of several unlined pits (pits 1-5) for disposal of hcevy
metals, solvents, petroleum distillates, oil, pesticides.
acids, bases, and non-hazardous septic wastes In
1981, under EPA guidance, a number of
mvesuganons were conducted that revealed VOC
contamination in the soil and ground water T!us
ROD addresses the soil, debris, and ground water as
the final action for the site The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil, debris, and ground water
are VOCs and metals, including chromium and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating contamination in the vatlose z.one using vapor
extraction at all locations where soil vapors exceed
clean-up levels, controlling emissions from the
treatment system using either vapor phase carbon
adsorption or catalytic oxidation as determined during
the RD phase, installing a 10-acre cap over the soil
and waste in the Hazardous Waste Area. extracting
and treating contaminated ground water onsite using
air stripping and, as necessary, vapor phase carbon
adsorption. with reinjecuon of the treated water onsite
or in the immediate vicinity, monitoring ground
water, and implementing institutional
controls including deed and ground water use
restrictions, and site access restrictions such as
fencing The estimated oresent worth cost for this
remedial action is $6,100,000. which includes an
annual O&M cost of $2,213,100 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The selected remedy will comply with the federal and
more stringent stale standards. Soil vapor clean-up
levels will be calculated based on levels that will be
protective of ground-water quality. The design of the
cap will be in compliance with RCRA requirements.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals axe
based on SDWA MCLs and include I,1-DCE 7 ug/l;
1,2-DCA 5 ug/1; PCE 5 ugh; ICE 5 ugh; l.2-DCE
(hans) 100 ugh; 1,2-DCE (cis) 70 ugh; and 1,1,1-
TCA 200 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented at the site to
prevent direct contact with contaminated wastes and
soil at pit 1 and to limit future ground water use.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Capping. Carbon Adsorption (GAC):
Carcinogenic Compounds. Chromium, Debris: Direct
Contact: Drinking Water Contaminants; Extraction;
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment, Institutional Controls: Landfill
Closure, Lead, MCLGs, MCLs; Metals, Municipally
Owned Site, O&M. Onsite Containment, Onsite
Discharge. Onsite Disposal. Onsite Treatment: RCRA:
Safe Drinking Water Act, Soil, Solvents, State
StandardslRegulations. TCE. Treatment Technology,
Vacuum Extraction, VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of prvvious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW
Major Contaminants: VOC, Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
283
-------
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE, CA
September 30, 1992
REGION 9
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 4,400-acre Iron Mountain Mine (1MM) site is a
collection of inactive mines and associated properly
located on hon Mountain, Shasta County, California.
Land use in the area is predominantly commercial,
with a wetlands located within 9 miles from the site.
The Sacramento River is a major fishery and source
of drinking water for the City of Redding, which is
located 9 miles east of the site. 1MM contains several
inactive underground and open pit mines, numerous
waste piles, abandoned mining facilities, and mine
drainage treatment facilities. From 1879 to present.
several owners, including Rhone-Poulenc Basic
Chemicals, mined copper and other metals, such as
gold, silver. pyrite. and zinc In 1894, Mountain
Mining Company acquired and began operating the
mine. Mining waste generated was dumped into
ravines and washed into several creeks, including
Boulder and Sacramento. In 1896, Mountain Copper
Company assumed ownership, and mining activities
continued intermittently from the 1880’s until 1962
In 1968, Stauffer Chemical Company acquired
Mountain Copper and operated a copper cementation
plant In 1976, the state issued Stauffer Chemical an
order requiring an abatement of the continuing
pollution from [ MM Throughout the years. mining
activities at 1MM resulted in deposits of waste rock
and pynte tailings on the exposed ground surface, in
addition to rain and surface flows, which formed acid
mine drainage and transported contaminants to surface
water and sediments In 1983, EPA identified 1MM
as the largest discharger of toxic metals in the United
States A 1986 ROD provided limited source control
and management actions to lessen discharge of AMD
to surface waters This ROD addresses control of the
AMD sources in the Boulder Creek drainage basin
from the Richmond and Lawson portals Two
planned RODs will address AMD to Slickrock Creek.
sources for Boulder Creek drainage (excluded from
this ROD), contaminated ground water, and other
sources of contamination Tbe primary contaminants
of concern affecting the sediment, debns, and surface
water are metals, including lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
collecting the acid mine drainage from the Richmond
and Lawson portals and constructing pipelines and
necessary structures to transport the drainage into the
treatment facility; treating the acid mine drainage by
chemical neutralization/precipitation using the
lime/sulfide High Density Sludge (FEDS) treatment
process, and discharging the treated effluent onsite to
surface water; disposing of the residual sludge onsite
in the macfive open pit mine; excavating,
consolidating on ite, and capping seven waste piles
that are actively eroding and discharging hazardous
substances; and diverting ground water and surface
water away from the landfill. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is 553,958.000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $27,865,000
for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Sediment and surface water clean-up goals are based
on background levels as established by SWDA MCLs
or health based levels, whichever is more stringent.
Chemical-specific sediment and surface water goals
include antimony 0006 mg/i, arsenic 0050 mg/I;
cadmium 001 mg/I. and mercury 0.002 mg/i.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
ARAR Waiver, Background Levels: Capping.
Carcinogenic Compounds. Clean Water Act, Debris,
DLrect Contact. Drinking Water Contaminants.
Excavation. Interim Remedy. Lead, MCLGs, MCLs,
Metals. Muting Wastes. Offsite Treatment. Onsite
Containment, Onsne Disposal Onsite Discharge,
Onsite Treatment, Safe Drinking Water Act;
Sediment. Soil. State Standards/Regulations, Surface
Water, Surface Water Collection/Diversion, Surface
Water Treatment
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 10/03/86
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Sediment, Debris. SW
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
284
-------
JASCO CHEMICAL, CA
September 30, 1992
REGION 9
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
11 2.05-acre Jasco Chemical site is a chemical
blending and packaging facility in Mountain View,
Santa Clara County, California.. Land use in the area
is predominantly residential with some light indusuy.
An estimated 67,000 residents in the City of
Mountain View use municipal water from wells and
a reservoir as their drinking water supply: however,
EPA has determined that ground waxer in the shallow
aquifer underlying the site is a potential source of
drinking water. From 1951 to 1976, the site changed
hands several times. In December 1976, Jasco began
repackaging bulk chemicals into smaller quantities
and blending chemicals to produce products, such as
paint thinners and degreasers. Jasco received bulk
chemicals in 55-pound bags and in 55-gallon drums,
and chemicals were stored in eight underground tar-
wrapped storage tanks In 1984, puny mixing
operations were initiated. As a result of a citizen’s
complaint of solvents being dumped onsite, the state
conducted a preliminary ground water investigation in
1984, which showed the presence of
pentachiorophenol and inethylene chionde, chemicals
used by Jasco. in the soil and ground water. In 1985,
a subsequent investigation showed the presence of
high levels of contanunated soil in the drainage
swales around the plant. In 1987. Jasco removed a
leaking underground diesel storage tank that had been
installed prior to 1976 Soil sampling in the
immediate area showed the presence of diesel
derivatives, such as PAHs Since 1987, Jasco has
been extracting and discharging contaminated ground
water to the storm sewer system in accordance with
their permit provisions In 1990. trace chemicals
placed in the eight underground tanks revealed one
leak below action levels This ROD addresses
treating tank source materials present in the soil and
ground water and preventing future migration of
contaminants The pnmary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil and ground water are VOCs,
including beazene. PCE. TCE. toluene. and xylenes
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial acuon for this site includes
excavating and treating 1.100 cubic yards of
contaminated soil onsite using enhanced biotreatrnent.
treating air emissions using carbon adsorption. and
treating or disposing of spent carbon offsite: testing
residual soil. with pretreatment if necessary, and
onsite disposal if treatment levels are met, or offsite
disposal if clean up levels are still exceeded;
extracting and treating contaminated ground water
with an onsite liquid phase carbon adsorption unit.
and discharging treated ground water offsite to a
sanitary sewer, as permitted; implementing hydraulic
controls to prohibit future plume migration,
conducting quarterly ground water monitoring; and
implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions to limit use of ground water The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
ranges from $601,000 to 5684.000. which includes a
$32,800 annual O&M cost for 5-10 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chenucal-specific soil clean-up goals are established
on health-based levels estimated using SDWA MCLs
and include l.1-DCA 0.6 mg/kg: 1.1-DCE 2 mg/kg;
1,2-DCE 0.03 mg/kg; cis-l.2-DCE 1 mg/kg; 1,1,1-
TCA 100 mg/kg; acetone 30 mg/kg, benzene
0.3 mg/kg; chloroethane 4,000 mg/kg; diesel mixture
10.000 mg/kg, ethylbenzene 3.000 mg/kg; methanol
200 mg/kg; methyl ethyl ketone 9 mg/kg; methylene
chloride 0.2 mg/kg. PCE 7 mg/kg; toluene
1,000 mg/kg; ICE 3 mg/kg. vinyl chlonde
0.02 mg/kg: and xyleries 2.000 mg/kg Chemical-
specific ground waxer clean-up goals are based on
federal and state MCLs and include acetone 4,000
ug/l,benzene I ugfl, 1.l-DCA5ugII. l.1-DCE6ugIl.
1.2-DCA 05 ug/l. methylene chlonde 5 ugh. PCE
5 ug/l. toluene I ugh, petroleum hydrocarbons 1 ugh.
and vinyl chIonde 0.5 ug/1
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to prevent use
of the shallow ground water aquifer for drinking
purposes
KEYWORDS :
Benzene: Biodegradation/Land Application; Carbon
Adsorption (GAC). Carcinogenic Compounds: Clean
Air Act, Direct Contact, Drinking Waxer
Contaminants; Excavation: Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring. Ground Water Treatment,
institutional Controls, MCLs. O&M. Offsite
Discharge: Offsite Disposal. Offsite Treatment; Onsite
Treatment; PCE, Plume Management. RCRA; Safe
285
-------
REGION 9
JASCO CHEMICAL, CA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
Drinking Water Act: Soil; Solvents; State
Sindards/Regulations. ICE; Toluene; Treatment
Technology; VOCs. Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminant: VOCs
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
286
-------
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LAB (USDOE), CA
August 5, 1992
REGION 9
SITE m5T0RyIDESCRWrIQN :
The 800-acre Lawrence Livermore National Lab
(LLNL) (USDOE) site is a multidisciplinary research
facility located in Livermore, California. The site is
owned by the Depar nt of Energy (DOE) and
operated by the Regents of the University of
California. Land use in the area is predominantly
industrial with an urban area to the west and
agncultural lands to the east of the LLNL facility.
Wetlands at the site consist of three small areas
associated with culverts that channel runoff from the
surrounding area into Arroyo Las Positas at the
northern perimeter of the site. About 10,000 people
use the ground water, which is blended from several
downtown Livermore municipal wells, as their
primary drinking water supply. The LLNL site was
converted from agricultural and cattle ranch land by
the Navy in 1942, who used the site until 1946 as a
training facility and for aircraft assembly and
maintenance. Solvents, degreasers. and paints were
routinely used Between 1946 and 1950, the site was
used as a naval reserve command training center, and
in 1951. the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
began using the property as a weapons design and
physics research laboratory In 1977. DOE took over
responsibility of the site Investigations for suspected
ground water contamination at LI.J4L were prompted
by the state beginning in 1984. when
perchloroethylene was discovered in the domestic
supply well of a nearby property. LLNL began
supplying bottled water to local residents whose
domestic wells had been affected by solvents
rrugraung from the LLNL facility Between 1985 and
1987, the LLNL continued the ground water
investigations, which revealed that releases of
hazardous materials had occurred at the LLNL site
during the 1940’s. Also in the post-Navy era,
localized spills, leaking tanks, surface impouridn nts.
and landfills contributed VOC. FHC. metal, and
intium contamination to ground water and unsaturated
sediments Prior to 1985. LIJ4L conducted two
significant removal actions From 1982 to 1983. four
former pits in the Taxi Strip Area in eastern LL L
were excavated and backfllled. in 1984. a former
landfill was also excavated and backfilled This ROD
addresses a final remedy for the contaminated
sediment and ground water at the LLNL site An
additional potential source of hazardous materials, the
Trailer 5475 East Taxi Strip Area. has been identified
and is being investigated. If additional public health
or environmental risks from this or other sources are
identified, this ROD may be augmented to address
any additional necessary actions. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the sediment and
ground water are VOCs, including beuzene, PCE,
TCE, and toluene; other organics, including
pesticides; metals, including lead and chromiunz and
radioactive materials.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
using vacuum-induced venting to extract contaminants
in vapor form from the onsite unsaturated sediment
and treating using catalytic oxidation and/or activated
carbon; pumping water at 24 initial locations to
contain and remediate the ground water plume using
both existing and new extraction wells: constructing
seven onsite facilities (labelled A to 0) to neat the
extracted ground waler, designing each treatment
system specifically to treat the specific combinations
of contaminants, including ultraviolet/oxidation to
treat VOCs at facilities A, B, E, and F: air stripping
to treat the chloroform and carbon tetrachloride at
facilities C, D, and 0; ion exchange at facility D to
remove chromium; and granular activated carbon at
treatment facility F to remove lead. controlling air
emissions from the treatment processes at all facilities
using granular activated carbon, recharging or reusing
the treated water onsite; and monitoring ground water
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $104,100,000, which includes an annual
O&M cost of $21,585,000 for 50 years.
PERFORMANCE STA jDARDS OR GOALS :
Cbemical”SpeCific sediment and ground water clean-
up goals are the mote stringent SDWA MCLs and
State MCLs and include benzene I ugh, PCE 5 ug/l,
TCE 5 ugh, lead 15 ug/l. total chromium 50 ugh,
total tnbalomethaneS 100 ugh. and carbon
tetrachioride 0.5 ugh Unsaturated sediment will be
remediated only if it would result in levels above an
MCL if allowed to nugrate into the ground water
Unsaturated zone rernediauon will be complete when
modeling shows that contaminants will no longer
migrate and cause ground water to exceed MCL The
discharge limits for these chemicals will also be met
if effluent waters from the remedial treatment are
discharged to ditches or arroyos onsite .
287
-------
REGION 9
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LAB (USDOE), CA (Continued)
August 5, 1992
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogemc Compounds; Chromium; Clean Air Act,
Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Waler Treatment; lncmeration/
Thermal Desmiction: Lead; MCLs: Metals; O&M;
Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal. Onsne Treatment;
Organics; PCE, Pesticides; Plume Management:
Radioactive Materials; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water
Act; Sediment, Solvents: State Standards/Regulations.
ICE: Treatment Technology: Vacuum Extraction,
VOCs, Water Quality Cntena.
SETE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Sediment, GW
VOCs, Other Organics.
Metals. Radioactive
Materials
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
288
-------
PACIFIC COAST PIPELINE, CA
March 31, 1992
REGION 9
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIFrION :
The 20-acre Pacific Coast Pipeline site, located in
Ventura County, California. is a former petro-
chemical refinery that opera le4 from the 1920’s to
1950. The site is currently used by Texaco as a
pumping station for crude oil produced in local oil
fields. Surrounding land use is industrial, agricultural,
and residential. The site is located near the
confluence of three major drainages: the Santa Clara
River, Sespe Creek. and Pole Creek. Piior to the
construction of a flood channel, Pole Creek emptied
directly into the site. Surface water from the site is
either channeled for collection in bermed storage
areas or in excavated pits, or it flows into Pole Creek
through drainage pipes or over the ground’s surface.
The San Cayetono Thrust Fault that crosses the site is
associated with areas of natural oil seeps. From 1928
to 1950, refinery wastes were disposed of onsite in a
large main waste pit (MWP) as well as in eight
smaller unlined sumps and pits located on the South
Western portion of the site. Monitoring wells
installed by Texaco have identified 45 chemicals of
potential concern detected at the site, including VOCs,
SVOCs, and TPHs In 1986, under state guidance,
Texaco removed 33,000 cubic yards of waste material
and contaminated soils from the MWP and the eight
other waste disposal areas There ate currently two
areas of ground water cont.aininauon one beneath the
MWP and one in the southwest site area The source
of this ground water contamination is likely associated
with the disposal of refinery wastes in the MWP and
other waste disposal pits Since the removal of the
refinery wastes in the MWP, concentrations of ground
water contamination have decreased This ROD
nddresses reinediafton of ground water to reduce
contaminant levels below federal and stale drinking
water standards The principal contaminated media
are soil and ground waler The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil in the vadose zone and
ground water are VOCs. including benzene and
toluene. other organics. including PAHs, and metals,
including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
treating areas that threaten to contaminate ground
water at levels above site clean-up standards using
soil vapor extraction after a I-year subsurface study;
desaenin . constructing, and operating an onsite
ground water extraction and treatment system that
uses activated carbon; discharging the treated ground
water to the onsite aquifer by injection, or reuse of
the treated ground waxer in a beneficial way, such as
irrigation; thermally destroying or regenerating the
spent carbon; monitoring ground water to ensure
effectiveness of the treatment system, and maintaining
a perimeter fence. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action ranges from $2,300,000 to
$7,000,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of
$480,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for ground water in
the aquifer are based on state MCLs, and the TBCs
State Action Level for toluene, including benzene
I ugh (stale); I ,2-DCA 0.5 ug/l (state); ethylbenzene
680 ug/l (state); methylene chloride 0.1 mgfl, and
toluene 100 ugh (state action levelITBC).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds. Chromium. Direct Contact;
Drinking Water Contaminants, Ground Water, Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment,
Incineration/Thermal Destruction; Lead, MCLs.
Metals; O&M, Onsite Discharge. Onsite Disposal.
Onsite Treatment, Organics; PAHs. RCR.A; Safe
Drinking Water Act, Soil. Solvents, State
StandardsIRegulatiOflS Toluene. Treatment
Technology, Vacuum Extraction, VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics,
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
289
-------
PURITY OIL SALES, CA
September 30, 1992
REGION 9
SITE IHSTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 6.8-acre Purity Oil Sales site is a former waste
oil re-refining facihty in the township of Malaga,
Fresno County, California. Land use in the area is
mixed agricultural, industrial, and residential, with the
North Central Canal flowing along the southern
border of the site. The town of Malaga surrounds the
site at distances of about 1/2 mile or more. From
1934 to 1975, waste oil was re-refined ousite using a
number of treatment processes. including clarification.
chemical addition, dehydration, distillation, and
filtration Dunng its history, the facility has changed
ownership several times, and the property is now in
the custody of the state. Oil and by-products from
the re-refining process were stored in sumps and
tanks and disposed of onsite in unlined pits In 1973,
at the request of the county, Punty Oil backfilled the
waste pits with soil but did not remove any of the
waste Recent investigations have revealed that the
most highly contaminated soil is in the former waste
pit areas and extends from the surface to the ground
water, and that the eastern 23 acres of the property
demonstrates surface soil contamination to a 2-foot
depth In 1986 and 1987, two removal actions were
initiated by the state and EPA, which involved
removal of 1,800 cubic yards of hazardous materials
and 30,000 gallons of waste oil and waler from an
above-ground tank to be disposed of offsite A 1989
ROD addressed remediation of the ground water and
tanks, as OU 1. and provided for the removal of seven
above-ground tanks and their contents and allowed
pnvate well users downgradient of the site to be
connected to city or county water systems This ROD
addresses a final remedy for 0U2, the contaminated
soil at the site The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, sediment, and debns are VOCs,
includrng benzene, PCE. ICE. toluene. and xylenes.
other organics, including PAHs and pesticides. and
metals, including arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing a slurry wall around the perimeter of the
site to minimize migration of contaminants,
excavating approximately 500 cubic yards of
contaminated canal sediment and spreading them over
the site, filling the excavated areas with 8,600 cubic
yards of imported soil; applying foam to control
emissions during excavation and slurry wall
construction; transporting and disposing of rubble
uncovered during the excavation process offsite,
possibly at a RCRA facility; enclosing the entire
length of the North Central Canal in a reinforced
concrete pipe; treating 72,000 cubic yards of deep soil
onsite using a soil vapor extraction (SVE) to remove
VOCs; treating air emissions from the SVE process
using carbon adsorption, prior to discharge to the air;
disposing of spent activated carbon offsite at a
permitted RCRA facility; covering the site with a
RCRA multi-layer cap, with a retaining wall to
support the cap; monitonng ground water, conducting
environmental monitoring to ensure the integrity of
the cap; and implementing institutional controls,
including deed restrictions The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $36,254,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $741,000 for
9.4 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals were not
provided, however, vadose zone monitonng will be
performed to ensure that the SVE system is reducing
the VOC mass so that it no longer threatens to
contaminate ground water at levels above SDWA
MCLs
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions
will be implemented to protect the cap and prohibit
future excavation
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Capping, Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium, Clean Air Act,
Clean Water Act, Debris; Direct Contact, Dredging,
Excavation. Filling. Ground Water Monitoring,
In5ntutional Controls. Landfill Closure, Lead, Metals,
O&M. Offsite Disposal. Onsite Containment, Onsite
Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Orgarncs, PAHs, PCE,
Pesticides, RCRA. Sediment, Slurry Wall, Soil,
Solvents; Solvent Extraction, State Standardsi
Regulations, ICE, Toluene, Treatability Studies,
Ireatinern Technology; Vacuum Extraction, VOCs,
Xy lenes
290
-------
REGION 9
PURITY OIL SALES, CA (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: 09127/89
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Sediment. Debns
Major Contaminants: VOCS, Other Organics.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
291
-------
RHONE-POULENCIZOECON, CA
March 4, 1992
REGION 9
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 13.19-acre Rhone-Poulenc/ZoecOn site is located
in East Palo Alto, San Mateo County, California. The
site is composed of at least 12 separately owned
parcels that include a 5.19-acre former pesticide
manufacturing plant, a sludge pond, and a chemical
storage facility owned by Sandoz Crop Protection
Corporation. From the late 1950’s to the early
1970’s, another parcel at the site, called the Call-Mac
Property, was used to store hazardous waste drums
some of which were leaking. Land use in the area is
mostly industrial with some mixed commercial and
residential use within one-fourth mile of the site. The
sue is located approximately 2,000 feet from San
Francisco Bay within the 100-year coastal floodplain.
and is bounded on the east and southeast by tidal and
nontidal marshes (wetlands) Surface and subsurface
drainage affect surface and ground water that has
numerous existing and potential beneficial uses
From 1929 to 1972 until Zoecon Corporation
purchased the site, pesticides coniaining arsenic were
manufactured and packaged onsite In 1980. an
investigation by the new site owners revealed severe
contamination of soil and ground water with arsenic,
which resulted from improper handling of pesticides
during unloading ln 1981, the state directed the
removal of 1300 drums and 25 cubic yards of
contaminaied soil from the Call-Mac Property From
1985 to 1987, ground water monitoring wells and
fencing around contaminated soil were installed- In
1991. the state required removal of approximately
4,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil, however, the
Sandoz parcel is currently a state-permitted RCRA
facility for the storage and disposal of hazardous
wastes This ROD addresses the contaminated soil
and ground water in the upland operable unit. A
future ROD will address remediation of the wetlands
operable unit The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil, debris, and ground water are metals.
including arsenic and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and removal of any offsite soil from areas
at the Sandoz and Bains properties with arsenic levels
greater than 5,000 mg/kg, removing or paving over
soil for properties other than Sandoz and Bains, with
arsenic levels greater than health-based levels of
70 me/kg, u-eating soil at the Sandoz and Bains
properties contaminated with arsenic levels greater
than 500 mg/kg onsite using silicate stabilization;
excavanag and treating contaminated soil from
beneath onsite structures after future demoLition using
stabilization; installing a slurry wall and dewatenng
around an area of approximately 76,800 cubic yards
of arsenic-contaminated soil and the ground water
remaining after soil remediauon; installing a cap and
liner on the currently unpaved portions of the Sandoz
property, the Barns railroad track area, and portions of
the adjacent properties; monitoring ground water with
a contingency that, if arsenic exceeds 40 ugh in
perimeter wells or background levels in the deep
aquifer, ground water treatment will be performed to
contain the plume; and implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions for the Sandoz and
Bains properties and other areas where paving is
selected The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $9,100,000, which includes a total
O&M of $1,100,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
The chemical-specific clean-up standard for soil is
based on the health-based standard for arsenic
300 mg/kg Ground water is based on state and
SDWA MCLs for arsenic 50 ugh
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls. including deed restrictions, will
be implemented to prohibit future residential use.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic: Background Levels: Capping. Carcinogenic
Compounds, Clean, Water Act, Contingent Remedy;
Debris: Deferred Decision: Direct Contact.
Excavation, floodplain, Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring, Ground Water Treatment, Institutional
Controls, Landfill Closure, Lead. MCLs, Metals,
O&M; Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal, Onsite
Treatment, Plume Management RCRA. Safe
Drinking Water Act, Slurry Wall, Soil; Solidificauon/
Scabthzauon. State Standards/Regulaliocis. Treatability
Studies, Treatment Technology, Wetlands
292
-------
REGION 9
RHONE-POULENC/ZOECON, CA (Continued)
March 4, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns, GW
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
293
-------
SACRAMENTO ARMY DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 3), CA
December 9, 1991
REGION 9 —
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFUION :
The 485-acre Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) is a
U.S. Army support, service, and storage facility
located approximately 7 miles southeast of the City of
Sacramento, California. Land use in the area is
predominantly commercial and light industrial, with
residential areas located mainly to the west. An
estimated 56,000 people obtain water from a deep
aquifer that is not considered to be contaminated by
the facility. However, some wells in the surrounding
area draw water from the upper aquifers Past and
present activities conducted at SAAD include electro-
optics equipment repair. the emergency manufacture
of parts, shelter repair, and metal treating. The
pnmary waste-generating activities included metal-
plating and painting In conjunction with these
activities, SAAD maintains several above- and below-
ground storage tanks, some unlined lagoons and burn
pits, a battery disposal area, a firefighter traimng area,
and a pesticide mixing area As a result of a late
1970’s U.S. Army initiative, a 1981 onsite
invesuganon of SAAD revealed multiple chemical
contamination from numerous sources within the
facility Ground water remediation was addressed in
a previous ROD In the past, Tank 2 was used as a
waste solvent underground storage tank In 1980. the
lank was emptied, and in 1986 the tank was removed
Sampling and analysis of the soil under and around
the tank showed that solvent contamination was
confined to the soil well above ground water level
(aquifer) A 1989 ROD addressed contaminated
ground water associated with onsite burn pits This
ROD addresses the final remedial action for
approximately 1,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil
associated with Tank 2 (0U3) Future RODs will
address contamination occumng at the oxidation
lagoons. the burn pits, the pesticide mixing area. the
battery disposal well, building #320 leach field, and
the firefighter training area The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil are VOCs.
including PCE and xylenes, and other organics.
including PAHs and pesticides
treating air emissions using granular activated carbon
and transporting the residual carbon offsite for
recycling and treatment; monitoring air emissions
during the treatment process; and sampling media
after 6 months to determine compliance with clean-up
standards. The estimated present worth cost for this
selected remedial action is $614,414. No O&M costs
are associated with this selected remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up levels are based on
health-based cntena of reducing the noncarcinogenic
HI to e—proximately I and include 2-butanone (MEK)
1.2 mg/kg: ethylbenzene 6 mg/kg; PCE 0.2 mg/kg.
and total xylenes 23 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring: Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact, Offsite Disposal, Offsite
Treatment. Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment;
Organics, PAHs, PCE. Pesticides; RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act, Soil. Solvents. State Standards/
Regulations. Treatability Studies; Treatment
Technology. Vacuum Extraction: VOCs. Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09129/89. 12/09191
Lead: Federal Facihty
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: VOCs. Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
constructing and installing an onsite soil vapor
extraction system to remove VOCs from contaminated
soil. detiunudifying the air stream arid treating the
collected water vapor using UV/hydrogen peroxide .
294
-------
SACRAMENTO ARMY DEPOT (OPERABLE UNIT 4), CA
September 30, 1992
REGION 9
SITE WSTORYIDESCRIFrION :
The 485-acre Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) site
is a mihtaiy facility in Sacramento County, Calif OTIUL
Land use in the area is predozzunantly commercial and
light industrial, with wetlands in the vicinity of
several oxidation lagoons. The estimated 56,398
people who live within 2 to 3 miles of the site use
municipal water as their drinking water supply. From
1950 to 1972, the lagoons received mostly industrial
waste water from metal ptating processes and
domestic wastewater. Domestic wastewater was
treated in the sewage treatment plant prior to
chscharge to the lagoons. Concentrated, untreated
rinse water generated by metal plating operations was
diluted with large volumes of water and then directed
to the lagoons. Since the Army began investigating
possible contamination at SAAD, eight operable units
have been identified that may require remediation.
This operable unit (0U4) consists of four lagoons,
several drainage ditches, and the neighboring Old
Morrison Creek. As a result of a 1981 investigation
by the Army and the state. VOCs were detected in
ground water and 11 heavy metals up to
concentrations of 10,900 mg/kg were found in the
oxidation lagoon pits A 1989 ROD addressed OlJl.
the ground water, and a 1991 ROD a:idressed
contaminated soil at Tank 2. This ROD addresses
0U4, the metal-contaminated soil at the oxidation
lagoons Future OUs will address other potential
risks posed by the site and a final ROD will
comprehensively address all contaminated areas at
SAAD The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil are metals, including arsenic,
chromium., and lead
umi. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $5,020,000. There are no O&M
costs associated with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
PHE for the primary metals of concern including
arsenic 5 mg/kg; cadmium 40 mg/kg; and lead
174 mg/kg. A treatabiity variance from LDR
requirements is likely. Achievable treatment levels
will be set by field pilot tests employing the selected
technology.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not Provided.
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact; Excavation: Lead: Metals;
Offsite Disposal: Offsite Treatment. Onsite Disposal;
Onsite Treatment: RCRA; Soil; Soil Washing/
Flushing; Solidification/StabiliZat lOfl State
Standards/Regulations. Temporary Storage;
Treatabihty Studies, Treatment Technology.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 09/2g/89. 12109/91
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Metals
Category: Source Control - Interim
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and treating approximately 15.500 cubic
yards of contaminated soil onsite using soil washing.
dewatering and then backfilling the treated soil onsite
in the excavation areas, and storing the nosate
temporarily in onsite holding tanks for recycling,
treating nnsate from the treatment process using
chemical precipitation. clanficanon/flocculation. and
chemical coagulation to remove metals, prior to
discharge into the sanitary sewer, dewatenng the
sludge containing the precipitated metals, and
stabilizing this if necessary, followed by disposal in
a RCRA landfill or recovery at an offsite reclamation
295
-------
WES11NGHOUSE ELECTRIC (SUNNYVALE PLANT), CA
October 16, 1991
REGION 9
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPT1ON :
The 75-acre Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant)
site is an active industrial facility located in
Sunnyvale, Santa Clara Valley, California. The site
currently manufactures steam generators, marine
propulsion systems. and missile-launching systems for
the U.S. Government. The area around the site has
been developed for light industrial, commercial, and
residential uses. A building (Building 21) used for
transformer manufacturing exists onsite. In the mid-
1950s, Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant)
manufactured transformers containing both Inerteen,
which is a dense, non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL)
consisting of PCBs and trichlorobenzene, and mineral
oil as thermal insulating fluids The storage and use
of lnerteen and mineral oil resulted in contamination
of soil and two shallow aquifers beneath the site. In
addition, general handling practices and the onsite use
of Inerteen as a weed killer resulted in the release of
PCBs into soil In 1981, Westinghouse conducted site
investigations In 1984 and 1985. Westinghouse,
under state orders, removed PCB-contaminated soil
along fence lines and railroad spurs Dunog these
investigations, evidence of fuel hydrocarbon leakage
to soil and ground water was discovered coming from
two underground fuel tanks One tank was removed
under state orders, and the remaining tank is slated
for removal during the remedial action phase of site
work This ROD addresses remediation of the
contaminated shallow ground water and soil. which
pose the pnmary risks at the site The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground
water are PCBs, solvents, and fuel compounds
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating approximately 4.00 cubic yards of
contaminated soil containing greater than
25 mg/kg PCB to a depth of eight feet and
incinerating the soil at an offsite federally permitted
facility, filling the excavated areas with clean soil and
installing an asphalt cap, permanent containment of
the shallow contaminated ground water onsice where
DNAPLs are detected using extraction, treating
contaminated ground water onsite using a technology
to be selected during the remediation design phase
based on the results of future treaiabiliiy and bench-
scale studies, which may include using phase
separation, membrane or carbon filtrauçn ultraviolet !
chemical oxidation, air stripping, and a carbon polish,
with offsite disposal and incineration of any product
phase recovered, spent carbon, and/or filtration
membranes; discharging the treated ground water
onsite unless an alternative end-use for the treated
effluent can be implemented: notifying EPA of any
future intention to cease operations, abandon,
demolish, or perform construction in Building 21:
monitoring ground water, and implementing
institutional controLs including deed and land use
restrictions. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is 58.263.000. which includes an
annual O&M cost of $225,000 for 30 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
EPA is invoking a waiver of the requirement to meet
the MCL for PCB-contaminated ground water in the
source area where DNAPL is detected based upon the
technical impracticability of remediation. Soil
containing greater than 25 mg/kg PCB will be
excavated to a depth of 8 feet, based on EPA
guidance for PCB remedialion at CERCLA sites with
restricted access The 25 mg/kg clean-up standard is
a To Be Considered (TBC) criterion Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals are based on the
more stringent of state or federal SDWA MCLs,
including benzene I uglkg (state). TCE 5 ug/kg
(federal), toluene 1,000 uglkg (federal), xylenes
1,750 ugIkg (state). and PCB 05 ug/kg (federal).
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed and land use restrictions will be implemented to
prevent well construction in contaminated areas and
to restrict excavation below 8 feet where
contaminated soil remains
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping. ARAJ Waiver, Benzenc, Capping.
Carbon Adsorption. Carcinogenic Compounds. Clean
Water Act, Deferred Decision. Direct Contact,
Drinking Water Contaminant .s. Excavation, Filling,
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground
Water Treatment, Incineration/Thermal Desmiction,
Institutional Controls, MCLs, O&M, Offsite Disposal
Offsite Treatment, Onsite Treatment, Oils, Onsite
Containment; Onsite Discharge. Organics, PCBs; Safe
Drinking Water Act, Soil, Solvents, State Standards/
296
-------
REGION 9
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC (SUNNYVALE PLANT), CA (Continued)
October 16, 1991
Regulations; TCE; Toluene; Toxic Substances
Control Act; Treatabihty Studies; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Xylenes.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, OW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - Final Acnon
Ground Water - Final Action
297
-------
ARRCOM (DREXLER ENTERPRISE), ID
June 30, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORYIDESCRWTION :
The 1.2-acre Aircom (Drexler Enterprise) site is an
abandoned waste oil recycling facility located
2.5 miles southwest of Rathdrum, Idaho. The facility
is situated in a rural residential area, and there are an
estimated eight residences within a one-half mile
radius of the site. The site overlies the Spokane
Valley-Rathdrum Praine Aquifer, a sole source for
public and pnvate dnnking waler for approximately
350,000 people. From 1960 to 1982. Arrcom used
the site for oil recycling operations. which included
an oiliwater separation process. a shaking process to
facilitate sedimentation, and a heating process for
demulsiflcation. Waste oil and recycled oil were
stored in 27 tanks and 4 tank trucks Sludge and
waste oils were discarded in three disposal pits on the
property or used for dust suppression on the road. In
1982, the site was abandoned, and investigations by
EPA later that year revealed soil and waste oils
contaminated with high levels of solvents, lead, and
PCBs. Emergency response acu vines were conducted
under EPA’s removal program between 1983 and
1990 In 1983. 9,700 gallons of waste oils from tanks
and 137 cubic yards of contaminated soil were
removed offsite In 1987, 13,225 gallons of waste
oils and sludge and 2,000 cubic yards of soil were
removed from tanks and onsite disposal pits Also, in
1990. 1.653 tons of contaminated soil were excavated
and sent offsite to hazardous waste incinerators or
landfills Residential ground water wells were
sampled and ground water monitonng wells also were
installed This ROD addresses the final remedy for
the Arrcom site Previous removal actions have
eliminated the need to conduct any remedial actions
at the site Therefore, there are no contaminants of
concern affecting this site
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
No Action Remedy.
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, which is based on the post-removal soil and
ground water sampling, supplemental remedial soil
and ground water sampling, and the risk assessment
Removal actions onsite have reduced concentrations
of contaminants in the soil to levels that do not pose
a risk to human health and the environment There
are no costs associated with this no action remedy
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
SITE SUMMARY
298
-------
REGION 10
BANGOR ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (USN SUBMARINE BASE), WA
December 10, 1991
SITE
,I,r , IKIrI nfir ;
The 12-acre Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN
Submarine Base) site is located in the northern
portion of the U.S. Naval Submarine Base Bangor
(SUBASE) in Kitsap County, Washington. The Site
A pomon of the site consists of a 6-acre burn area,
debris area, and a storm water discharge area- Land
use in the area supports limited residential and
undeveloped forest land. Site A is located near Hood
Canal which borders the SUBASE to the west. The
community of Vinland is located approximately 2,000
feet from Site A. Several residents who reside in
Vinland use a shallow aquifer as their drinking water
supply. Municipal water supphes near the site are
obtained from the deeper sea level aquifer. From
1962 to 1975, the Navy used the site to detonate and
incinerate various ordnance materials. The site
onginally consisted of burn mounds, facilities for
personnel, fire suppression vehicles and equipment, an
incinerator for amznuruuon, and a blast pit for TNT
detonation. Sediments from an ordnance waste water
disposal lagoon were disposed of and burned, at the
site through 1972. Buildings at the site were
demolished and burned on site in 1977. Grading and
redistribution of soil at the Site A burn area continued
through 1984 In 1983 the Navy diverted surface
water discharges from the Site A Burn Area to Hood
Canal, to minimize contamination to the near town
This was done as a result of investigations conducted
by the Navy in 1978 This ROD addresses
contaminated soil and ground water at Site A Future
RODs will address an additional six operable units
comprising 20 known or suspected hazardous waste
sites at SUBASE The pnmary contaminants of
concern affecting the soil and ground water are
organics, including PCBs, metals, including lead, and
explosive compounds including TN1’, DNT, and
RDX
water, placing a 1-food soil cover over the residual
ordnance-contaminaied soil, and revegetaling the area;
disposing of any treated soil still containing
concentrations of lead above the action level offsite at
a permitted facility; conducting treatabiity studies to
support final design of the ground water restoration
plan; installing approximately eight extraction wells
near the Burn Area, pending final design; treating the
extracted ground water onsite using UV/oxidation;
installing an effluent polishing system, in the event
that ground water treatment is inadequate; discharging
the treated water onsite; and monitoring ground water.
The present worth cost for this remedial
action is $2,700,000. No O&M cost was provided for
this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals are based on
state standards and include TNT 33 mg/kg; DNT 1.5
mg/kg; RDX 9.1 mg/kg; lead 250 mg/kg. Chemical-
specific ground waler clean-up goals are based on
state standards and include DNT 0.1 ugh; RDX 0.8
ugFl; lead 15 ugh; phthalates 4 ugh: and PCBs 0.1
ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds: Clean Air Act: Clean
Water Act; Deferred Decision; Direct Contact:
Drinking Water Contaminants; Excavation: Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitonng: Ground Water
Treatn nt: Leachate Collecvon)Treatment; Lead.
Metals: Offsite Disposal; Ousite Containment; Onsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PCBs; Soil
Washing/Flushing. Soil, State Guidance; State
Standards/Regulations. Trealabibty Studies; Treatment
Technology.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating and consolidating approximately 7,000
cubic yards of ordnance-contaminated soil and 100
cubic yards of lead-contaminated soil from Debris
Area 2. and modifying the soil, as necessary using
mechanical or chemical means to ensure effectiveness
of subsequent treatment; treating soil onsite using soil
washing, followed by trea nt of the process
leachate using UV/oxidation, with reuse of the treated
299
-------
REGION 10
BANGOR ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (USN SUBMARINE BASE), WA (Continued)
December 10, 1991
srr SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, OW
Organics. Metals,
Explosive Compounds
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
300
-------
BUNKER HILL MINING AND METALLURGICAL COMPLEX, ID
September 22, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex
site, a 21-square-mile area centered around an inactive
industrial mining and smelting site, includes the Cities
of Kellogg, Page, Pinehurst, Smelterville, Wardner,
Shoshone County, Idaho. The inactive several
hundred acre industrial complex includes the Bunker
Hill mine and mill, a lead and zinc smelter, and a
phosphoric acid fertilizer plant. Other site features
include the South Fork of the Coeur d’Alene River;
an alluvial floodplain bordered by mountains, valleys,
and gulches; and vegetated residential areas. In 1886,
the first mill for processing lead and silver ore was
constructed at the site. In later years, operations were
expanded with the addition of a lead smelter, a blast
furnace, and electrolytic zinc, sulfuric acid,
phosphoric acid, and fertilizer plants. Onsite
operations and disposal practices have caused the
deposition of metals to offsite areas throughout the
valley via airborne particulate deposition, alluvial
deposition of tailings dumped in the river, and
migration from onsite sources Initially, most solid
and liquid residue from the complex was discharged
into the nver When the river flooded, these matenals
were deposited onto the valley floor and were leached
into onsite soil and ground water Although some
industrial wastes were removed and disposed of
offsite, thousands of tons of sludge, tailings, flue dust,
and other wastes still remain onsue In 1973. a
baghouse lire severely reduced air pollution control
capacity at the lead smelter A 1974 public health
study and concurrent epidemiologic and
environmental investigations concluded that
atmospheric emissions of particulate lead from the
active smelter were the primary sources of elevated
blood lead levels in local children In 1977. two tall
stacks were added to disperse contaminants from the
complex Smelter operations ceased in 1981, but
limited mining and milling operations continued
onsite from 1988 to 1991. In 1989, EPA began a
removal program to excavate lead-contaminated soil
from affected residential properties Several
additional removal actions for source materials were
also completed by various PRPs from 1989 to 1991
The site has been divided into several sections for
remediation based on population levels the Hillside
Area; Smelterville Flats, Central Impoundment Area
(CIA), Page Pond, Smelter Complex; mine operations
area, nghi-of-way within nonpopulat ed areas, and
future development areas. A 1991 ROD addressed
contaminated residential soil within the populated
areas of the site, as OUI; provided for the excavation
of soil with lend contamination above 1,000 mg/kg at
1,800 residential properties with disposal at an onsite
repository, which was subsequently capped; and
provided clean soil and sod to residents. This ROD
addresses a final remedy for 0U2. the nonpopuLated
areas of the site and those aspects of the populated
areas not addressed by the 1991 ROD. The primaty
contaminants of concern affecting the soil, sediment,
debris, ground water, and surface water are organics,
including PCBs; metals, including arsenic and lead,
and morganics, including asbestos.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
revegetaung the Hillside Area with less than 50
percent cover; contour terracing eroded hillsides and
installing erosion-control structures, re-establishing
nparian habitat and mitigating eroding tailings in
Smelterville Flats; consolidating jig tailings into CIA,
establishing soil bamers in contaminated areas,
relocating the A-I gypsum pond sediment to CIA.
capping the A-4 gypsum pond or consolidating it
within CIA; removing materials from the 1982
smelter cleanup and consolidating these within the
smelter closure, relocating the slag pile to either the
CIA or Smelter Complex, removing tailings from the
West Page Swamp and consolidating these in Page
Pond and capping the pond with residential soil.
improving the channels for Humboldt and Grouse
creeks; reprocessing, recycling, or treating all
principal threat materials, including copper flue dust
using cement-based stabilization, removing and
recycling salvageable items, demolishing and
decontaminating onsite structures, capping the CIA,
Lead Smelter. and Zinc Plant with low permeability
caps. collecting and treating the CIA, Lead Smelter,
and Zinc Plant leachate, treating acid mine drainage
from the Bunker Hill mine in the Central Treatment
Plant pnor to discharge to the wetlands treatment
system, closing the onsite solid waste landfills,
continuing blood level monitoring for lead and high-
efficiency vacuum loan program to site residents,
cleaning all homes exceeding 1,000 ppm lead house
dust after remedial actions are completed, and
developing and implementing an intenor dust
monitoring program; recovering and treating the
301
-------
REGION 10
BUNKER HILL MINING AND METALLURGICAL COMPLEX, ID (Continued)
September 22, 1992
ground water in Government Gulch; constructing a
passive wetland treatment system in Smelterville Rats
and Pinehurst narrows to treat CIA seeps, pretreated
acid mine drainage, and ground water and surface
water from Government Gulch, as well as leachate
from the lead and zinc closure areas, using absorption
and precipitation of metals within an anaerobic
substrate; constructing a second ground water system
and passively treating upper zone ground water to
meet discharge limits; abandoning and closing
potentially contaminated wells, and providing an
alternative source of water for any affected residences
not serviced by the municipal water system;
continually monitoring the air, surface water, ground
waler, and biological parameters at the site, and
implementing institutional controls including land use
restrictions to control future land use, and site access
restrictions such as fencing The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $52,035,000,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $1 1,096.000
for 30 years.
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitoring; Alternate Water Supply; ARAR
Wwver Arsenic; Asbestos; Biodegradation/Land
Application, Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds.
Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Debris;
Decontamination, Deferred Decision, Direct Contact,
Drinking Water Contaminants; Floodplain, Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitonng; Ground Water
Treatment; lnorganics; Institutional Controls; Landfill
Closure, Leachate Collectiontl’reatment; Lead; MCLs,
MCLC3s; Metals, Mimng Wastes, O&M; Offsite
Disposal, Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge,
Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Organics; PCBs,
Public Exposure, RCRA; Relocation, Safe Drinking
Water Act, Sediment; Soil, Solidification!
Stabilization; State Standards/Regulations. Surface
Water; Surface Water Collection/Diversion; Surface
Water Monitoring; Surface Water Treatment, Toxic
Substances Control Act, Treatabihty Studies,
Treatment Technology, Wetlands.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals, which are
based on health-risk levels, include lead 1.000 mg/kg
Soil will be stabilized to meet RCRA LDR standards
prior to disposal in CIA, which will be capped Clean
replacement soil will contain less than arsenic
100 mg/kg, cadmium 5 mg/kg; and lead 100 mg/kg
Chemical-specific sediment and debris clean-up levels
were not specified, however, matenals that cannot be
reprocessed or recycled will be stabilized onsite prior
to disposal in CIA Chemical-specific ground water
clean-up goals are based on SDWA MCLs and state
standards and include arsenic 005 mg/I, cadmium
0005 mg/I. lead 005 mg/I, and zinc 5 mg/I
Chemical-specific surface water clean-up goals are
based on federal water quality critena under the CWA
and include cadmium 00011 mg/I. lead 00032 mg/I,
and zinc 0110 mg/I
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls in the form of land use
restrictions and other administrative restrictions will
be implemented onsite for those areas where lead
concentrations exceed 100 mg/kg
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 08/30/91
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants: Orgamcs. Metals,
Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Ground Water - Final Action
Soil, Sediment, Debris,
GW, SW
302
-------
EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE, AK
September 29, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 19,700-acre Eielson Air Force Base (EAFB) site,
located 26 miles southeast of Fairbanks, Alaska, is
pnmarily a tactical air support installation. The 2-
acre Blair Lakes Target Range facility, approximately
25 miles southwest of the main base, has been
included in the EAFB site because of its geographical
proximity. Land in the surrounding area is used
principally for military training associated with Fort
Wainwright, and there are few scattered residential
and commercial activities close to the base. The
communities of Moose Creek, North Pole, and Saicha
all lie within a 20-mile radius of the base. The
aquifer beneath EAFB, which supplies drinking water
to private wells in Moose Creek and North Pole, has
been designated a sole-source aquifer In addition,
70 percent of EAFB and virtually all of the Blair
Lakes Target Range are wetlands. Constructed in
1944, EAFB was originally a satellite installation of
Fort Wainwright. Used jointly by the Army and Air
Force, the site was designated Eielson AFB in 1948
Many industrial operations were conducted at the
base, which generated waste oils. contaminated fuels
and sludge. and spent solvents and cleansers During
the mid-1980’s. the Air Force Installation Restoration
Program (IRP) identified 64 potential areas of
contamination that were divided into six OUs This
ROD addresses an interim remedy for OU1B to
prevent further degradation of the ground water
quality by significantly reducing the volume of
petroleum product in site soil and free product
floating on top of the ground water OU I B contains
four areas. ST2O Refueling Loop E-7 Complex. ST2O
Refueling Loop E9 Complex. ST48 Powerplant Fuel
Spill Area. and ST49 Building 1300/SS5O-53 Blair
Lakes Target Range A future ROD will address
additional source control and final ground water
response actions The pnmary contanunants of
concern affecting the soil and ground water are
VOCs. including benzene. toluene, and xylenes. and
oils
for recycling or disposal; treating extracted ground
water, as needed, using air stripping, oil-waler
separation, or carbon filtration, as determined during
the remedial design stage; and discharging the
residual waler onsite; monitonng petroleum product
levels; collecting BTEX-LNAPLS using vacuum
extraction wells, with carbon adsorption, followed by
offsite disposal of carbon residuals; treating collected
liquids using an oil and water separator, air stripper,
or carbon adsorption; destroying air emissions using
tip flare incineration; and monitoring ground water.
The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$3,867. with an annual O&M cost of $3,375 for
5 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
No chemical-specific soil and ground water clean-up
goals are provided for this interim remedy. Final
performance goals will be established in the final
remedy for site soil and ground water remedianon.
All air emissions and effluent discharges generated by
this interim remedy will comply with the applicable
federal and state environmental regulations.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping. Benzene; Biodegradation/Land
Application. Carcinogenic Compounds; Direct
Contact. Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment, lncineratjoniThermal
Destruction, Interim Remedy; O&M. Oils; Offsite
Disposal, Onsite Discharge, Onsite Disposal. Onsite
Treatment. RCRA; Soil, Sole-Source Aquifer.
Solvents, State Standards/Regulations. Toluene;
Treanbility Studies, Treatment Technology; Vacuum
Extraction, VOCs. Wetlands, Xylenes.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes in-
situ bioventrng of BTEX contaminated soil in the
vadose zone, with monitoring of soil gases. collecting
floating petroleum hydrocarbons from the ground
water through wells, culverts, or trenches. incinerating
recovered product onsite or transpomn this offsite
303
-------
REGION 10
EIELSON A R FORCE BASE, AK (Continued)
September 29, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of pre ious RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Oils
Category: Source Control - Interim
Ground Water - Intenm
304
-------
ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, AK
September 1, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPI’ION :
The 13,130-acre Ehnendorf Air Force Base (AFB)
site is located adjacent to the municipality of
Anchorage, Alaska. Land use on the base includes
airfield and base support operanons, personnel
housing, and recreational facilities. Approximately
13 miles south of the base, land use is residential and
industrial. Wetlands, lakes, and ponds cover about
1,416 acres of the site. The estimated 8,600 people
who reside on the base do not use the shallow aquifer
as their drinking water supply From 1940 to 1991,
Elmendorf AFB used a 20-acre portion of the site,
referred to as source area ST4I, to store the fuel
product JP-4 and aviation gasohne in four 1-million
gallon underground tanks. As a result of numerous
leaks and above-ground spills since the tanks were
installed in the I 940s, USAF conducted investigations
through its Installation Restoration Program (IRP)
These investigations revealed several hundred
thousand gallons of fuel in the ground water and soil.
Remedial investigation activities in 1988 and 1989
included installing monitonng wells and test trenches
Dunng that time, a concrete dam was installed in an
effort to recover fuel from the south seeps.
Additional studies conducted in 1990 and 1991
indicated that ground water within an approximate
500-foot radius around ST4I is contaminated In
January 1991, the four tanks and piping were pumped
dry and taken out of service This ROD addresses an
interim remedy at Elmendorf AFB This action is
needed to reduce further spread of fuel constituents
through the recovery of floating product on the
ground water surface, and containment of seeps
Future RODs will include a final remedy for ground
water and soil at ST4I, as 0U2. and will address the
other six Otis at the site The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the soil and ground water at
ST4I are the compounds in JP-4, especially VOCs
such as benzene, toluene. and xylenes, and other
organics
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected intenm remedial action for this site
includes collecting and containing the floating BTEX-
LNAPLs with passive and active recovery systems.
using a sump to separate the fuel and water, then
recycling the fuel, treating contaminated ground water
using air stripping, with discharge of the treated water
offsite to a POTW, controlling air emissions from the
treatment process using carbon adsorption, and
disposing of spent carbon filters offsite; temporarily
storing excavated well construction soil onsite; and
monitoring ground water. The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $467,300, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $27,500.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground waxer clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and will be provided in the
final ROD for the 0U2 source area ST41.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping, Benzene; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act, Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Ground Water
Treatment, lntenm Remedy, O&M: Offsite Discharge;
Offsite Disposal, Onsite Containment, Onsite
Treatment. Organics; Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (P01W), RCRA. Soil, State Standards/
Regulations, Temporary Storage. Toluene, VOCs:
Wetlands, Xylenes
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Soil, GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Other Organics
Category: Source Control - lntenm
Ground Water - Interim
305
-------
FORT LEWIS (LANDFILL NO. 5), WA
July 10, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTiON :
The 180-acre Fort Lewis (Landfill No 5) site is
located on the west side of the 86,000-acre Fort
Lewis Military Reservation in Pierce County,
Washington. Ground water is used as the source of
the mumcipal water supply: however, supply wells are
not affected by the site. From 1967 to 1990, the
landfill accepted 77,000 tons per year of mixed
mumcipal, mdustnal, commercial, and residential
waste and 188,000 cubic yards per year of demolition
waste from the Fort Lewis Military Reservation, the
VA Medical Center. and McChord Air Force Base.
Dewatered sludge from the Fort Lewis Sewage
Treatment Plant was also disposed onsite Initially,
waste was placed in trenches running north to south,
which were covered with soil in 1971 Subsequently,
until 1990, site trenches running east to west were
used for disposal In 1985, as part of the closure
procedures for the inactive portions of Landfill No 5,
the Army covered the east-west trenches with a multi-
layer cap Ground water modeling conducted from
1980 to 1984 revealed that contaminant concentrations
in the ground water did not exceed regulatory
standards and will decrease over time because the cap
will reduce leachate production This ROD addresses
a final remedy for the inactive portions of the landfill
Recent investigations by the Army indicate thai
conditions at the site currently pose no unacceptable
nsks to human health or the environment, therefore.
there are no pnmary contmunants of concern
affecting this site
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Not Apphcable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action, however, onsite ground water monitoring will
continue in accordance with state and local solid
waste landfill operating and closure requirements
There are no costs associated with this no action
remedy
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy
306
-------
JOSEPH FOREST PRODUCTS, OR
September 30, 1992
REGION 10
SITE InSTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 18-acre Joseph Forest Products (JFP) site is a
wood-processing facility in the City of Joseph,
Wallowa County, Oregon. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial and agricultural. The City of
Enterprise uses two springs located 4,000 feet from
JFP to serve as its municipal water supply. In 1974,
and again from 1977 to 1985, Joseph Forest Products,
Inc., used the site as a lumber mill, processing wood
into lumber products. Structures located on the
facility include a sawing facility, a wood treating
facility and an adjacent drip pad. a drying buildirg. a
pumphouse, and maintenance facilities Wood
treatment operations consisted of mixing a
concentrated preservative paste with water and
treating lumber products with the mixture of
chromium, copper, and arsenic (CCA) in a retort
Process wastes, including wood chips, sludge, and
other materials remaining in the retort, were removed
penodically and placed in a cement pit adjacent to the
treatment building In 1974, the treatment building
and surrounding buildings were destroyed by fire
Dunng fire-fighting operations approximately
200 gallons of contaminated treatment paste and
3,000 gallons of treatment solution were released into
the soil it is estimated that more than 160.000
pounds of CCA preservative concentrate were used at
the site between 1978 and 1985 As a result of a
1984 state investigation that identified elevated levels
of metals. EPA conducted a site inspection, which
revealed metal contamination in surface water and
soil In 1985, a state enforcement action instructed
JFP to ship eleven 55-gallon drums of waste matenal
toan offsite hazardous waste landfill In 199l.dunng
EPA’s remedial investigation, a removal action
involved excavation and offsite disposal of highly
contaminated soil This ROD addresses a final
remedy for the excavation and disposal of
contaminated soil and debris remairung onsite The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil
and debris are metals, including arsenic. chromium.
and lead, and inorganics, including asbestos
and tanks, followed by recycling or offsite disposal of
debris; excavating surface and subsurface soil, with
screening and segregation of hazardous waste for
offsite disposal, with stabilization, if necessary, prior
to disposal at appropriate facilities; backfilhng any
excavated areas; removing asbestos from the facility,
with offsite disposal; removing underground storage
tanks and any associated contaminated soil, with
scrapping or offsite disposal; monitoring ground
water, and implementing institutional controls,
including deed and land use restrictions or
environmental notices. The estimated capital cost for
this remedial action is $550,000, with an annual
O&M cost of $24,000 for 3 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Excavation goals for soil/debris are based on EPA’s
nsk standards of l0 for surface soil and l0 for
subsurface soil Chemical-specific goals for
subsurface soil include arsenic 36 mg/kg; chromium
1,351 mg/kg: and copper 10,000 mg/kg Subsurface
soil goals include arsenic 336 mg/kg, chromium 1,351
mg/kg, and copper 10,000 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to ensure
appropriate consideration of site conditions in future
land use decisions
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic, Asbestos. Background Levels; Carcinogenic
Compounds. Chromium. Clean Air Act, Debris,
Decontamination. Direct Contact; Excavation; Filling,
Ground Water Monitonng, lnorganics. Institutional
Controls, Lead. Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal,
Offsite Treatment, RCRA, Safe Drinlung Water Act;
Sediment. Soil, Solidification/Stabilization; State
Standards/Regulations, Treatment Technology.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
demolishing contaminated onsite structures, including
the process, storage, and mixing tanks, and the
wooden structures and concrete slabs, followed by
offsite disposal, deconi.anunating the concrete drip pad
307
-------
REGION 10
JOSEPH FOREST PRODUCTS, OR (Continued)
September 30, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debns
Major Contaminants: Metals, Inorganics
Category: Source Control - Final Acuon
308
-------
MCCHORD AFB (WASH RACK(TREATMENT), WA
September 28, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIP’IION :
The 4,600-acre McChord Air Force Base (AFB) is
located in Pierce County, Washington. The site
contains a 22-acre parcel of land, referred to as the
Site 54 Washrack Treatment Area (WTA), which
contains weapon and aircraft maintenance facilities.
Land use in the area is associated with industrial and
operational activities at the AFB The WTA is
located east of Clover Creek, a perennial stream that
provides the only surface water drainage for McChord
AFB. There are no drinking waler supply wells in
the immediate vicinity of the WTA. Site features
included a former washrack, two leach pits, an
oil/water separator (skimmer), and storm drainage
infiltration ditches The site has been utilized for
airfield industrial activities, including draining fuel
and washing airplanes. In 1981, the Department of
Defense Installation Restoration Program was initiated
onsite to identify the location and contents of past
disposal sites. Through both record searches ‘nd the
use of aerial photographs dating from 1957 to 1985,
several site areas, including Sites 54 and 60. were
identified as waste spill and disposal areas floating
fuel was identified as underlying a 300,000-square-
foot area of the site, which resulted from unrecorded
spills This ROD addresses remediation of the
excavated soil and the NAPL-contaminated ground
water at Site 54. The pnrnary contarnmants of
concern affecting the soil and ground water are
VOCs, other orgamcs. including oils, and metals,
including lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
excavating, consolidating, and treating fuel-
contaminated soil onsite with ex-situ biorecoediation,
then backfil [ ing the treated soil into an onsite trench.
installing passive subsurface extraction trenches to
collect LNAPLs, with onsite separation using fuel
skimmers (oil/water separator). transporting the
recovered fuel offsite in drums to either a recycling
facility, if specifications are met, or to a permitted
disposal facility, conducting long-term ground water
monitoring, and implementing institutional controls.
including deed and ground water use restrictions, as
well as site physical controls The estimated present
worth cost for this remedial action is $640,000, which
includes an annual O&M cost of $54,000 for years
0-1, $23,000 for the years 3-5, and $22,000 for years
6-25.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs, MTCA Method A, and
background levels, and include soil clean-up levels
total petroleum hydrocarbons 1,000 ug/l (MTCA
Method A): and lead 11 ug/1 (background)
INSTITU11ONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls, including deed and ground water
use restrictions, will be implemented to restrict access
to contaminated media
KEYWORDS :
Background Levels: Biodegradation/Land Application;
Carcinogenic Compounds. Duect Contact: Excavation;
Filling, Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring;
institutional Controls. Lead, Metals, MCLs, O&M;
Offsite Disposal, Offsite Treatment, Oils: Onsite
Disposal, Onsite Treatment, Organics. Safe Drinking
Water Act, Soil. Solvents. State Standards/
Regulations, Treatment Technology, VOCs
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
GW
Contaminated Media: Soil.
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Orgamcs.
Metals
Category: Source Control - Final Action
Final Action
Ground Water -
309
-------
MOUNTAIN HOME AR FORCE BASE, ID
June 16, 1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The 7-acre Mountain Home Air Force Base (AFB)
site is a fire department training area located in
Mountain Home, Elmore County, Idaho. Land use in
the area is predominantly rural and agricultural. An
estimated 6,990 people residing within 0.6 mile of the
site and several farmers in the vicinity use ground
water to irrigate agricultural lands. From 1962 to
1975, the Mountain Home Air Force Base used the
site for fire department training exercises. From 1962
to 1975, the fuel used in the fire training exercises
was either clean fuel AVGAS or JP-4, or fuels from
flight line defueling operations Since 1975, only
clean JP-4 has been used in the exercises. Each
exercise began by saturating the bermed training area
with water, followed directly by applying 250 to
500 gallons of fuel. The flames were extinguished
with Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF), or pnor
to 1972, with a water-based protein foam. The
training session was completed with a post-exercise
ignition of the residual fuel in a bermed area The
USAF investigations identified solvents and
petroleum, oil, lubricant (POL) wastes in the soil
Unclei the installation Restoration Program (IRP), the
USAF conducted a record search, dnlling, and
sampling of soil bonngs to bedrock, the installation of
monitonng wells, and hand auger samples Corrective
measures that were taken included placing warning
signs. deactivating the burn pit in 1986. and installing
ground water monitoring wells This ROD provides
a final remedy for onsite soil as 0U4 Future RODs
will address ground water contamination as a separate
operable unit Because contaminants were found at
such low concentrations, the soil was covered by
crushed asphalt and has little potential io impact
ecological receptors The soil poses low nsks for
humans at the site and no remediauon is necessary
Therefore, there are no contaminants of concern at the
site
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS .
Not apphcable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS
Not apphcable.
KEYWORDS .
No Action Remedy
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Applicable
Category: No Action
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION
The selected remedial action for this site is no further
action Based on the results of the human health risk
assessment the USAF, EPA, and the state have
determined that chemicals remaining in the soil pose
no unacceptable risks to human health or the
environment There are no costs associated with this
no action remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
310
-------
N.A.S. WHIDBEY ISLAND - AULT FIELD, WA
April 21,1992
REGION 10
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey Island - Ault
Field site, a multiple use waste disposal area, is
located on a 260-acre active airbase northeast of the
City of Oak Harbor, Island County, Washington. The
northwest sector of the airbase, known as Area 6.
maintains and provides support to naval aircraft and
aviation facilities. Land use in the surrounding area
is predominately residential and wooded, with
wetlands located in and around the site. Area 6 is a
ground water recharge zone that overhes three major
aquifers. The uppermost unconfloed aquifer was
found to be contaminated from past site disposal
practices. From 1969 to 1988, hazardous wastes were
dumped and stored at various pits. trenches, and
landfills located in Area 6. Past disposal at these
sites included approximately 2.2 million gallons of
liquids and sludge; 300,000 to 700,000 gallons of
acids and solvents; an estimated 100,000 to 600,000
gallons of oily sludge; and unknown quantities of
waste oils, asbestos, and hazardous wastes Studies
conducted at the site by the Navy and EPA revealed
solvents, VOCs, oily wastes, acids, and asbestos in
ground water and soil Tius ROD addresses interim
remediation of the ground water to prevent the spread
of the contamination plume in the aquifer to drinking
water wells while other locations on the airbase are
evaluated Future RODs will address final remedial
actions for ground water The remaining operable
units will address the waste areas and associated soil
contamination at this site The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the ground water are VOCs.
including ICE, and metals, including chromium and
lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
containing the solvent contaminated ground water
using extraction, followed by onsite treatment using
metal precipitation, air stripping, and carbon
adsorption and reinjecting the treated water into the
affected aquifer, and monitoring ground water The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $2,201,000, which includes a total O&M cost of
$1,230,000 for 3 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and State Model Toxics
Control Act (MTCA) and include ICE 4 ugh
(MTCA); 1,1,1-TCA .5 ugh; 1,1 -DCA 200 ugh
(MTCA); 1,1-DCE 0.07 ugh (MTCA); 1,2-DCE
70 ugh (MTCA); vinyl chloride 0.02 ugh (MTCA);
carbon tenachloride 0.3 ug/l (MTCA): chromium
80 ugh (MTCA); and lead 4 ug/l (MTCA). Because
this action does not constitute a final remedy for the
ground water, subsequent actions will fully address
risks posed by conditions at this operable unit.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
Air Stripping; Carbon Adsorption (GAC);
Carcinogemc Compounds; Chromium; Clean Water
Act; Drinking Water Contaminants, Ground Water,
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
Interim Remedy, Lead; MCLs; MCLGs; Metals;
O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment.
Pesticides; Plume Management, RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act, Solvents; State Standards/Regulations,
TCE; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria; Wetlands
SITE SUMMARY
Date or previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals
Category: Ground Water - lntenm
311
-------
SITE I.IISTORYIDESCRWflON :
The 17-acre Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling site is
located in Pocalello, Bannock County. Idaho. From
the 1950’s until 1979, McCarty’s Inc. operated a
recycling business which primarily accepted scrap
metals, including batteries, transformers, and
capacitors filled with PCB oils, which were stored on-
site on the excavated pit floor. A 1988 ROD
addressed source control using excavation and
immobihzation with a provision for onsite
containment if the remedy proved unworkable. Prior
to implementation of this remedy, a bench-scale
treatability determined that the remedy failed to meet
several important performance criteria and tentatively
identified the presence of lead above onsite health-
based levels EPA planned to implement the alternate
remedy, onsite containment, however, upon further
review, EPA found that the design requirements of
the alternate remedy, as documented in the ROD, did
not comply with federal regulations and determined
that construction of an on-site containment cell would
not be feasible because this remedy could
significantly interfere with future cleanup of on-site,
Pb-contaminated soil in order to remediate the PCB-
contaminated soil in a timely and protective manner,
EPA evaluated other alternatives to the on-site
containment remedy This 1992 ROD aznendnient
addresses remedjauon of the PCB-contaminated areas,
as well as areas contaminated with commingled lead
and PCBs with a revised remedy EPA is continuing
to evaluate the nature and extent of lead, and possible
other contaminants at the site and may specify
additional clean-up activities, as necessary, under
separate operable unit remedial actions The pnmary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and debns
are organics. including PCBs, and metals, including
lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL AC1’ION :
The amended remedial action for this site includes
excavating, processing. transporting, and offsite
disposal of approximately 8.200 cubic yards of PCB-
contaminated and commingled PCB/lead-contamlnated
soil as follows excavation and offsite disposal of
approximately 6,500 cubic yards of untreated PCB-
contaminated soil, treating approximately 900 cubic
yards of contaminated soil commingled with over
25 mg/kg PCB and lead levels exceeding 5 mg/kg,
using solidification, followed by offsite disposal in a
permitted, hazardous waste facility, treating
approximately 100 cubic yards of PCB-, lead-, and
halogenated organic compound (HOC).contaminated
waste using offsite incineration, followed by
solidifying and disposing of the ash offsite.
decontaminating, stockpiling onsite, and covering
approximately 700 cubic yards of debris for possible
future salvage and recycling; and backfilling, grading.
and restoring the surface site drainage. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action ranges
from $2,360,500 to $2,429,000. There is no O&M
cost associated with the remedial action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals are based on
RCRA hazardous waste and characterization
regulations and TSCA PCB regulauons, and include
HOCs 1,000 mg/kg; lead 5 mg/kg (TCLP). and PCBs
25 mg/kg
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act, Clean
Water Act, Debris, Decontamination. Direct Contact,
Excavation, Filling, incinerauon!Thermal Destruction,
Leachability Tests, Lead, Metals, O&M. Offsite
Disposal: Offsite Treatment, Oils: Onsite Disposal.
Onsite Treatment: Orgamcs: PCBs, RCRA, ROD
Amendment, Soil, SolidificatiorilStabilization, State
Standards/Regulations Temporary Storage. Toxic
Substances Control Act, Treatment Technology.
Date of previous RODs: 06/28188
Lead: Federal Enforcement
Contaminated Media: Soil, Debris
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control Final Action
PACIFIC HIDE & FUR RECYCLING (AMENDMENT), ID
April 29, 1992
REGION 10
SITE SUMMARY
312
-------
PESTICIDE LAB - YAKIMA, WA
September 30. 1992
REGION 10
SITE }IISTORY/DESCRWFION :
The 10-acre Pesticide Lab- Yakizna site is located at
the Yalcima Agricultural Research Laboratory (YARL)
in Yakirna, Yakima County, Washington. The YARL
occupies approximately 15 pe’rcent of the total site
area, and the remainder is used for cultivation of row
crops and fruit trees. Land use in the area is
predominantly residential, and several residences
south of the site obtain drinking water from pnvate
wells. The YARL, which has operated since 1961,
develops insect control technologies to benefit fruit
and vegetable agriculture in the Pacific Northwest
Wastes generated at the site consist of a wide variety
of pesticide mixtures; nnsates from the cleaning of
sprayers and other equipment; and solvents. The site
contained a septic tank, disposal pipe. washdown pad.
and drain field system used for the discharge of dilute
pesticide compounds In 1980, YARL received
mtenm status under RCR.A; however, in 1983,
unpermitted discharges led to EPA investigations that
revealed evidence of soil and potential ground water
contamination from leaching of contaminants through
the highly permeable sand and gravel In 1988,
YARL removed the dramfield, sampled soil and
ground water, and compiled monitoring information
from four wells that had been installed that same
year. In 1990, three additional wells were added to
further facilitate ground water assessment. A RCRA
Closure Plan, which was approved in 1990, provided
for the removal and disposal of the septic tank
contents, excavation and removal of the tank itself,
washdown pad removal, additional background soil
sampling, excavation and removal of contaminated
soil to obtain clean-up levels, conformational soil
sampling around the removed structures, installation
of the three ground water monitonng wells, and
1 year of ground waler sampling Because all waste
residues. contaminated soil, and subsoil have been
removed or decontaminated pursuant to RCRA Clean
Closure regulations, there are no contaminants of
concern affecting this site.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTiON :
The selected remedial action for this site includes no
further action with ground water monitoring for
1 year There are no costs associated with this no
action remedy
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Not Applicable
Major Contaminants: Not Apphcable
Category: No Action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Not applicable.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy.
SITE SUMMARY
313
-------
UMATILLA ARMY DEPOT (LAGOONS), OR
September 25, 1992
REGION 10
SITE IHSTORYIDESCRIPTION :
The Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons) site is located in
the center of the 19,700-acre U.S. Army Depot
Activity, Umatilla (UMDA), 5 miles west of
Hermiston, in Morrow and Umatilla Counties,
Oregon. This installation was established in 1941 as
an Army Ordnance Depot to store and handle
munitions. Land use in the surrounding area is
pnmarily agricultural. Approximately 1,470 wells
have been identified within a 4-mile radius of
UMDA, the majority of which are used for domestic
and irrigation water Three municipal water systems
also draw from ground water within that same radius
From the 1950’s through 1965, UMDA operated an
onsite explosives washout plant, which processed
munitions to remove and recover explosives using a
pressurized hot water system. Plant operations
included flushing and draining the explosives washout
system, and wash water was discharged via an open
metal trough to two infiltration lagoons, known as the
explosive washout lagoons, located to the northwest
of the plant The lagoons were constructed in the
1950’s and utilized until 1965, when plant operations
and all discharges to the lagoon ceased An estimated
85,000,000 gallons of effluent were discharged to the
lagoons dunng plant operations Investigations
performed by the Army in the late 1970’s to evaluate
past use, storage, treatment, and disposal of toxic
matenals revealed contamination in the soil and
shallow aquifer beneath the lagoons The facility has
been divided into 8 operable units for remediauon
This ROD provides a final remedy for the soil present
at the lagoons A future ROD will address
contaminated ground water beneath the lagoons and
6 remaining RODs will address remaining portions of
the UMDA installation The pnmary conLamlnanls of
concern affecting the soil are explosives, including
DNB, 2, 4-DNT, HMX, NB, TNB. TNT, and RDX
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
areas with the compost, then covering the compost
with a 2-foot layer of clean soil and grading and
revegetating the area. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $1,870,000, which
includes an estimated total O&M cost of $1,084,000
over 2 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific excavation goals for soil are based
on risk-based remedial action criteria (RAC) and
include TNT 30 mg/kg (RAC) and RDX 30 mg/kg
(RAC). These levels correspond to an excess cancer
risk under the industrial use scenario of 7xl0 , which
is within the range of acceptable cancer nsks
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided.
KEYWORDS :
BiodegradationfLand Application, Capping;
Carcinogenic Compounds. Direct Contact; Excavation,
O&M, Onsite Containment, Onsite Disposal, Onsite
Treatment, Organics. Soil, State Standardsl
Regulations, Treatability Studies, Treatment
Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: Soil
Major Contaminants: Explosives
Category: Source Control - Final Action
The selected remedial action for this site includes
developing a composung facility onsite, constructing
a roadway between the lagoons and the onsire
composting facility to transport the excavated and
treated soil, excavating to a 5-foot depth,
approximately 6,800 tons of contaminated soil with
concentrations of TNT or RDX exceeding 30 mg/kg,
treating the soil onsite using ex-situ bioremedialion
via composting. backfilling the excavated lagoon
314
-------
- REGION 10
U.S. DOE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB (OPERABLE UNIT 2), ID
September 28, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 890-square-mile U.S. DOE Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory (INEL) is located 32 miles
west of Idaho Falls, Idaho. The site, established in
1949, is operated as a nuclear reactor technology
development and waste management facility by the
U.S. Department of Energy. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial and mixed use. The site
overlies a sole source Class I aquifer, the Snake River
Plain Aquifer. A 10-mile-square area within the
INEL complex, referred to as Test Area North (TAN),
was built in the 1950’s to support the Aircraft Nuclear
Propulsion Program sponsored by the U.S. Air Force
and Atomic Energy Commission. Within TAN, the
Technical Support Facility (TSF-05) injection well
was used to dispose of industrial and sanitary wastes
and wastewaters from 1953 to 1972 Types of wastes
disposed of in the well included low-level radioactive
and process wastes, corrosive wastewater, ignitable
wastes, chromium, lead, and mercury. Contaminants,
including TCE, PCE, triuum and stronuum-90. were
first detected above MCLs in the ground water in
1987. Based on these results, a RCRA Corrective
Action Program was subsequently developed to
address ground water contanunation at TAN, which
included installation of an air sparging system in the
water supply tank at the TSF to ensure that organic
contaminant concentrations remain below regulatory
levels Ground water sampling and monitoring
continued through 1990. and contaminated sludge
from the lower 55 feet of the TSF-05 injection well
was removed and analyzed in 1990 Currently. the
1SF-OS injection well is closed securely and locked.
and the well head has been sealed against surface
water intrusion Tbe INEL site is divided into
10 Waste Area Groups (WAGs) Two RODs in 1991
and 1992 addressed an interim remedy for Warm
Waste Pond sediment in WAG 2 and art interim
remedy for unexploded ordnancx and soil
contamination in WAG 10 This ROD provides an
interim remedy for ground water contamination near
the TSF-05 injection well (WAG 1) The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water
are VOCs, including TCE and PCE. metals, including
lead, and radioactive materials
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
l’be selected remedial action for this site includes
pumping the contaminated ground water from the
injection well and treating the ground water onsite
using filtration to remove suspended solids, followed
by air stripping and carbon adsorption to remove
organics, and ion exchange to remove inorganics and
radmonuclides; modifying the existing TAN onsite
disposal pond to receive treated ground water and
ensure that it does not exceed discharge limits,
transporting any spent carbon offsite to a permitted
facility for regeneration; installing two additional
ground water monitoring wells within the contaminant
plume; monitonng air emissions; and implementing
administrative and institutional controls, including
grou d water use restrictions. The estimated capital
cost for this remedial action is $7,715,000, with a
total O&M cost of $3,194,000 for 2 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals, which
are based on SDWA MCLs, and include TCE 5 ug/1;
PCE 5 ugfl; lead 50 ugh, and sironuum ° 300 pCi/I.
Air emissions also will be monitored and will not
exceed state air quality standards, which include
ICE 000051 lb/hr. PCE 0.013 lbflir, lead 1.5 uglm 3 ,
and strontium 9 ° 10 mreni/yd
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented at the site
to restrict ground water use during these intenm
remedial activities
KEYWORDS :
Air Monitonng. Air Stripping, Carbon Adsorption,
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act, Direct
Contact, Drinking Water Contamination, Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water
Treatment, Institutional Controls; Interim Remedy,
Lead, MCLs: Metals. O&M. Offsite Disposal; Offsite
Treatment, Onsite Discharge. Onsite Treatment, PCE,
Radioactive Matenals, Safe Drinking Water Act; Sole
Source Aquifer, Solvents, State Standards/
Regulations, ICE, Temporary Storage; Treatment
Technology; VOCs
315
-------
REGION 10
U.S. DOE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB (OPERABLE UNIT 2), ID
(Continued)
September 28, 1992
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 12/05/91, 06102/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: GW
Major Contaminants: VOCs, Metals,
Radioactive Matenals
Category: Ground Water - Interim
316
-------
— REGION 10
U.S. DOE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB (OPERABLE UNIT 5), ID
December 5, 1991
SITE HISTORYIDESCRIFTION :
The Idaho National Engrneering Laboratory (INEL),
located 32 miles west of Idaho Falls, Idaho, occupies
890 square miles of the Eastern Snake River Plain.
Land use at the INEL is industnal and mixed use,
with a surrounding 500 square mile buffer zone used
for cattle and sheep grazing. The 7,700 INEL
employees use the Snake River Plain Aquifer that
underlies the site, as a drinking water source. The
aquifer has been proposed as a sole-source aquifer
pursuant to the SWDA. The TRA contains high
neutron flux nuclear test reactors. The Warm Waste
Pond is located 200 feet east of the test reactor area.
The Warm Waste Pond is composed of three
wastewater infiltration/evaporation ponds Over the
past 40 years, the Warm Waste Pond received
discharges of reactor cooling water, radioactive
wastewater, and regenerative solutions from ion
exchange columns As a result of an investigation
conducted in 1988, it was revealed that a release of
radioactive and/or hazardous contaminants to the
Warm Waste Pond had resulted in contamination of
the pond sediment and subsurface water The INEL
is divided into 10 Waste Area Groups (WAGs), which
are further subdivided into operable units to facilitate
characterization and remedy selection for similar or
unique contamination issues This ROD addresses the
interim remedy for the Warm Waste Pond sediment
that are part of the WAG 2 group that includes the
TRA Other OUs are associated with this interim
action and will address perched water below IRA
Contamination of the Snake River Plain Aquifer and
complete evaluation of nsks associated with the
Warm Waste Pond will be addressed in separate
investigations and remedial actions, as necessary The
contaminants in the perched water, currently being
evaluated in an ongoing RLIFS, will be addressed in
future remedial actions The primary contaminants of
concern affecting the sediment are metals, including
hexavalent chromium, other inorgamcs, and
radioactive materials
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
onsite physical separation of large and fine-giained
matenals. followed by treatment of 20,700 cubic
yards of very-fine grained contaminated sediment
onsite by chemical extraction with an acidic solution
to remove cesium-l3 7 , cobalt-60. and chromlunt ,
followed by recovering contaminants from the acidic
solution using ion exchange, precipitation or
distillation; testing residuals, and treating to meet
applicable storage and/or disposal criteria, then stonng
the waste onsite temporarily until final disposition can
be determined; returning larger grained materials to
the pond and along with the treatment process
residuals, and backfiuing and revegetating the area,
conducting pilot studies to optimize the extraction
process; and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions. The estimated capital
costs for this remedial action are $7,195,000, with an
estimated O&M cost of $300,000 over 18 months.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Federal and state clean-up standards for cesium-37,
cobalt-60, and chromium have not been established at
this time. Clean-up objectives for cesium-37 are
based on a l0 to l0 range for cancer nsk to human
health. Because this action does not constitute a final
remedy for this operable unit, subsequent actions will
fully address risks posed by the Warm Waste Pond
sediment and associated contamination
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Deed restrictions will be implemented to prevent
human exposure to site contaminants and provide site
security
KEYWORDS :
Capping, Chromium. Direct Contact, Excavation;
Filling. Inorganics. Institutional Controls. Interim
Remedy, Metals. O&M. Onsite Containment: Onsite
Disposal. Onsite Treatment, Radioactive Materials,
Sediment. Sole-Source Aquifer. Temporary Storage;
Treatabihty Studies, Treatment Technology.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Medium: Sediment
Major Contaminants: Metals, inorganics.
Radioactive Materials
Category: Source Control - lntenm
317
-------
REGION 10
U.S. DOE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB (OPERABLE UNIT 22), ID
September 30, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The 890-square-mile U.S. DOE Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory (INEL), located 32 miles west
of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is operated by the U.S.
Department of Energy. Land use in the area is
predominantly industrial and mixed use. The site
overhes a sole source Class I aquifer, known as the
Snake River Plain Aquifer. Within INEL, an area
known as the Power Burst Facility (PBF) operated
from 1972 to 1985 and supported the testing of
pressunzed-water fuel rods under hypothetical reactor
accidents. This area contained several site features,
including a corrosive waste sump, an evaporauon
pond, and discharge pipe. From 1978 to 1984, waier
containing a chromium-based algal and corrosion
inhibitor from the PBF reactors secondary coolant
system was discharged from the corrosive waste sump
(CWS) via a discharge pipe to an evaporation pond
To prevent discharge of toxic hexavalent chromium to
the sump, cooling water was treated in the discharge
pipe by bubbling sulfur dioxide through it to reduce
the hexavaient chromium to less toxic trivalent
chromium, and the treated water was discharged to
the sump and neutralized using sodium hydroxide o
sulfuric acid. As a result of these activities,
approximately 363 cubic yards of sediment in the
evaporation pond have been contaminated by metals
and radioactive materials. In 1987, the pond and
sump were listed as RCRA land disposal units,
however, wastewater exhibiting the toxicity
characteristic (TC) for chromium is believed to have
been discharged after the effective date of the TC
rule The INEL site is currently divided into
10 Waste Area Groups (WAGs) Three previous
RODs signed in 1991 and 1992 addressed intenm
remedies for the warm waste pond sediment in
WAG 2, unexploded ordnance and contaminated soil
in WAG 10, and ground water contamination from
the IS-OS injection well in WAG I. respectively
This ROD provides an interim remedy for the
contaminated sediment and sludge in the evaporat on
pond, discharge pipe, and waste suinp as 0U22 in
WAG 5 A future ROD will address the underlying
aquifer and unsaturated zone The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the sediment,
debns, and sludge are metals, including chromium,
and radioactive materials.
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes removing and solidifying/stabilizing the
100 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from the
evaporation pond by grouting, followed by onsite
disposal in the Radioactive Waste Management
Complex (RWMC) at INEL along with existing low-
level waste containers; removing sludge and sediment
from the waste sump; treating the sludge by grouting,
if feasible, based on the results of treatability studies,
and disposing of the treated sludge onsite in RWMC;
decontaminating the discharge pipe, and sampling the
remaining sediment to venfy residual contaminant
concentrations. The estimated total cost for this
remedial action is $480,000 No O&M costs were
provided for this remedial action
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Sediment and sludge excavation goals are based on a
site-specific residential use scenario for a population
that begins residence at the site within 100 years in
the future Chemical-specific goals include chromium
800 mg/kg and cesium-137 30 pCi/g
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Not applicable.
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds, Chromium, Debris.
Decontamination, Direct Contact, lnterun Remedy,
Metals, Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment,
Radioactive Materials, Sediment, Sludge,
Solidification/Stabilization; State Standards!
Regulations. Treatability Studies, Treatment
Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 12/05/91, 06/02/92,
09/28/92
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Sediment, Sludge, Debris
Metals, Radioactive
Materials
Category: Source Control - Intenm
318
-------
REGION 10
U.S. DOE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB (OPERABLE UNIT 23), ID
June 2, 1992
SITE HISTORY/DESCRIPTION :
The U.S. DOE Idaho National Engineering aboratory
(INEL), established in 1949, is located 32 miles west
of Idaho Falls, Idaho. The facility occupies
890 square miles, and land use in the area is
predominantly industrial. The Snake River Plain
Aquifer, which underlies the INEL, has been
designated as a sole source, Class I, aquifer pursuant
to the Safe Drinking Water Act. Within the INEL is
a 270-square-mile area, formerly known as the Naval
Proving Ground (NPG), which was used prior to
World War II for naval artillery testing, explos:ves,
storage bunker testing, and ordnance disposal.
Investigations by site personnel have resulted in the
discovery of numerous unexploded ordnance devices.
such as 3- to 16-inch artillery shells, partially
exploded 125- to 2.000-pound bombs, anti-tank
mines, and depth charges. This ROD addresses
0U23, which covers six locations on the site the
CFA gravel pit, the storage bunkers north of Idaho
Chemical Processing Plant, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Grid, CFA Building 633 Zone, Fire
Station II Zone, and Power Line Road Unexploded
ordnance has been found on the ground surface in
most of these areas it is estimated that
150 unexploded ordnance will be found and detonated
during this remedial action Areas of soil are also
contaminated with explosive compounds at the ground
surface, or will become contaminated by detonation
activities This interim ROD addresses ordnance in
the six NPG areas and associated soil contamination
Future RODs will address remaining ordnance areas
for which insufficient information exists at this time,
final remedies for soil contamination, and all of the
Waste Area Group 10 (WAG 10) at the INtL site
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the
soil and ordnance debris are organics, inorganics, and
natural decomposition products
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected interim remedial action for this site
includes conducting soil sampling of the detonation
areas, excavating, containerizing, and transporting an
estimated 185 cubic yards of soil exceeding action
levels offsite for treatment using incineration, with
offsite disposal of residuals, researching historical
records pertaining to ordnance activities at INEL;
conducting a field search of the six NPG areas for
unexploded ordnance, controlled onsite thermal
treatment (detonation) of any identified ordnance,
with onsite disposal or recycling of any residual metal
debris; and posting signs where the public has access
to ordnance areas. The estimated present worth cost
for this remedial action is $2,359,500. No O&M
costs are associated with this remedial action.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Action levels for soil were determined based on
health-based criteria and include TNT 44 mg/kg and
RDX 18 mg/kg. A screening level for DNT has not
been developed as it is a breakdown product of TNT.
Soil at or above these screening levels will he
excavated, containerized, and transported to an offsite
incinerator. Any resultant ash will be disposed of by
the incinerator facility. Containerized soil will be
sampled and analyzed for TCLP analytes to determine
whether they should be classified as a RCRA waste.
INSTITUTiONAL CONTROLS :
Not provided
KEYWORDS :
Carcinogenic Compounds, Debris; Direct Contact,
Excavation; Incineration/Thermal Destruction;
lnorganics, Interim Remedy, Offsite Disposal; Offsite
Treatment, Onsite Disposal. Onsite Treatment,
Organics, RCRA; Soil. Sole-Source Aquifer, State
StandardsiRegulations. Treatment Technology
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: 12/05/91
Lead: Federal Facility
Contaminated Media:
Major Contaminants:
Soil, Debris
Orgarucs, lnorganics.
Natural Decomposition
Products
Category: Source Control - Intenm
319
-------
WYCKOFF/EAGLE HARBOR, WA
September 29, 1992
REGION 10
SITE 1llSTORY DESCRwrION :
The 3,780-acre Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor site is located
on the east side of Bainbridge Island, in Central Puget
Sound, Kitsap County, Washington. The site consists
of an inactive 40-acre wood treating facility owned by
Wyckoff, the adjacent 500-acre Eagle Harbor and
other upland sources of contanunauon to the Harbor,
including a former shipyard. Land use in the area is
predominantly residential, with some commercial and
industrial uses The harbor supports several fish
resources, a wide variety of resident and migratory
birds, and other wildlife. The shipyard operated from
1903 to 1959 on the northwest shore of Eagle Harbor,
resulting in releases of metals and organic
contaminants. From 1905 to 1988, wood treating
operations were conducted on the southeast shore
involving pressure treatment with creosote and
pentacblorophenol Preservative chemicals, which
were delivered to the facility by barge and ship. were
stored in ta_nks on the property Contaznmat ion of soil
and ground water at the wood treatment facility led to
seepage into adjacent sediments Wastewater was
discharged into Eagle Harbor for many years. and the
practice of storing treated pilings and umber in the
water continued until the late 1940’s In 1984,
NOAA investigations of the Harbor revealed that
sediment, fish, and shellfish from Eagle Harbor
contained elevated levels of PAHs Later in 1984,
EPA required the Wyckoff Company to conduct
environmentai investigation activities under RCRA,
and the state required immediate action to control
stormwater runoff and seepage of cont.anunants In
1991. EPA defined three operable units at the
Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor site East Harbor (OUI),
Wyckoff (0U2). and West Harbor (0U3) This ROD
addresses subudal/miertidal sediment and upland
sources of contamination in the West Harbor (0U3).
where significant sources from former shipyard
activities are believed to have been controlled Future
RODs will address PAH-contaminaied sub-tidal
sediment in the OU I and 0U2, the contaminated East
Harbor (OUl), and contaminated ground water , soil
and intertidal sediment at the adjacent facility (0U2)
The pnmary contaminants of concern affecting the
subtidaliintertidal sediment and upland sources are
organics. including PAl-Is, and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and lead
SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION :
The selected remedial action for this site includes
dredging, dewatenng, excavating approximately 1,000
to 7,000 cubic yards of intertidal sediment that
exceeds levels of 5 mg/kg mercury and/or lower
moderate PAH concentrations, followed by treatment
using solidificauon/siabthzation, as necessary, to
comply with LDR as determined by bench scale tests;
transporting sediment, which cannot be treated to
meet LDR offsite for disposal at a RCRA-permitted
landfill; treating wastewater from the dewatenng
process onsite using carbon adsorption before
discharge into the harbor; capping the sediment in
areas of high concern with a I-meter thick layer of
clean sediment, placing a thin layer of clean sediment
in subtidal areas of low to moderate concern to
enhance natural sediment recovery, conducting long-
term environmental monitonng, and implementing
institutional controls to prevent exposure to
contaminated fish and shellfish The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action ranges
from $6,200,000 to $16,000,000, which includes a
present worth O&M cost of $1,100,000 for 10 years
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS :
Sediment clean-up goals are based on the State of
Washington Sediment Management Standards
(Sediment Standards). which provide chemical criteria
for both a minimum clean-up h vel (MCUL) and the
more stringent sediment quality standards (SQS)
Chemical-specific goals for defining cleanup areas
include anthracene 1.200 mg/kg, chrysene 460 mg/kg,
naphthalene 170 mg/kg, pyrene 1,400 mg/kg, and
mercury 0 58 mg/kg (MCUL) the long-term goal for
the harbor is the SQS
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS :
Institutional controls will be implemented to prevent
exposure to contaminated fish and shellfish
KEYWORDS :
Arsenic. Capping. Carbon Adsorption (GAC),
Carcinogenic Compounds. Chromium, Clean Water
Act, Direct Contact, Dredging, Excavation, Ground
Water Monitoring, institutional Controls, Lead,
Metals, O&M, Offsite Disposal. Onsite Containment,
Onsite Discharge, Onsite Disposal, Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PAl-Is, RCRA. Sediment, Solidification/
Stabilization. State Standards/Regulations, Temporary
320
-------
REGION 10
WYCKOFF/EAGLE HARBOR, WA (Continued)
September 29, 1992
Storage; Treaiabiity Studies; Treatment Technology;
Water Quality Criteria; Wetlands.
SITE SUMMARY
Date of previous RODs: None
Lead: Fund
Contaminated Media: Sediment, Upland Sources
Major Contaminants: Organics, Metals
Category: Source Control - Intenm
321
-------
SECTiON III
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 SUMMARY TABLE
The FY 1992 Record of Decision (ROD) Summary Table provides an overview of site type, status of the
operable unit, contamination problems, selected remedies, waste volumes, deanup criteria and estimated
remedial costs, as provided in the RODS signed during FY 1992. Information included in the Summary Table
is derived from the ROD abstracts presented in Section II of this document.
The table is presented by Region, in alphabetical order according to the site name.
323
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Type/
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
ThrentfProhlern
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
Brunswick Naval Air
Station (Operable Unit
I), ME
Pan of a 3,094-ALrC
Active Military Facility
06116192
Brunswick Naval Air
Station (Operable Unit
2). ME
Part of a 3.094.Acre
Active Military Facility
06116 /92
Soil, sediment, and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
bcniene, toluene,
methylene chlonde. and
DCE, other organics.
including PAils, and
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
16000,000 gals (GW)
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE
and TCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes constructing a
low permeability RCRA cap over the landfills and a slurry wall
around the waste to divert clean water away from the landfills.
conducting treatability tests before designing the treatment
system. pumping and onsite treatment approximately 16 million
gallons of contaminated ground water, which is contained by
the cap and slurry wall, using chemical oxidation, flocculation.
clanfication. and filtration to remove the metals and ultraviolet
oxidation to destroy VOCs in an Onsute system concurrent with
the Eastern Plume ground water (discussed as part of another
ROD) to be most cost effective, discharging the treated water
olfsite to the local POTW once the water meets pretreatment
levels, and then into the Androscoggin River under a CWA
NPDES permit. monitoring system ground water to confirm that
the containment system is functioning properly. and
implementing institutional controls including land, deed, and
ground water use tesinctions to prevent future use ol the
landfills or ground water
‘The selected remedial action for this Site includes extracting and
treating contaminated ground water onsite using precipitation
arid filtration processes to remove metals such as iron and
manganes& and UV/oxidation to remove VOCs, with olfsite
discharge of the treated water to a local P01W for final
treatment, conducting treatability tests prior to design of the
treatment system. and implementing a Navy monitoring
program to ensure that the system is effective Extracted
ground water for this OU will be combined with ground water
from OUI. the subject of a previous ROD, and treated
concurrently in a single system
Chemical-specific soil/sediment clean-
up goals were not provided, as the
nsks presented by these medh are
within the acceptable range established
by EPA A target clean-up level for
mercury in soil/sediment is specified at
I mg/kg based on a food-web analysis.
as mercury was the only contaminant
identified which demonstrates a
propensity to bioaccurnulate in
terrestrial food chains Chenucal-
specific ground water clean-up goals
arc based on SDWA MCLs and
Include arsenic 50 ugh; vinyl chloride
2 ugh; methylene chloride 5 ugh. 1.2-
cis-DCE 70 ug/l. (.2 -trans-DCE
100 ugh: chromium (tolal) 100 ug/l.
lead 15 ughl (action level): and nickel
100 ugh
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals for this Site were based on
SDWA MCLs and health-based
standards and include I,I,l-TCA
200 ugh. TCE 5 ugh, PCE 5 ugh;
trans-l.2-DCE 100 ugh. cIs-1.2’DCE
bug/i. l,l-DCA 3.500 ugh; and 1,1-
DCE 7 ugh) The Interim action is
intended to contain the Eastern Plume
and prevent further migration to
Harpswell Cove pending final remedial
actions
57,842.000
(present worth)
SI .432.000
(present worth
0& M)
(30 years)
54.223.(XX)
(present worth)
51.845.000
(present worth
O&M)
(5 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatetType)
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WoiihF
Capital and
O&M Costs
Darling Hill Dump, ‘T
3 3-Acre Inactive Solid
Waste Disposal Facility
06f 30/92
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes no funher
action because significant levels of contaminants are not present
at the site EPA. however, will continue to monitor the ground
water, surface water, and sediment for a 5-year penod to ensure
the protectiveness of the no action remedy
Not applicable
$292,000
(present worth)
$77,000
(annual O&M)
1 )
“I
I Newpoii Naval
Education/Trairung
Center. RI
85-Acre Training
Facility
09/29/92
Otis Air National
Guard/Camp Edwards.
MA
22,000-Acre Former
Military Vehicle
Maintenance Facility
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben7ene and TCE; and
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, arid
lead
Not specified
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE
and TCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes constructing
an extraction system around Tanks 53 and 56 to contain the
contaminated ground water plume and prevent migration and
potential discharge to surface water bodies; treating ground
water onsile with a precipitation process that involves a
coagulation/filtration to remove metals, followed by using
UV/oxidation to treat VOCs; conducting a treatability study
during the final design of the UV/oxidation treatment system to
determine the appropriate oxidant and concentration necessary
to destroy the VOCs. disposing of the filtration solids in
accordance with federal and state regulations; discharging the
treated ground water offsite to either the local wastewater
treatment facility, recycling treated water back into the aquifer
upgradient. or onsite to surface water if the treatment facility is
unable the accept the pretreated water, and monitoring GW.
The selected remedial action for this Site includes onsite
pumping and treatment of 790 million gallons of contaminated
ground water using carbon adsorption to remove VOCs;
monitonng the influent and effluent of the carbon absorption
treatment, and discharging the treated water lo an Onsite
infiltration trench, and monitoring ground water
Interim chemical-specific clean-up
goals are based on the MCLs and
MC1,Gs and include arsenic 50 mg/kg
(MCL); benzene 5 mg/kg (MCL);
chromium 100 mg/kg (MCLG); and
lead IS mg/kg (based on EPA action
level)
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for
ground water are based on SDWA
MCLs and state standards and include
PCE 5 ugh; TCE 5 ugh: DCE 70 ugh,
and PCA 2 ugh (l0 risk-based
standard)
$3,500,000
(present worth)
$2,000,000
(present worth
O&M)
(5 years)
$2,113,000 -
$4,528,000
(present wotth)
$472.000-
$1,012,000
(present wotih
O&M)
(5 years)
05/20/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/type!
Signature Date.!
Remedial Action
ThreatfProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wonhl
Capital and
O&M Costs
PSC Resources. MA
21 5-Acre Former Waste
Oil and Solvent
Reclamation Facility
09/15/92
Soil, sediment. debns.
(3W. and SW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beneene. PCE, and
TCE. other organics.
including PAils and
PCBs. and metals,
including arsenic and
lead
11.000 yd’ (soil)
1.695 yd’ (sediment)
The selected remedial action includes decontaminating.
demolishing, and offsite disposal of dcbns and property
structures at a RCRA landfill, consolidating the contaminated
soil with lagoon and wetlands sediment onsite, and treating
these matenals using stabiliration, constructing a permeable cap
over the stabibzed matenal. restoring affected wetlands, treating
lagoon surface water onsite using filtration and a granular
activated carbon (GAC) adsorption unit, followed by
discharging the treated water into the Quaboag River or to an
offsite Facility, using natural attenuation to achieve ground
water clean-up levels, monitoring ground water, conducting
sediment and surface water sampling; and Implementing
Institutional controls including deed, ground water and land use
me St nCtJOn S
Chemical-specific soil and sediment
(lagoon only) clean-up levels are based
on health-risk standards an4 SDWA
MCLs. respectively, and include
benzene 1 mg/kg/3 mg/kg; TCE
2 mg/kg/4 mg/kg; PCE
2 mg/kg/l2 mg/kg, lead
500 mg/kg/IS mg/kg. total PAils
151 mg/kg; and total PCBs 1 mg/kg.
Chemical-specific wetlands sediment
clean-up levels are based on health-risk
standards and include total PAils
10 mg/kg; total PCBs I mg/kg, arsenic
12 mg/kg; and lead 315 mg/kg
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up levels are based on SDWA MCLs
and state standards and Include
henzene 5 ug; TCE 5 ug/l: PCE
5 ug/l; and lead 15 ug/I An ARAR
waiver will be issued for certain
requirements of the chemical waste
landfill regulations, which require
construction of chemical waste landfills
in low permeable clay conditions, the
use of a synthetic membrane liner, and
that the bottom of the landfill be
50 feet above the histonc high water
table.
$3,420,747
(present worth)
$731,913
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
Revere Textile Pnnis,
Cr
IS-Acre lndustnal
Facility
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes no further
action, with imuplementatmon of a 5-year sediment and ground
water monitonng program EPA has determined thai the
previous interim remedial activities have eliminated the need to
conduct additional remedial actions and are adequate to protect
human health and the environment.
Not applicable
$263,000
(present worth)
09/30/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelType/
Signature DaIe/
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goats
Present Worth?
Capital and
O&M Costs
I Ttbbetis Road. NH
2-Acre Former Waste
Storage and Dtspocal
Facility
09/29/92
Town Garage/Radio
Beacon. NH
Former Radio Beacon
Facility
09/30/92
Debns and OW
contanunated with
VOCs. including
brnzene. PCE. TCE,
and xylenes. other
orgarucs. including
PAH . and metals.
including chromium
end lead
Not specified
OW contaminated with
VOCs
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes removing and
disposing buildings and debns offsute to access the areas of
contamination more efficiently, disposing of 15 barrels of
incinerator ash residue and spent carbon fillers from a previous
removal action olfsite. using trenches or wells to intercept
ground water in the bedrock aquifer, designing and constructing
a ground water dewatenng and extraction system in the
overburden aquifer, and treating air emissions using granular
activated carbon, treating the contaminated ground water in an
onsute treatment plant using metals precipitation, chemical
additives, and IJV/oxidation. with discharge of the treated
ground water to injection wells onsile to promote flushing of
weathered bedrock, disposing of the resulting sludge offsite;
conducting a treatabibty study to determine the appropriate
oxidant and concentration needed to destroy VOCs; upgrading
and expanding the water supply, as needed, monitoring ground
water and surface water modifying or abandoning wells, if
necessary, and Implementing institutional controls, including
deed and ground water use testnciions to prevent the use of
contaminated ground water
The selected remedial action for this site includes allowing the
contaminated ground water in the overburden and bedrock
aquifers to naturally attenuate, implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions to prevent future use of
ground water, monitoring ground water, and Implementing a
contigency remedy to provide an alternate water supply to
affected residences in the event that contaminants into the
dnnlung water wells reverse their historical trend arid
concentrations begin to increase beyond the clean-up levels
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and MCLGs and state standards and
Include PCE 5 ugll; toluene l,000 ugh:
naphthalene 1,460 ugh; arsenIc 50 ugh;
manganese 3,650 ugh; bls(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate 4 ugh, benzene
5 tight. sylenes 10,000 ugll; TCE
5 ugh, and chromium 100 ugh.
Chemical-specific interim ground water
clean-up levels are based on SDWA
MCLGs and state standards and
Include l,l-DCE lug/I; l,l,l-’I’CA
200 tight; antimony 6 ugh; beryllium
4 ug /l; chromium 100 ugh; and barium
2,000 ugh Three years after these
levels have been achieved, a risk
assessment will be performed to
determine whether the levels are
protective and, therefore, should be
final.
$3,776,000
(present worth)
$2,047,000
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
$1,250,000
(present worth
O&M)
(years 2-25)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateiTypel
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiihl
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 Action Anodizing.
Plaling. and Polishing.
NY
I-Acre Metal Finishing
Shop
06/30192
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes no futiher
action, with the implementation of a ground water monitoring
program for I year to ensure that the remedy is protective of
human health and the environment
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
2 Bioclirocal Laboratories.
NY
26-Acre Former
Industrial Chemical
Distnbution Facility
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site Is no further action
The risk a.ssessment results indicate that the levels of
contamination present in the soil, air, sediment, and ground
waler present nsks which fall within or below EPA’s allowable
nsk range
Not applicable
so
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
09/30192
2 Cosden Chemical
Coatings. NJ
6 7-Acre Paint
Formulation and
Manufacturing Facility
09/30192
Soil. debns, and OW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene. TCE, toluene,
and xylenes. other
orgarucs. including
PAH5 and PCBs,
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, and Inorganics.
including asbestos
8.000 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this Site includes treating
8.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil onsite using In-situ
solidification, and disposing of a small pile of concentrated
PCB-contaminated soil ofisite: disposing of sludge generated
during the treatment process ofTsite; decontaminating and
demolishing the contaminated building onsite. and removing
and/or recycling decontaminated debns and equipment offsite.
removing asbestos and PCB-contaminated debris oIfsite for
disposal in an appropnate offsite facility, treating ground water
ontite using precipitation to remove Inorganic contaminants,
followed by air stnpping to remove VOCs. with recharge of
treated ground water to the underlying aquifer, treating air
emissions using carbon adsoTptlon. if determined to be
necessary during remedial design. and implementing
institutional controls including deed restrictions
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are risk-based and include PCBs I
mg/kg; chromium 390 - 78.000 mg/kg;
and lead 500 mg/kg Chemical-
specific ground water clean-up goals
are based on state standards and
SDWA MCLs and Include toluene
1.000 ugh, xylenes 44 ugh); chromium
100 ugh; and lead 15 ugfl
$15,172,800
(present worth)
$585,500
(O&M)
(I year)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
SiatefType/
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
W st Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WotiW
Capital and
O&M Costs
t’J
2 Dover Municipal Well
4, NJ
Municipal Well
09/30/92
6W contaminated with
VOCs, Including
benzene. PCI. and
TCE. arid metals.
Including lead
Not specified
‘The selected remedial action for this site includes onsite
pumping and treatment of contaminated ground water from both
the intermediate and deep aquifers using air stripping to remove
VOCs, discharging the treated water cilsite to the public water
supply system to be used for potable water, with reinjection of
surplus quantities. perfonning a prelinunaiy assessment of air
stnpper emissions and discharge requirements to determine if
vapor phase treatment using activated carbon will be necessary.
and if so, disposing of or recycbng the spent carbon offsite,
monitonng air emissions, and monitoring ground water to
ensure effectiveness of the treatment system and to determine if
pretreatment for inorganics is necessaty.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on federal and state
MCLs. including PCE I ugh (state);
TCE I ugh (state): toluene 1.000 ug(l
(federal): l,l,l-TCA 26 ugh (state);
and lead 15 ug/l (federal) Ground
water will be treated to meet all
applicable drinking water standards
prior to offsite discharge to the public
water supply Any regulated
equipment used In the selected remedy
will be designed. constructed, and
operated to meet state Air Pollution
Control and Noise Pollution Control
Act requiremenis
$1,985,000
(present worth)
$106,000
(annual O&M)
(21 years)
2 Ellis Property. NJ
36-Acre Fom r Drum
Storage Facility
09/30(92
Soil and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE
arid TCE. other
organiCs. including
PCBs. and metals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead
760 yd’ (surface and
subsurface soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating all
contaminated soil, and treating metal-contaminated soil onsite or
offsite using stabiliiation if necessary, pnor to olTsite disposal
in a landfill, transporting organic- or PCB-contaminated soil
olfsite for treatment by incineration, backfilling the excavated
area with clean fill, collecting ground water using interceptor
trenches or extraction wells, and treating the water onsite using
precipitation and ultrafiltration to remove metals, followed by
air stnpping to remove VOCs. with reinjection of the treated
water onsite, treating air emissions if necessary, using
engineering controls to mitigate any affected wetlands, and
monitoring ground water
Chemical-specific soil and ground
water clean-up goals arc established
based on the levels specified In New
Jersey’s Proposed Cleanup Standards
for Contaminated Sites (February
1992). Surface soil clean-up standards
include arsenic 20 mg/kg; lead
100 mg/kg; benzene 3 mg/kg; PCE
9 mglkg. TCE 23 mg/kg(s). and PCBs
045 mg/kg The clean-up standards
for sub-surface soil include arsenic
20 mg/kg. lead I mg/kg. PCE
I mg/kg. ICE I mg/kg, and PCBs 100
mg/kg Ground water clean-up
standards include arsenic 8 ugh,
chromium 100 ugh, PCE I ugh; TCE
I ugh; toluene 1.000 ugfl; and lead
100 ugh
$6,653,000
(present worth)
$188,200
(annual O&M)
(years 0—I)
$365,000
(annual O&M)
(years 1-3)
$283,000
(annual O&M)
(years 4.30)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Staterrype!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Prcscnt Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
i -i
0
2 Endicoti Village Well
Field. NY
16-Acre Inactive
Landfill
09/30/92
2 Evor Phillips Leasing.
NJ
65-Acre Former
Disposal Facility
09/30/92
2 FAA Technical Center.
NJ
5.000-Acre Research
and Development
Facility
Soil, debns, and OW
contaminated with
VOCs, including 1.2-
DCE. benrene. PCE.
TCE. toluene. vinyl
chionde. and xylenes.
other organics.
including PAils. PCBs.
and pesticides, and
metals, including lead
Not specified
Debos and OW
contaminated with
VOC5, including
beniene and toluene.
other organics.
including PCE.
pesticides, and TCE.
and metals, including
chromium and lead
80 y& (debns)
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes capping the
majority of landfill #1 with a low permeability soil cap:
covenng the Tn-Cities Airport Controlled Activity Area and the
compost facility area with a bituminous (asphalt) cap,
hackfilling or mitigating any affected wetlands, performing an
explosive gas investigation, and installing a passive gas venting
system, collecting and treating the ground waler and leachaie
seep using an air stnpper. with onsite discharge of the treated
waler and leachate to the Susquehana River or transporting the
ground water and leachate ofisite to a local PO1’W: mainlairung
the landfill cap arid venting system, conducting long-term air
and ground water monitoring, and implementing institutional
controls including deed restnctions. and site access restrictions
such as fencing
The selected interim remedial action for this site Includes
excavating and overpacking approximately 30 buried drums.
and removing these offsite for disposal along with an estimated
50 drums currently stored at the drum disposal area: extracting
and treating contaminated ground water onsite using
precipitation to remove inorganics. followed by air stripping to
remove VOCs. with recharge of the treated water to the aquifer.
treating air emissions using carbon absorption. pnor to
discharge to the atmosphere: and conducting environmental
monitonng
The selected remedial action for this Site Is no further action
Based upon the completed removal actions and risk evaluation
for Area (I. us determined to be protective of human health and
the environment
Chetnical-specilic goals for ground
water are based on TCE 5 ugh:
chromium 5 ug/l, and lead 5 ugh.
Leachate collection, treatment, and
disposal will be designed to comply
with SPDES discharge requirements
and air emission standards will be
adhered to for the air stripper
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and state standards Including benzcne
I ugFl (stale): carbon tetrachloride 2
ugh) (state); TCA I ug/l (slate), TCE I
ugh (stale); arsenic 50 ugh) (MCL);
and lead IS mg /i (MCL) Disposal of
drums will be conducted according to
RCRA requirements for olfsite
Treatment. Storage or Disposal (‘TSD)
facilities
Not applicable.
$16,684,200-
$ 16.889.400
(present worth)
$248,000-
$265,900
(annual O&M)
$7,211,948
(present worth)
$717996
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
09/30/92 Not applicable
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type)
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wotih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
.1
2 Facet Enterprises. NY
31-Acre Manufacturing
Facility
09/04/92
Soil, sediment. debns.
and GW contaminated
with VOCs, including
ben7ene. PCE. TCE.
loluene, and xylenes.
other organics.
Including PCBs and
PAHs. and metalc,
including arsenic and
lead
470,000.000 gals (GW)
6000 yd’ (soil and
sediment)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
contaminated soil and sediment from the disposal areas;
disposing of approximately 1,275 cubic yards of TSCA waste
with PCBs concentrations greater than 50 ppm offsite in a
secure double-lined landfill facility. stabilixing of all RCRA
wastes to prevent leaching of merals and disposing of
2,124 cubic yards of waste In a secure ofisite RCRA-hned
facility, disposing of approximately 120 cubic yards of non-
RCRA wastes in an offsiie industrial waste landfill; extracting
and stonng contaminated ground water in e central onsite
collection tank, followed by treatment using air stripping to
remove VOCs, and filtration and precipitation to remove metals.
ii necessary; discharging the treated effluent onsite to the
facility non-contact cooling system or to surface water and
Implementing a long-term ground water monitoring program
and institutional controls including land use resirictions.
Action levels for excavation of surface
soil/sediment are health-based and
include benzo(a) anthracene
20 pprnf3 ppm; benzo(b)fiuoranthene
20 pprnf3 ppm; benzo(k)fiuoranthene
43 ppmrl ppm; henzo(a)pyrene
3 ppm /i ppm; arsenIc 19 ppm/I ppm:
indeno(l.2.3-cd)pyrene 12 ppmF2 ppm;
dibenzo(a.h) anthracene 3 ppm/I ppm:
PCBs 10 ppmf I ppm; and chromium
1110 ppm in sediment only Action
levels for excavation of subsurface soil
are also health-based and Include
benzo(a)anthracene 54 ppm;
benzo(b)fiuoranthene 55 ppm;
henzo(k)Iluoranthene 118 ppm;
benzo(a)pyrene 8 ppm. indeno(1,2.3-
cd)pyrene 33 ppm; PCBs 25 ppm; arid
arsenIc 52 ppm. Chemical-specific
clean-up goals for soil and sediment
are based on RCRA TCLP. Land Ban
regulations, and TSCA regulations.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and state drinking water standards
including ICE 5 ugh. ,iylenes 5 ugh;
and lead 25 ug/i. Chemical-specific
ARARs will be waived if it is
determined by EPA that cerlain
portions of the ground water cannot be
restored for beneficial use
34.850.656
(present worth)
31.305.596
(annual O&M)
(20 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!l’ypel
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woflh/
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 General MotorslCcn;ral
Foundry Division. NY
270-Acre Aluminum
Casting Plant
03/31/92
Soil, sludge, debris.
GW. and SW
contaminated with
VOCs. including TCE.
other organics.
including PCBs,
phenols, and PAils.
and oils
174 (XXJ yd’ (coil
sludge. dchns, and all
visibly oily soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
174.000 cubic yards of soil containing greater than or equal to
500 mg/kg PCBs, sludge, dcbns. and all visibly oily soil from
the East Disposal Area, followed by onsite treatment using
either biological, them-tat destruction, or another treatment as
determined by the results of treatahility studies performed as
part of remedy for Out, disposing of debns offsute;
consolidating and containing soil with PCB levels below
500 mg/kg in the East Disposal Area along with the treated soil
and sludge, and eovenng th. area with a composite cover.
recontounng, regrading. and containing contaminated matcnal
from the lndustnal Lagoon onsite with a composite cover,
installing a slurry wall to control ground water migration and a
runoff collection and treatment system to treat surface water,
pnor to ensue discharge at the East Disposal and the lndustnal
Lagoon areas, based on testing results, treating ground water
onsite using air stnpping to remove VOCs and catbon
adsorption to remove PCBs. with onsile discharge to the St
Lawrence River, rnonitonng ground water, surface water, and
air, and implementing institutional controls, including deed
restnctions. to discourage use as a residential area
The chemical-specific clean-up goal for
treated soil residuals is tO mg/kg for
PCBs, which is an onsite residual
disposal ARAR waiver of the TSCA
regulation concerning landfill
requirements of 2 mg/kg For PCBs; for
sludge with initial PCB >500 mg/kg.
clean-up residual level is 2 mg/kg
(TSCA) Ground water clean-up goals
are based on SDWA and state
standards, and include PCBs 0 I ugIl;
TCE 5 ugh; and total phenols I ug/l
$31,000,000 -
$45,000,000
(present woflh)
$567,000
(annual O&M)
(0-2 years)
$200,000
(annual O&M)
(yeats 3-28)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateiType/
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WonW
Capital and
O&M Costs
tjJ
2 Higgins Farm. NJ
75-Acre Former Cattle
Farm
09/3 W92
GW contaminated with
VOC5. including
berizerie. PCE. TCE.
and xyknes
Not speci fled
The final remedial action for this site includes installing ground
water extraction wells around the penmeter of the stte. treating
the contaminated ground waler onsite by processes that are
expected to include precipitation. flocculation, clarification,
filtration, air stnpp lng, intermediate pH adjustment, ion
exchange, and final pH adjustment, however, the exact system
will be developed during the RD phase; discharging the treated
ground water to onsite surface water, monitonng ground water.
surface water, and onsite and offsite wells including
downgradient residential wells; and performing limited
investigations to ensure all sources of contamination have been
tdentified, with removal and offsite disposal of contaminated
materials that were previously remediated and are currently
stored onsite
Chemical-specific goals for ground
water clean-up, which are based on
SDWA MCLs and state standards,
include benzene I ug /1 (slate);
chlorobenzene 4 ugh (state); cis-l.2-
dichloroethene 10 ugh (slate); vinyl
chloride 2 ugh (state); big (2-ethyl
hexyl) phthalate 6 ug /1 (MCL); and
xylenes 44 ugh.
$5990000-
$8,447,600
(present worth)
$384,000
(annual O&M)
(years 5-30)
2 Impenal Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ
15-Acre Oil Blending
Facility
09/MY92
GW contaminated with
VOCs, including
benzene. PCE, TCE.
toluene. and xylenes.
other organics,
including PAHs and
PCRs, and metals.
Including arsenic.
chromium, and lead
The selected remedial action for this site Includes extracting and
treating contaminated ground water onsite using precipitation to
remove inorganic contaminants, and carbon adsorption to
remove organic contaminants; discharging the treated ground
water onsite to Birch Swamp, continuing the previous removal
action, conducting a wetlands assessment to determine site
impact, regenerating or disposing of the spent carbon, disposing
of any sludge generated dunng the treatment process offsite;
and conducting environmental monitonng to ensure the
effectiveness of the remedy
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals, based on federal MCLs and
state levels. Include benzene I ugh:
xylenes 40 ugh; toluene 1.000 ugh;
pyrene 200 ugh; PCBs 5 ugh; arsenic
8 ugh, beryllium 20 ug/1; and lead
10 ugh
$9.647.000
(present worth)
$51 5.000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
Not specified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Staterrype/
Signature Datel
Rersedial Action
ThreatfProhlern
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 Indusinal Latex, NJ
967-Acre Chemical
Adhesives and Natural
and Synthetic Rubber
Compounds
Manufaciurer
09/31V92
Soil, sediment, sludge.
and debns
contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE.
ICE. toluene. and
sylenes. other organics.
including PAils. PCBs.
pesticides, and phenols,
and metals including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
38.000 y& (soil and
sediment)
800 gals (liquid sludge)
6 yd’ (sludge)
600 (drums)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
approximately 600 buned drums with offsite disposal or
incineration. dismantling 30 production vats from their steel
supporis and draining any remaining matenal that is not
hardened into drums for offsite disposal or incineration,
disposing of the vats in an ofisite landfill, removing the floor
drains and demolishing 41,000 square feet-of the onsite
buildings with offsite disposal. excavating the septic system
along with 800 gallons of associated liquids and 6 cubic yards
of sludge with offsite disposal, excavating and treating onsite an
estimaled 34,700 cubic yards of contaminated soil and sediment
using low thermal desorplion, testing soil to determine the need
for stabiliiauon prior to disposal, and backfilling treated
material onsile, transporting residuals generated during the
treatment process offsite for disposal or treatment, Ireaung
offgases using carbon adsorption or another appropriate
treatment; monitoring air; assessing the wetland area and
performing additional ground water investigations dunng the
remedial design phase. Implementing institutional controls, if
necessary and Site access restrictions including fencing
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals,
which are based on the EPA Risk
Assessment Guidance for Supcrfund
(RAGS), include PCBs I mg/kg;
heptachlor epoxide 0.1 mg/kg;
benzo(a)anthracene 04 mg/kg.
chrysene 13 mg/kg, bis (2-ethyihexyl)
phthalate 46 mg/kg, indeno (1,2,3-cd)
pyrene 0 2 mg/kg, arsenic 3 6 ing/kg;
and lead 500 mg/kg Building material
contaminated with PCB5 greater than
50 mg/kg will be disposed of in
accordance with TSCA/RCRA
requirements
$17,883,600
(present worth)
$4,848,700
(annual O&M)
(I year)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
Staic!Type/
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Thre al/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WoiihF
Capital and
0&M Costs
UI
2 Islip Municipal Sanitary
Landfill, NY
107 5-Acre Municipal
Landfill
09/30/92
Soil. debns, and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beniene. PCI. TCE.
and toluene, other
organics. and metals.
Including arseruc,
chromium, and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes inslalling a
modified geosyntheuc membrane cap over 52 acres of the
landfill. constnicung a stormwater system to direct and control
runofI from the site to recharge basins; allowing ground waler
with total VOC concentrations less than 50 ugh to naturally
attenuate, extracting and onsite treatment of ground water with
total VOC concentrations greater than 50 ugh using aeration.
with discharge of the treated wager onsite to a recharge basin.
determining if carbon absorption will be required as a polishing
treatment step to ensure compliance with state discharge limits;
conducting a treatability study to determine the effectiveness of
aeratnin in precipitating metals from the ground water, and
providing for a contingency remedy that treats ground water
using chemical precipitation and air stiipping: evaluating the
ground water treatment system to determine whether an air
pollution control device is necessary: monitoring ground water
and air; and implementing Institutional controls including deed
arid ground water restrictions to prevent the Installation of
drinking water wells in impacted areas.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals, which are based on SDWA
MCLs and state standards. Include
benzene 5 ugh (MCI); PCE 5 ugh
(MCI), ‘ICE 5 ugh (MCL): toluenc 5
ugh (MCL); arsenic 0025 mg/I (state);
chromium 50 ugh: and lead 002 mg/I
(state),
517.942.025
(present worth)
54.588.875
(present worth
0&M)
(30 years)
2 Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ
200-Acre Inactive
Disposal Area
09/28/92
Sediment. GW. and
SW contaminated with
VOCs, Including
benzene and xylenes,
other organics,
including PAHs and
PCBs, and metals.
including arseruc
2.200 yd’ (sediment)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
2.200 cubic yards of contaminated sediment with PCB levels
above 5 mg/kg using excavation methods selected to control
surface water flow and mimmize impact to wetlands,
dewatenng. consolidating, and disposing of the sediment onsite
within the OUI containment area, actively restoring I 36 acres
of affected wetlands in Edmonds Creek/Marsh using a program
to be developed dunng the RD stage; maintaining the Mound B
cover, allowing natural attenuatinn to reduce contaminant
concentrations in the ground water to acceptable levels, and
conducting long-term morutoring of ground water and surface
water II EPA determines that disposal of 0112 sediment In the
OUI containment area will delay construction of the OUI
remedy, a contingency remedy will be implemented, which
provides for offsite disposal of sediment at a chemical waste
facility
Chemical-specific excavation goals for
sediment are based on EPA’s
evaluation of bloavailability. Office of
Water methods, and remediatlon goals
at other Superfund sites and Include
PCBs at 5 mg/kg EPA believes that a
PCB-drlven remedial action will also
affect reduction of the other
contaminants onsite, such as metals
and PAils.
54.314.900
(present worth)
567,100
(annual O&M
cost)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefTypei
Signarure Date)
Rerr dial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selecied Remedy
Clean.up Goats
Present Woiihi
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 Naval Air Enginecnng
Center (Operable Unit
5). NJ
7.400-Acre Naval
Engineenng Center
01/03/92
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no fuither action
because previously implemented removal actions have
eliminated the need to conduct additional remedial action at
sites 5, 19, and 21
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
“3
0 ”
2 Naval Air Engineenng
Center (Operable Unit
6), NJ
7,400-Acre Naval
Engineenng Center
03/I 6/92
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action
because the previously implemented removal action has
eliminated the need to conduct additional clean-up activities
Recently conducted environmental investigations show no
evidence of any significant contamination remaining at Site 44
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
2 Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit
7), NJ
7.400-Acre Naval
Engineenng Center
03/I 6f92
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs, including
benzene. PCE. TCE,
toluene. and sylenes,
other organics,
including PAils and
PCBs. and metaLs
520 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes extracting and
pretreating contaminated ground waler from six recovery wells
to remove metals, solids, and free product, transporting the free
product offsite for recycling or disposal, treating ground water
onsite using air stripping and granular activated carbon to
remove VOCs, with discharge of the treated water Onsite to the
aquifer through an irrigation and infiltration system, spray
Imgating the treated water over areas of subsurface soil
contamination to facilitate soil flushing and removal of soil
contaminants, treating air emissions from the air slnpping
process using granular activated carbon, prior to discharge to
the atmosphere: testing residual sludge 1mm the pretreatment
processes for hazardous waste charactenstics and sending this
offsite for appropriale disposal. and retunung spent carbon
ofIsite to the vendor for regeneration
Chemical specific clean-up levels for
ground water and soil have not been
identified because of the interim nature
of this remedial action Clean-up goals
will be established when a final
remedial action Is chosen Treatment
residuals will be tested to determine
whether RCRA Land Disposal
Restrictions apply
$4,015,000
(present worth)
$400,000
(annual O&M)
(3 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Sta!e [ T’ypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Prescnt Woilh/
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 North Sea Municipal
Landfill. NY
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site Is no further action,
with air and ground water monitonng
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
131-Acre Active
Land fill
09/28/92
Not applicable
$0
(O&M)
2 Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY
0 5-Acre Former Oil,
Solvent, and Chemical
Storage Tank Farm
04/24/92
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs, including
tieniene. PCE. TCE,
toluene, and xylenes.
other organics,
including PAIls, and
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
13.000 yd (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes treating
13.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil onstte using vacuum
extraction to remove aliphatic hydrocarbons and soil flushing.
as necessary, to remove VOCs. followed by disposal of
treatment residuals at an offsite RCRA facility, ground water
pumping and onsite treatment using precipitation. clanfication,
and filtration to remove heavy metals, followed by treatment
with air stnpping to remove VOCs. treating the liquid phase
using granular activated carbon as a final polishing step, with
recharge onsite Into the aquifer or to infiltration trenches,
treating olfgases from the air stripping process using vapor
phase activated carbon; disposing of residual carbon and sludge
generated during the treatment processes offsite, and moruloring
soil and ground water
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on SDWA MCLs to protect
ground water by the reduction of
mobility and volume of contaminants
and include PCE 14 mg/kg; TCE
0.7 mg/kg; toluenc 1.5 mg/kg; and
xylenes 1.2 mg/kg Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals may be
waived because of the presence of an
upgradient contamination source from
another site. Clean-up goals are based
on the upgradient concentrations of
certain contaminants When the
upgradient source has been remedlated.
drinking water standards, such as
SDWA MCLs and state ground water
quality regulations, will be assigned
$13,744,000
(present worth)
$1,236,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
2 Plattsburgh Air Force
Base (Operable Unit I),
NY
Air Forte Base Landfill
09130 (92
Soil, sediment. OW,
and SW contaminated
with VOCs. including
benzene and xylenes.
other organics,
including PAHs and
PCB5. and metals.
including arsenic
The selected remedial action for this site includec cleanng and
grubbing the Site, establishing a low-permeability vegetated
cover system over the landfill, diverting the surface water
runoff to minimite erosion of the cover and maintenance
requirements, installing a gas detection and monitonng system,
developing a post-closure plan to monitor, maintain, and inspect
the site. rnotutoring ground water and surface water and
implementing institutional controls including deed restrictions
Chemical-specific soil, sediment, and
surface waler clean-up goals were not
developed for the LF-023 source
control action because discrete source
areas were not found Clean-up levels
for other contaminated media
associated with the site will be
established in a subsequent ROD, if
necessary
$4,574,000
(present worth)
5988.000
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
Not spe’cified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Slatelrypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThreatfProhlem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 Plattsburgh Air Force
Base (Operable Unit 3).
NY
Air Force Base Landfill
09I3fY92
Soil and debns
contaminated with
VOCs, other organics.
including pesticides.
and metals, including
chromium and lead
Not specu lied
The selected remedial action for this site includes cleating and
grubbing the landfill site; diverting surface water runoff to
minimize erosion of the cover and minimize maintenance
requirements, covering the landfill with a 12-Inch soil cover,
revegetating the area to minimize erosion and enhance
evapoiranspiration. developing a post-closure plan to nonitor.
maintain, and inspect the site. rouwioring ground water, and
implementing institutional controls including deed restrictions
Chemical-specific soil and ground
water clean-up levels were not
developed because none of- the
contaminants of concern Identified In
the baseline risk assessment were
found to pose an unacceptable risk to
either human health or the
environment
$2.1 14.000
(present worth)
$866,000
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
2
00
Preferred Plating, NY
0 88-Acre Former Metal
Plating Facility
09/28 /92
Soil contaminated with
VOCs. including
beniene, PCE. ICE.
toluene. and zylenes.
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, and inorganics,
including cyanide
The selected remedial action for this site includes jet grouting
of the building’s Foundation to stabilize the foundation dunng
excavation. excavating approximately 700 cubic yards of
contaminated soil from the waste storage pit area and
approximately 350 cubic yards of contaminated soil from
within, around, and beneath the former sanitary leaching pool
and former steam condensate leaching pool and line areas.
treating the soil offsute using solidification! stabilization or
another appropriate technology still to be detemuned, with
offsite disposal at a RCRA-permitted facility; and backlilling
the excavated areas with clean soil.
Prior to disposal, the contaminated soil
will be ireated to comply with RCRA
LDRs Chemical-specific soil clean-up
levels were not provided
$1,423,700
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
1050 ydi (soil)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
State!Fypel
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Thr eaVProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
t J
2 Rarnapo Landfill. NY
60-Acre Landfill Site
03/31/92
Soil, debns. GW. and
SW contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben7ene and xylenes.
other org an ics.
Including PAHs and
phenols, and metals.
including arsenic.
chrorruuni. and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing a
multi-media cap over the 60-acre landfill, improving the
existing leachate collection system, diverting surface water
drainage, and relocating and/or raising Tome Valley Road to
allow for filling, installing ground water extraction wells to
supplement the existing leachate collection system, and treating
the esiracied ground water and leachate ofisite at the Sulfern
Wasiewater Treatment Plant, conducting long-term ground
water, surface water, and perimeter air monitoring with venting
or control, as required, implementing institutional controls.
including deed restnctions. and providing for a contingency
remedy to provide preliminary design of the alternate water
supply system, and ground waler pretreatment and landfill gas
treatment systems, if necessary
Chemical-specific goals for leachate
and shallow ground water clean-up are
based on the more stringent New York
State Water Quality Criteria standards.
Surface water standards are based on
the more stringent of human and
aquatic ARARs.
S 19,890.000-
$26,423,000
(present worth)
$319,800 -
$678,600
(annual O&M)
(30 Years)
$24,890,000-
$30,880,000
(present worth
for contingency
remedy with
$319,600-
$622,600
annual O&M
for 30 years)
2 Robintech National Pipe.
NY
l27.Acre Light
Industrial Facility
03/31/92
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including 1.1-
DCE. 1,2.DCE. TCE.
l,l,t.TCA, vinyl
chlonde. and sylenes
Not specified
The remedial action for this site includes onsite pumping and
treatment of contaminated ground water from the bedrock and
overburden aquifers using air stnpping to remove VOCs,
followed by discharge of the treated water to the permitted
effluent discharge point or, depending on plant requirements,
use of the treated waler in the plant process, utilizing air
emission controls, if deternuned to be necessary during the RD
phase. onducung a semi.annuaj monitonng program for
10 wells and the effluent discharge to track the migration and
concentration of contaminants, invoking an ARAR waiver as
contingency measure, if the continued monitoring and
adjustments to the treatment system indicate that portions of the
aquifer cannot be restored to beneficial use; and imp menting
Institutional controls including onsiie and offsite deed
restnctions to restrict ground waler use
The selected remedy will achieve
chemical-specific ARARS based on
SDWA MCLs and state equivalents for
the site, including TCE 5 ugh; 1,1-
DCE 5 ugh; l.2.DCE 5 ugh; 1,1,1-
TCA 5 ugh; and vinyl chloride 2 ugh
Air emissions from the stripping
treatment operations will comply with
state requirements for air resources
$2,255,817
(present woiih)
$242,286
(annual O&M)
(years 15-30)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
SlatelTypei
Signature Daie/
Remedial Action
‘flireatfProhlem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
2 Rowe Industries
Groundwater
Contamination. NY
8 5-Acre Electronic
Devices Manutactunng
Facility
09/30/92
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs, including
henzene. PCE. TCE.
toluene, and xylcncs.
and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
365 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
365 cubic yards of contaminated soil, treating the soil offsite
using incineration or another equivalent technology to meet
LDR disposal standards, then disposing the soil at an ofisile
RCRA landfill, conducting soil sampling to confirm that all soil
contaminated above clean-up levels has been removed, pumping
and onsite pretreatment of contaminated ground water to
remove iron and manganese, followed by filtration to remove
metals and air stnpping to remove VOCs, with offsite discharge
to surface water, treating air emissions, If necessary, and
implementing a long-term ground water monitoring program
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals
are established to ensure that soil
contaminants do not contribute to
ground water contamination, and
include benzene 05 mg/kg; PCE
1 5 mg/kg: TCE I mg/kg; toluene
I 5 mg/kg. and xylenes 1.2 mg/kg
Additionally, excavated soil sent for
offsite disposal will be treated, if
necessary, according to RCRA LDR
standards Chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goals are based on
SDWA MCLs and MCLGs. including
arsenic 25 ugh; chloroform 7 ugh;
PCE 5 ug/l; TCE 5 ug/1; toluene
5 ugh; and xylenes 5 ugh. Treated
ground water discharged to Sag Harbor
Cove will meet state discharge
requirements
$6,187,000
(present worth)
$254,000
(annual O&M)
(15 years)
2 Witco Chemical
(Oakland Plant), NJ
9-Acre Former
Technical Research
Facility
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action.
with ground water monitoring Results of the RI indicated that
there are no significant concentrations of hazardous substances
remaining onsite
Not applicable
$8,660
(present worth)
$2,000
(annual O&M)
(5 years)
09 /28/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Siatell’ype/
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
3 Abex,VA
700-Square-Foot
Former Biass arid
Bronze Foundry
09/29/92
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Soil coniamjnated with
organics. including
PAHa and PCBs. and
nietals. Including
chromium and lead
Not specified
Components of
Selecied Remedy
The selected remedial action for this Site Includes demolishing
all foundry operations buildings. with removal and
decontamination of associated equipment and demolition debns
at an offsite landfill, temporarily relocating residents dunng soil
excavation, removing and disposing of offsite any asphalt arid
concrete from paved areas pnor to soil removal, excavating
surface soil with lead concentrations greater than 500 mg/kg
and subsurface soil with concentrations of lead exceeding 1,000
mg/kg from non-residential areas. from around foundations, and
under residences in affected residential areas: temporarily
storing these onsite pnor to treatment, testing, then treating any
soil that exhibits TCLP toxicity onsite using stabilization.
retesung the treated materials to ensdre they meet RCRA LDR
requirements, followed by iranspoiling and disposing of treated
arid untreated soil and waste materials offsiie at a RCRA
landfill, disposing or water genemted dunng the treatment
processes olisite at a POTW; backfilling all excavated areas
with clean fill: installing erosion and sediment control measures;
and morutonng air for dust and lead dunng remedial activities
Clean-up Goals
Chemical .speCific soil excavation goals
In residential areas down to the water
table, which are based on EPA’s
policies for soil clean-up levels per
OSWER Directive #9355 4.02. include
lead 500 mg/kg for surface soil to one
fool below surface and 1.000 mg/kg
for subsurface soil from one foot
below surface to the water table. All
excavated soil and waste material will
be tested using the TCLP method and.
if they exhibit toxicity, they will be
stabilized onsite to meet RCRA LDR
standards prior to offsite disposal.
Present Woiih!
Capital and
O&M Costs
$28,891,243
(present wotib)
so
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type!
Signature Dale!
Remedial Action
ThrratfProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
3 Brown’s Battery
Breaking. PA
14-Acre Inactive Lead
Acid Battery
Processing Facility
07/02192
Soil. dehns. and GW
contaminated with
metals, including lead
and nickel, and other
inorganics. including
su llaie
67.000 yd’ (soil and
battery ca.cings)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and treating 67.000 cubic yards of soil and battery casings
offsite using an innovative themial treatment technology.
followed by ofisite disposal, constructing two vertical limestone
hamers in the shallow aquifer to neutral l7e lead levels, pumping
and treatment of contaminated ground water in the bedrock
aquifer using p11 adjustment, precipitation, and ion exchange.
with onsite discharge, transporting sludge generated dunng the
treatment process offsite for disposal at a POTW, monitonng
ground water’, and Implementing institutional controls, including
deed restnctions to limit site use, providing for a contingent
remedy, which allows for stabtb7auon/solidjlicalion of the soil
and casings, followed by ofl’site disposal of the siabthzed mass.
it the selected innovative alternative cannot he implemented
Clean-up levels for lead-contaminated
soil are based on present EPA policy
An ARAR waiver has been issued on
the basis that EPA will achieve an
Equivalent Standard of Performance In
the protection of human health and the
environment. The recommended
action level for residential areas is
between 500 and 1.000 mg kg. but no
cnterion for Industrial areas has been
es ahlished EPA. therelore. has
determined 1.000 mg/kg as the clean-
up level for the lead-contaminated soil
Ground water clean-up goals for the
shallow bedrock aquifer are based on
CWA WQC and state standards.
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for
this site are background levels except
for manganese, which must be cleaned
to 50 mg /) (slate) Other ground water
goals Include beryllium 0.19 ugh
(WQC), cadmium OSE ugh (WQC);
lead <3 ugh (WQC); manganese
50 ug/l (state); nickel 2 9 ug/l (WQC),
and sulfate 27 ug/l (WQC
S 12.3l6.000
(present wonh)
O&M
(not specified)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Stat elType/
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
ThreatIProhlem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wo,Th/
Capital and
O&M Costs
3 Butz Landfill. PA
I 5-Square Mile
Inactive Landfill
06/30/92
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene. PCE. and
ICE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing
ground water extraction wells immediately downgradient From
the landfill in the area of suspected ground water and DNAPLs
contamination, extracting and transporling ground water to an
appropnate treatment facility and treating the extracted water
using either chemical precipitation. followed by air stnpping
with vapor phase carbon units to control emissions or granular
activated carbon, as determined dunng the RD phase, dis-
charging the treated ground water onsite to surface waler, and
disposing of residuals produced dunng the treatment process
oIfsi re
Clean-up goals for ground water are
based on SDWA MCLs and state
standards designed to achieve
background levels for all of the VOCs
in the ground water, thereby restoring
the ground water to its beneficial use
as a drinking water source.
Background concentrations will be
determined by EPA based on
contaminant concentrations in
upgradient monitoring wells.
$11,012,000-
$14,495,000
(present woiih)
$561,000-
$861,000
(annual O&M
costs)
(0-10 years)
3 C&D Recycling. PA
110-Acre Former
Metals Recycling
Facility
09/3 0(92
Soil, ccdirnent and
debns contaminated
with metals, including
arseruc. chromium, and
lead
20,565 yd’ (soil and
sediment)
The selected remedial action for this Site includes excavating
and stabilizing onsite 20.565 cubic yards of contaminated soil
and sediment with lead levels greater than 500 mg/kg. along
with the onsite ash, followed by disposal in an ofisite landfill:
decontaminating and/or demolishing contaminated buildings and
structures with offsite disposal or decontamination and recycling
of dismantled material and equipment. conducting post-
excavation/removal sampling to confirm that clean-up levels ate
met, removing any casings and wire for offsite disposal or
recycling, abandoning wells that serve no useful long-term
purpose, grading and revegetaung excavated areas; monitoring
air, ground water, and surface water, and implementing
institutional controls, including deed restnctions If. within
180 days of the issuance of this ROD. EPA receives
information that indicates an onsite containment cell may be
designed and constructed, then the stabilized and
decontaminated materials may be disposed or onsite
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals
and debris decontamination goals arc
based on health-risk levels and include
lead 500 mg/kg: copper 3,300 mg/kg;
antImony 35 mg/kg Excavation goals
for sediment Include lead 500 mg/kg;
copper 2,900 mg/kg; antimony
35 mg/kg All soil, sediment, and ash
will be stabilized to below RCRA
TCLP levels prior to disposal
Building surfaces will be
decontaminated to the following: lead
50 ug/m’; copper 1.000 ug/m’; and
antimony 500 ug/m ,
$11,985,717
(present woiih)
$25,390
(annual O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelTypel
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
3 Chem-Solv. DE
One-third of a I 5-
Acre Property
03/31/92
ThreatlProhlem
Waste Volume
OW contaminated with
VOCs. including
beniene and TCE. and
the meial manganese
Not specified
Components of
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for this site includes ground water
pumping and olTsite discharge to a POTW for treatment, or as a
contingency if an agreement with the POTW cannot be reached.
ensue treatnieni using filtration, and air stnpping with Onsite
discharge to surface water. conducting ground waler narnitonng
and providing an alternate water supply, including welihead
treatment to affected residences ii ground water momtonng
detects contamination in existing residential wells, removing
existing recovery wells, and implementing institutional conIro s.
including deed and ground water use restrictions
Clean’up Goats
Chemical-specific ground waler clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
or risk-based levels, including beozene
5 ugh (MCL): and TCE 5 ughl (MCI):
manganese 3,000 ugh (risk-based)
Present WortW
Capital and
O&M Costs
$660.(X)0
3686.000
(present worth)
$57,000 -
$148,000
(annual O&M)
(years 2-8)
3688.000
(present worth
for contingency
remedy with
$148,000-
$189,000
annual O&M)
3 Commodore
Semiconductor
Group, PA
14-Acre
Manulactunng
Facility
09/29/92
OW contaminated with
VOCs, including PCE
and TCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes extending the
public water supply lines and connecting affected residences
located in areas south of the CSG facility, abandoning
contaminated wells, continued maintenance of existing
residential carbon units, with disposal or recycling of the spent
carbon filters as determined dunng the remedial design phase.
installing additional ground water extraction wells, air strippers.
and vapor phase carbon units, to treat the contaminated ground
water onsite with discharge to a public water system or reuse by
the CSG facility, with overflow discharge offsite to a POTW.
sampling ground water and treated water, and implementing
institutional controls, including ground water well restrictions
Ground water clean-up goals arc based
on background levels as established by
SDWA MCL5 or health-based levels.
whichever are more stringent.
Chemical-specific ground water goals
include l,2-DCB 75 ug(l; l,2-DCA
810 ugh. PCE 5 ugh. TCA 200 ugh.
ICE 5 ug/’l; and vinyl chloride 2 ugh
$5,573,700
(present worth)
$446,500
(annual O&M)
(years 0-2)
$404,300
(annual O&M)
(years 3-30)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!rype/
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wotihl
Capital and
O&M Costs
3 Dixie Caverns County
Landfill, VA
39-Acre Former
Municipal Landlill
09 128/92
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
3 Dublin Water Supply.
PA
4 5-Acre Former
Manufactunng
Facility
I 2/3W9 I
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE
and TCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing and
operating a new water supply well, or operation of the eristing
well within the plume, construction and operation of an onsite
air stnpping and vapor phase carbon adsorption treatment
system. or other appropriate technology for the well.
discharging the treated water to the municipal water supply
system. expanding the Dublin Borough public distnbulion
system to supply well and treated water to affected residences;
and monitonng the residential and commercial wells not
serviced by the pubhc distribution system
Chemical-specific ground water
standards are based on SDWA MCLs
including ICE 5 ugfl, PCE 5 ug/l.
vinyl chlonde 2 ugh. cls-l.2-DCE 70
ugh; trans-l,2-DCE 100 ugfl; 1.l-DCE
7 ugh; and l.l.l-TCA 200 ug/1.
Performance standards for air
emissions from the ground water
stopping unit shall comply with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) under CAA. and disposal
standards ror spent carbon filters shall
meet RCRA requirements.
$5,000,000
(present worth)
$300,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
3 Eastern Diversified
Metals. PA
25-Acre Former
Metal Processing
Plant
Leachate contaminated
with orEarucs.
including dioxin and
PCBs. and metals.
Including lead
The selected remedial action for this site includes onsite
recycling of huff into one of two fomts—a Final Product that
requires no further offsite processing. or a Non-Final Product.
such as plastic pellets. which will undergo further offsite
prneessing. testing recycling residuals for RCRA hazardous
waste characlenstics. with oflsite disposal of non-RCRA wastes
and onsite treatment of RCRA wastes using a technology to be
determined based on a treatabitiry study, disposing of the
treated wastes olisite, testing soil underlying the fluff, and
implementing erosion and sedimentation controls
There are no specific performance
standards for any of the coniaminants.
The recycling products and the
residuals will be tested for RCRA
hazardous waste characteristics pool’ to
use of the product or disposal of mart-
recyclable residuals.
$13,100,000-
$21,900,000
(present worth)
$6,900,000
(total cost
O&M)
(10 years)
IY1/02J92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!rypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
3 FikeCheniical.WV
II 9-Acre Former
Chemical
Manulactunng Plant
and Associated
Wastewaler Tre iment
Facility
03/31/92
3 Lindane Dump. PA
61 8-Acre Dump
03/31/92
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Buned waste pits
contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE.
other organics.
including dioxins.
pesticides. and phenols.
n tals. acids, and other
inorganics
7.000 - 16,000 buried
drums and containers
Soil, sediment. debns.
and GW coniaminated
with VOCs. including
benzene. other
organics. including
pesticides such as
DDT, Lindane, and
phenols, and metals.
including arsenic and
lead
Not specifled
Components of
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
between 7,000 and 17.000 buned drums and containers, using a
self-supported portable structure to enclose active excavation
areas and to mirunuze organic vapor and dust emissions and
treating air emissions using an air lilier and vapor phase carbon
adsorption, with offsite disposal or incineration of the spent
carbon and filters, sampling, testing, repackaging. and shipping
of drummed waste offsite: using offsite incineration or other
equivalent treatment technologies to treat drums containing
solids and liquids, decontaminating empty drums onsite prior to
olIsite disposal of treatment liquids and metals, stabilizing!
neutral l7lng acidic wastes prior to olisite incineration, onsite
stora e of dioxin-contaminated drummed wastes and dioxin-
contaminated soil and sludge identified dunng excavation for
future treatment, treating cylinders onsite using a cylinder
recovery vessel, or repackaging for ofisite disposal: backfilling
excavated areas; employing storm water management or erosion
controls to divert surface water from the site: monitoring air:
and treating any ground water collected during the excavation at
the cooperative sewage treatment plant
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing a
mulu-layer cap where side slopes are stabilized, constructing a
combination clay and soil cap where site slopes are unstable.
and vegetating the capped areas, upgrading the existing
leachate/shallow ground water collection system, and treating
leachale and shallow ground water using air stnpping, with
onsite discharge to the Allegheny River. disposing of sludge
generated during the treatment process olTsite at an approved
facility, constructing and maintaining a penrneter fence.
morutonng ground water and surface water, restonng the Alsco
Community park. and implementing institutional controls.
including deed restrictions
Clean-up Goals
Although this Interim action does not
provide for chemical-specif’iC clean-up
standards, it does provide for the
removal of soumve contamination in
accordance with state and federal
requirements Performance standards
will be established in future Otis
addressing site media contamination
Chemical-specilic goals for leachate
and shallow ground water clean-up
goals am based on the more stringent
Pennsylvania slate water quality cri-
teria standards or SDWA MCI_s. and
include gamma BHC (Lindane) 2.0
ugfl arid benzene 5 ugh An ARAR
waiver Is being Issued for ground
water based on technical imprac-
ticability of capturing all ground water
due to the compl?x hydrogeologic
conditions at the site, the possibility of
subsidence and site damage due to
extensive pumping. and the potential
for migration during the pumping
Present Woiib/
Capital and
O&M Costs
$16,059,000
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
$ 14. 122.500
(pmsent worth)
5634.000-
5634.700
(annual O&M)
(30 Years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Stale/Type!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
3 MW Manufactunng.
PA
15-Acre Fomier
Copper Recovery
Facility
O6f3 W92
ThreatfProblem
Waste Volume
GW contaminated with
VOCs. Including PCE
and ICE, other
organics. including
PAl-Is, pesticides, and
phenols, and metals
Not specified
Components of
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for this site includes conslnlcting a
public water supply system to supply dnnking water to present
and future affected residences; extracting contaminated ground
water and treating the water onsile using chemical precipitation
to remove inorganics. and air stnpping to remove VOCs,
treating emuent from the air stnpping process using cai-bon
adsorption to remove organics. followed by onsite discharge to
surface water, treating air emissions from the air stnpping
process using thermal destructio!1. and recycling the residual
carbon waste ofisite: disposing of any collected free product
olisite. dewatenng and disposing of sludge generated during the
treatment process offsite at a RCRA landfill, and Implementing
a ground water monitonng program If It is determined by EPA
and the state that certain portions of the aquifer cannot be
restored to background levels, the ROD specifies modification
of the selected remedy, which include engineering controls;
physical bamers. or long-term pumping to contain
conlamlnatlon. institutional controls to limit access: and waiver
of chemical-specific ARARS for portions of the aquifer where
further contaminant reduction Is impracticable
Clean-up Goals
Ground waler clean-up goals are based
on stale standards. SDWA MCLs and
MCLGS under SDWA, CWA.
Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, and
background levels The clean-up goals
will attain background concentrations
that will be determined during the
remedial design. In the event that the
background concentration of the
contaminant is not detected, the most
stringent chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goal will be met.
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
$37,402,000
(present worth)
Sl.568.000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$20,000
(additional
O&M every S
years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statcrrypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
3 Paoli Rail Yard. PA
428-Acre
Maintenance. Storage,
and Repair Facility
07/21/92
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Soil, sediment, debris.
and GW contaminated
with VOCs. including
beniene. toluene, and
xylenes. and other
organics. including
PCBs
28.000 y& (soil).
3,000 yd’ (previously
excavated coniarrunated
residential soil)
Components of
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and onsite treatment of approximately 28.000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil with PCS concentrations oF 25 mg/kg or
greater. 3.000 cubic yards of previously excavated contaminated
residential soil currently stored in an onsite containment cell
with PCBs greater than 2 mg/kg. and stream sediment with
PCB concentrations exceeding I mg/kg using
solrdiflcauo,ilstabtluzation processes. followed by disposal oF the
solidified mass in an onsite containment cell, with an
impenneable cap. Onsite decontamination of 35.000 square feet
of high contact surfaces in the rail yard buildings and structures
with PCB concentrations in excess of 10 ug/lOO cm ’; mitigating
impacts to wetland areas From the sediment excavation.
pumping and onsite treatment of fuel-oil contaminated ground
water, recovenng the oil using a fuel oil recovery system and
disposing of the recovered oil olisile at a RCRA facility.
treating the ground water using filtration and activated carbon
with onsite discharge through a subsurface infiltration gallery,
with otTsite disposal of the spent carbon, implementing erosion
controls to manage sediment and stonn water wn-off,
backfilling and regrading, and tevegetating excavaied areas;
morutonng soil, sediment, ground water and air; and
implementing institutional controls including deed, land, and
ground water use restrictions
Clean-up Goals
Soil clean-up standards at the rail yard
are based on health-based levels,
including PCB 25 mg/kg for soil onsite
and 2 mg/kg for residential ‘areas
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on the more
stringent of state standards or SDWA
MCLs. and include benzene 5 ugh
An ARAR waiver will also be issued
for certain management controls at the
TSCA waste landfill under CERCLA
121 (dX4)
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
$28,268,000
(present worth)
$494,000
(0-2 years)
$258,250
(O&M)
(3-7.5 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefTypef
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woflh/
Capital and
O&M Costs
3 Raymark. PA Sort/source
contaminated with
VOCs. including 1,2-
DCE. PCE. and TCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes constructing.
operating, and maintaining a soil vapor extraction system to
remove VOCs from soil and unsaturated bedrock, treating air
emissions from the extraction process using vapor phase carbon
adsorption: constructing and maintaining a low permeability cap
over the treated soil to minimize Infiltration, conducting
additional sampling of surface soil: and implementing
institutional controls including deed restrictions, and site access
testnctions
Chemical and location-specific
performance goals are based on federal
and state standards VOCs will be
removed from the soil/source such that
TCE in subsurface soil does not exceed
50 ugh VOCs will be removed From
subsurface soil so that leaching of TCE
from subsurface soil will not exceed
SDWA ground water MCLs Organic
emissions will be minimized from the
vapor extraction system such that the
maximum rate of organic emission
does not exceed 3 pounds per hour or
15 pounds per day Infiltration of
contaminants through the low
permeability cap shall not exceed 9
cubic feet per day. Water potentially
generated during the SVE process will
be treated to meet CtVA levels, as
stated in the ROD for OW 2 and 3.
The excess cancer risk resulting From
site-related conlaminatlon will be
reduced to a 106 level and the HI will
7-Acre Active Metal
ManuFactunng and
Electroplating Plant
l2/3cW9l
33.654.400
(present worth)
$1,222,600
(O&M)
(2-20 years)
equal I
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
U’
Region.
Site Name.
Staie!Fypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
3 Rhinehart Tire Fire
Dump. VA
22-Acre Drainage
Area
09129/92
3 Route 940 Drum
Dump, PA
2 5-Acre Grass.
Covered Cleanng
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Soil, sediment. debns.
and SW contaminated
with metals. including
arsenic, lead, and zinc
1.125 yd’
200.000 gals (SW)
Not applicable
Not applicable
Components of
Selected Remedy
‘The selected remedial action for this Site includes excavating
approximately 1.125 cubic yards of contaminated soil with zinc
concentrations greater than 50 mgflg from the pond area,
sampling. excavating, and dewntenng pond sediment using
solidification with a solid reagent, testing the soil and sediment
for ha7ardous charactensucs and transporting these offsite for
appropnate disposal, removing the synthetic liner within the
pond. with olisite disposal, treating approximately
200,000 gallons of contaminated surface water from the pond
using the existing oil/water separator. directing the water to
Rhinehart’s Pond for treatment in the existing wastewater
treatment plant using chemical precipitation and filtration to
remove solids, with discharge of the treated water onsite to
Massey Run. backfulling Dutchman’s Pond. and any
surrounding soil that may be excavated with clean soil, and
implementing soil erosion controls
The selected remedial action for this site is no action with
future ground water monitoring
Clean-up Goals
Chemical-Specific soil excavation goals
are based on background and aquatic
toxicity levels and include zInc 50
mg/kg. Chemical-specific surface
water discharge limits are based on
state standards and include aluminum
8? ug/l, arsenic 360 ugh; copper
92 ugh, iron 1,000 ugh. lead 34 ugh,
nickel 1,100 ugh; silver 0 12 ugh; and
zinc 180 ugh
Not applicable
Present Worth)
Capital and
O&M Costs
$1,300,000
(present worth)
$12,000
(annual O&M)
(2 years)
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
09/28192
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Typel Present WosiW
Signature Date.! Threat/Pmt ilem Components of Capital and
Remedial Action Waste Volume Selected Remedy Clean-up Goals O&M Costs
3 Sirasburg Landfill. Soil. dcbns. and air The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating Site-specific clean-up goals will meet S 10.397.070-
PA contaminated with and removing the existing landfill cover. regrading the slopes of slate and closure ARARs. 511.306.460
VOCs. including the landfill to conform with the PA and RCRA performance (present worth)
22-Acre Inactive ben.tene. ICE. loluene. requirements, and replacing the existing landfill cap with a
Landfill and sylenes multi-layer cap, installing a gas venting system to operate as $312,471
euthe an active or passive system, depending upon the (annual O&M)
03/31/92 Not specified measured gas emissions. Installing a leachate collection trench (30 Years)
around the eastern, southern, and western penmeters of the
landfill to collect leachate migrating into the surfical aquifer.
treating the leachate using a UVlezone treatment system, based
on the results of a pilot test, followed by onsite discharge to an
Onsite surface stream, monitoring ground water and air; and
iniple nenung site access restrictions
3 Suffolk City Landfill. Not applicable The selected remedial action for this Site Is no funhtr action Not applicable SO
VA with ground water moniconng. since sampling results indicate (present worth)
that the Site poses no nsk to human health or the environment
67-Acre Inactive Not applicable so
Sanitary Landfill (O&M coat)
09!3W92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
LA
Region.
Site Name.
SuatelType/
Signature Date/
Remedial Action
3 Tonolli, PA
30-Acre Former
Battery Recycling and
Secondary Lead
Smelting Plant
09/30192
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Soil. sediment. dcbns,
OW. and SW
contaminated with
metals, Including
arsenic. cadmium, and
lead
39.000 y& (soil)
Components of
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for Itus site includes transporting
and treating ofisite approximately 13.000 cubic yards of battery
wastes, including battery casings, iron oxide, sump sediment.
and dust by resource recovery at a secondary lead smeller.
conducting additional sampling and characterization of other
waste pile matenals effectively via excavating and
chatactenzation of all sediment and battery fragments in
stormwater collection piping and onsite dumps, or consolidation
within the onsite landfill, excavating and consolidating
approximately 39,000 cubic yards of soil with lead levels above
1,000 mg kg within the Onsite landfill, stabilizing onsite
approximately 7.300 cubic yards of soil with lead levels over
10.000 mg/kg, with consolidation of the treated soil into the
onsite landfill, excavating soil situated in the residential area to
the immediate west of the ptopetly boundary containing greater
than lead 500 mg/kg: collecting confirmatory samples.
consolidating soil Into the onsite landfill, and backlilling both
onsite and offsite excavated areas with clean soil, sampling to
define the area and volume of soil potentially impacted by the
site activities and requiring remedjation; consolidating and, if
necessary, treating approximately 2.020 cubic yards of treated
sludge. 250 dnints of melted plastic, and 210 cubic yards of
excavated lagoon soil in the onsite landfill prior to closure,
conducting additional sampling and completion of bioassays for
contaminated sediment in Bear and Nesquehoning Creeks
during the RD to develop appropriate clean-up levels, and
excavating all sediment above the set levels from the creek(s)
with consolidation within the onsite landfill, closing the onsite
landfill in accordance with the federally authonzed slate
requirements for hazardous waste, including removal of
standing water from the landfill, upgrading the Icachate
collection system, consolidating materials generated during the
remedial action within the landfill to meet the minimum grading
requirements; application of the properly designed layer of
agricultural limestone, and covenng over the landfill with a low
permeability cap, conducting a treatability study to evaluate the
optimal application rate of agncultural limestone to provide
Clean-up Goals
Chemical-specific soil excavation
lcvels are based on health-risk
calculations and include onsite lead
1.000 mg/kg and ofIsite lead
500 mg/kg. Soil will be stabilized
onsile to meet RCRA TCLP levels,
such as lead 5 mg/I, prior to disposal.
Chemical-specific sediment clean-up
levels will be determined during the
remedial design stage Chemical-
specific surface water and ground
water clean-up levels will also be
determined during the remedial design
stage and will be based on allowable
NPDES discharge parameters and
state-speci fled background levels,
respectively.
Present Worth)
Capital and
O&M Costs
$16,616,000
(present worth)
$35,300-
$35,600
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Typei Present Worth/
Signature Date! Threat/Problem Components of Capital and
Remedial Action Waste Volume Selected Remedy Clean-up Goals O&M Costs
3 Tonolli, PA maximum pH buffering capacity to the consolidated soil for this
(Continued) in-situ passive treatment method, maintaining the cap and
dewatenng system, and monitoring ground water; collecting and
treating approximately 2 million gallons of landfill leachate
decontamination fluids generated during remediation. and
approximately 16 gallons per year of contaminated stomiwater
using the existing onsite treatment system, prior to onsite
discharge to Nesquehoning Creek, using monltonng data
collected from the treatment system to aetermine appropriate
discharge levels; decontaminating onsite buildings, dismantbng
of nonstructural components, with removal of equipment and
debris olTsite; disposing of drained nickeWiron batteries offsite.
monitoring air, implementing measures to prevent runoff of
surface waters, sediment, and/or contaminated soil or battery
wastes into Nesquehoning or Bear Creeks; evaluating
underground storage tanks during remedial design, any tanks
that will impede the completion of the selected remedy
(especially contaminated soil) will be addressed during
remediation. treating the contaminated overbuniened ground
water by constructing a vertical chemical barrier, with possible
injection of pH-adjusted water to enhance ground water flow
rates, using gradient controls to prevent infiltration of
contaminants Into the bedrock aquifer, monitoring the
effectiveness of the vertical chemical barrier and/or injection of
the pH adjusted fluids, and implementing institutional controls,
including deed restrictions to prevent excavation of the landfill
and limit Site use, and site access restrictions
-------
FY92 Record of DecIsion Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statefrype/
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
3 U S Defense General
Supply Center
(Operable Unit I),
VA
640-Acre Military
Support. Service, and
Storage Facility
05/15/92
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Soil contaminated with
VOCs. including
heru’ene. PCE. TCE.
toluene, and sylenes.
other organics,
including PAils,
pesticides, and phenols,
metals. tncluding
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, acids and oils
Noi specified
Components or
Selected Remedy
The selected remedial action for this Site includes implementing
institutional controls and site access resinctions, including
fencing of the storage area
Clean-up Goals
Not applicable
Present Wotih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
$15,000
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
3 U S Defense General
Supply Center
(Operable Unit 5).
VA
640-Acre Military
Suppoil. Service, and
Storage Facility
03/25/92
Soil contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben7ene and PCE. and
arsenic, a metal
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes treating
contaminated soil onsite using a vacuum extraction system, and
controlling air emissions using carbon adsorption. cOnStnicting
concrete covers over the pits to prevent their further use and
infiltration of rainwater; disposing of or recycling the spent
carbon offsite at a RCRA facility; and sampling soil at the end
of the clean-up penod to evaluate the effectiveness of the
remedy
ChemIcaI speci1tc soil action levels are
based on health-based criteria and
include MCLs established for arsenic
57 mg/kg; benzene 0.001 mg/kg; PCE
1 5 mg/kg; DCE 0015 mg/kg; TCE
0036 mg/kg; toluene 2.400 mg/kg. and
zylenes 24,000 mg/kg Soil action
levels will protect ground water at the
site from further contaimnation.
$115,607
(present worth)
$16,000
(annual O&M)
(4 years)
3 USA Aberdeen.
Michaelsville, MD
20-Acre Former
Municipal Landfill
06/3Q 192
Soil contaminated with
VOCs, other oTgamcs.
including pesticides.
and metals, including
chromium and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes replacing the
existing cover with a multi-layer cap in accordance with state
requirements for sanitary landfills, covering the cap with an
earthen cover and revegetating the area, installing a methane
gas venting system within the cap system to minimize the
migration or accumulation of gases generated by the landfill
wastes, and instalbng surface water controls to accommodate
seasonal precipitation
The soil clean-up goals for capping the
site are established in accordance with
state requirements for sanitary landfill
and RCRA subtitle C requirements
$9,207,200
(present worth)
$27 .000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelType!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
ThreatlProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goats
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
t.)
LA
LA
3 Westinghouse
Elevator Plant. PA
90-Acre
Manufacrunng Plant
for Elevator and
Escalator Components
06f30/92
GW contaminated with
VOC5. including TCA.
TCE. and l.l.DCE
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this Site includes pumping and
treatment of ground water using air sinpplng from both the
onsite area, in the center of the contamination plume in contact
with the DNAPLs, and the ofisite area, downgradient from the
center of the plume. to control migration oF dissolved
contaminants, discharging the treated water offsile to surface
surface water, treating air emissions using carbon adsorption.
and recycling and/or disposal of the spent carbon offsite at a
RCRA Facility. monitonng ground water and residential wells:
and implementing institutional controls including deed
restnclions to restnct the use of oncute giouid water
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for
ground water are based on SDWA
MCLs and non-zero MCLGs for
VOCs, Including TCE 5 ug!l; TCA 200
mgll. and l,l-DCE 7 ugh; and State
Water Quality Cnterla for discharge to
surface water The state standard for
ground water cleanup to background
levels is waived due to technical
impracticability Emission reduction
from the air stnpper!adsorber will be
reduced to the minimum obtainable
levels through the use of best available
technologies
$4,400 000
(present worth)
$142,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Silt Name.
State/Type!
Worth!
Signature Date.!
Remedial Action
ThreatlPruhlem
Waste Volume
Componenis of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Agnco Chemical, FL
35-Acre Inactive
Fertilizer Manufactunng
Plant
09/29(92
4 Alabama Anny
Ammunition Plant, AL
2.200-Acre Army
Ammunition Plant
12/3 1/91
Soil and sludgc
contaminated with
VOCc. other organics.
including PAils and
pesticide residues,
meialc including
arsenic and lead and
radioacii’.e matenals
453 0(X) d 1 (soil and
sludge)
Soil and dehns
contaminated with
explosives, including
2.4.6-TNT. 2,4-DNT.
2 6-DNT and tetryl
ineials. including lead,
and asbestos, an
inorganic
24.300 to 25.650 yd’
(soil)
1.350 to 2.700 yd’
(asbestos containing
matenal
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating an
estimated 32.500 cubic yards of contaminated soil with
concentrations above I 463 mgjkg fluoride from PFP I. Ill, and
IV, and dewatenng the excavated areas, excavating. solidilying.
and stabilizing all soil with lead concentrations above
500 mg/kg and arsenic levels above 16 mg/kg from PFP IV,
excavating and stabilizing contaminated sludge from all ponds.
consolidating the excavated soil and sludge from all areas into
PFP II constructir.g a s!uny wall around PFP II. and covenng
the area with a RCRA cap. mon.ionng ground water, and
implementing institutional controls including deed resinctions.
and Site access restnctions such as security Fencing
The selected remedial action for the stockpiled soil in Area B
includes separating between 24.300 and 25.650 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and between 1.350 and 2,700 cubic yards of
asbestos-containing material, incinerating onsite contaminated
soil, testing the treated soil for explosives and lead to venly
compliance with the treatment cntena and stabilizing the soil or
ash. if necessary, to meet LDR s. rollowed by disposing of the
treated soil and stabilired inatenal onsite at designated backfill
area, and containcnzing asbestos-containing matenal. followed
by either onsite or ouisite disposal at a regulated facility
depending on the quantity of matenal to be disposed ci and the
availability of disposal iacmliiies
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals
are based on protection of ground
water and include fluoride
1.463 mg/kg The excavation goals
established for lead and arsenic are
based on health-based soil exposure
scenanos. including lead 500 mg/kg
and atsenic 16 mg/kg
Chemical-specific soil and dehns
clean-up goals are based on Federal
standards, including explosives I ug!g
oi 2,4.6-TNT (RCRA) and lead 5 mg/I
in the TCLP extract (RCRA)
$10,731,013
(present wotih)
$384,313
(O&M)
(present worth)
$10,991,900 -
$17,055,600
(present worth)
38.782.8(X) -
$14,846,500
(total cost
O&M
6-9 months)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type!
Worth!
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
U i
-J
4 BenJield lndustnes. NC
35-Acre Former Bulk
Chemical Mixing and
Repackaging Plant
07/31/92
4 Camer Air
Conditioning. TN
135-Acre Active
Manufacturing Facility
09/03/92
Soil and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene, other
organict. including
PAHs. and metals.
Including arsenic and
lead
4.600 yd’ (soil)
Soil, sludge, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs. Including TCE
and PCE. and metals.
including lead and zinc
76.500 yd’ (soil and
sludge)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating.
separating, sizing, and treating the contaminated soil using
onsite soil washing. transfernng the smaller soil particles to an
es-situ slurry biological treatment system: replacing coarse soil
fraction and the treated soil fines in the onsite excavations, and
grading and revegetating the area, treating and/or disposing of
any remaining hazardous waste residual ofisite. exincting and
pretrealing ground water onsite using aeration to remove iron
arid manganese. followed by treatment using Ion exchange to
remove heavy metals: es-situ biotreatment using a submerged
fixed-film bioreactor: and a polishing step using granular
activated carbon; reintroducing the nutncni-cnriched water Into
the onsite aquifer to facilitate in-Situ biodegradation. or if
necessary ofisite discharge to a POTW.
The selected remedial action for this site Includes treating an
estimated 76.500 cubIc yards of contaminated soil/sludge and
shallow ground water In the old lagoon and main plant source
areas using soil vapor extraction (SVE). extracting and
containing ground water from the Memphis Sand aquifer using
the existing and supplemental extraction wells with treatment
using the air stnppers at Water Plant 2. followed by discharge
of the treated ground water to the municipal water supply, a
local POTW, surface water, or reinjecting it to the Memphis
Sand aquifer. treating any air emissions from the SVE or the air
stnpping processes using granular activated carbon, thermal
treatment. or photolytic oxidation, if necessary, implementing
institutional controls deed restnctions to limit well construction
and water use near the site, and conducting penodic monitoring
chemical-specific ground waler clean-
up goals arc based on SDWA MCLs
and state standards, including bcnzene
5 ug/l; antimony 6 ugll; barium
1.000 ugh: beiyllium 4 ugfi; and
lead 15 ughl Chemical-specific soil
clean-up goals are based on SDWA
MCLs and State standards, Including
benzo(a)anthracene 0 8 mg/kg;
chrysene I 6 mg/kg; naphthalene
10 mg/kg; and benzo(a)pyrene
0.3 mg/kg (health-based).
The chemical-specific soil goal is
533 ug/kg for TCE. based on fate and
transport modeling for TCE leachate,
which would not contaminate the 6W
above the SDWA MCLs, and will be
set until once the extraction system has
been Implemented EPA may set an
alternate clean-Up level If contaminant
levels remain constant at a level above
the goals based on sampling results.
6W clean-up levels are based on
SDWA MCLs. MCLGs, and UIC
regulations, CWA Discharge
Limitations and Pretreatment standards;
and/or the State Water Quality Act
including TCE 5 ugh. cls-DCE
70 ugh; trans-DCE 100 ugh: PCE
5 ugIl; vinyl chloride 2 ug/l; zinc
5,000 ugh: and lead IS ugh or
background levels
$3,079,900
(present worth)
$424,360
(present worth
O&M)
$5,700,000 -
$7,900,000
(present worth)
$5,489,334
(O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of DecIsion Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Typel
Worthl
Signature Dale)
Remedial Action
ThreatJProb)em
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Chem-Form. FL
Machine Tool
Manufactunng Facility
09/22192
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action br this site is no action, with
quarierly ground water monitoring for no less than I year
Not applicable
S 104.000
(present worth)
$80,000
(annual O&M)
(I year)
Soil, sludge, and debns
contaminated with
VOCs, including
ben,ene. toluene, arid
sylenes. other organics.
including pesticides.
metals, including
arsenic. chromium, and
lead, and inorganics
63.000 yd’ (soil and
sludge)
46.000 yd’ (soil
containing less than
2.500 mg/kg total
organics and no
gamma BHC)
17.000 y& (soil.
sludge, and other
waste)
The selected remedial action for this site includes removing and
decontaminating nonchemical con5tructlonfdemolition debris
from the surface of Area 8, excavation and ofisite disposal of
approximately 63,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and
sludge from the area as possible, to a depth of 20 feet, or until
concrete structures, the water table, or the iron slurry waste are
encountered, solidifying and stabilizing onsite approximately
46,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil that contain less than
2,500 mg/kg total organics and no gamma .BHC. treating
approximately 17,000 cubic yards of soil, sludge, and other
waste, which is not amenable to other treatment using an
Innovative thermal technology to he decided during the RD
phase. treating 46.000 cubic yards of iron slurry waste in-situ
using fixatio&stabiliration. backfilling and establishing a
vegetative cover over excavated areas: disposing all treated soil,
sludge, slurry waste, and debris residuals onsite in a RCRA
laridvault, monitonng air emissions and ground waler, and
institutional controls, including land and ground water use
restncilons In areas where clean.up levels are not attained, but
no further excavation can occur. the technology(s) to be used
will hc based on treatahility and leachability studies to be
conducted dunng the RD stage, but may include using in-situ
soil flushing alone or in combination with vacuum extraction or
bioremediation to remediate areas where nsk-based levels are
not reached before excavation is terminated
Chemical-specific soil and sludge
clean-up goals are based on health-risk
levels to assure that drinking water
MCLs would not be exceeded in the
ground water as a result of
contaminants leaching through soil or
sludge. Actual clean-up levels to be
used will be determined for atrazine,
diazinon. prometon. simazine. 4,4-
DDD. 4,4-DDT, 4,4-DDE, and bladex
using the sumn rs and pestan models.
and based on the proximity of the
waste to the ground water table. It is
anticipated that site contaminants that
do not have specified clean-up levels
in this ROD will be reduced to
acceptable levels when established
clean-up levels are met for the most
toxic and mobile contaminants
U,)
“I
00
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mclniosh
Plant), AL
1,500-Acre Active
Chemical Manufacturer
07/14/92
$49,723,000
(present worth)
Not specified
(O&M)
(30 years)
46,000 yd’ (iron slurry
waste)
-------
FY92 Record of DecIsion Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateIrype/
Worthj
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
li i Feat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
V i
‘ . O
4 Florida Steel, FL
ISO-Acre Steel Mill
0&31W92
Soil sediment, and
dehns contaminated
with organics including
PCBs, and metals.
Including lead
600 y& soil and
sediment
3.700 y& (soil,
sediment, and debns)
The selected remedial action for this site Includes excavating
and disposing olTsite 600 cubic yards of soil and sediment
contaminated with PCB levels equal to or greater than
50 mg/kg, excavating and onsite solidification of 37,000 cubic
yards of EC dust and metals-contaminated ash and soil.
including soil with lead concentrations above 600 mg/kg and/or
PCB concentrations between 25 and 50 mg/kg. temporanly
slonng the excavated matenals onsite pending final treatment in
a manner that will prevent PCB contamination through surface
water run-off, and disposing of the solidified matenals In an
onsite double-lined landfill with a RCRA cap, controlling
surface water run-off From the site by routing it to the onsite
surface water retention pond, periodic monitoring of surface
water lot at least 2 years afler construct ion is completed.
continuing ground water quality monitoring, and Implementing
Institutional controls, Including deed restnctions
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals
are based on health risk levels and the
leachability of lead from soil into the
underlying ground water, Including
lead in soil 600 mg/kg. PCBs
25 mg/kg; and slag, which contains
lead 1360 mg/kg The slag level was
developed to be protective of human
health in an Industrial setting, and
additional TCLP testing will be
conducted during the RD stage to
confirm its protectiveness. Compliance
with the RCRA land disposal
treatment standards for EC dust will be
attained by meeting levels specified In
the treatability variance for
contaminated soil and debris.
$7,004.750
(present wonh)
$18,200
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
4 Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant). NC
I-Acre Former
Agricultural Chemical
Distribution Center
08127192
Soil and GW
contaminated with
pesticides, including
aldnn. dieldrin,
toxaphene. DDD. DDE.
and DDT
1.000 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and disposing of an estimated 1000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil offsite at a RCRA-appiuved landfill, or an
incinerator, backfilling the excavated areas with clean soil and
revegelating the area. onsite pumping and treatment of
contaminated ground water using a system to be developed
during the RD phase, but will include a senes of carbon filters:
discharging the treated water to an infiltration gallery or offsite
to a POTW: transporting the spent carbon offsite for disposal.
destruction, or reactivation. Implementing any of the following
contingency remedies, if it is determined thai certain portions of
the aquiFer cannot be restored to their beneficial use installing
physical barriers or long-term gradient controls: waiving
chemical-specific ARARs, monitoring specific wells: re-
evaluating remediauon technologies for ground water
restoration, and implementing institutional controls and site
access restnctions including fencing
Soil and ground water clean-up
standards are based on the more
stringent of state or federal MCLs. and
will attain a 10 ’ risk level. Chemical-
specific goals for soil include atririn
0113 mg/kg; dieldrin 0 13 mg/kg;
toxaphene 2 mg/kg, DDD 7.6 mg/kg:
DDE 5.5 mg/kg; and DDT 475 mg/kg;
aldrin 005 ugh. dieldrin 001 ughI; and
toxaphene I ugh
$2,810,000-
$4,650,000
(present worth)
$1,680,000
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of DecisIon Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type!
Worth!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 JFD Electronics/Channel
Master. NC
l3 09-Acre Former
Television Antenna
Production and Saicllite
Assembly System
Facility
09 1 10 /92
4 Madison County
Sanitary Landfill. FL
90-Acre Active Sanitary
Landfill
0W28/92
Soil, sludge. and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene and TCE.
other organics. metals.
including chromium.
nickel, and antimony.
and inorgamcs.
including cyanide
3.000 yd’ (soil and
sludge)
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOC5, other organics.
and metals
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this Site Includes excavating.
consolidating, and treating onsite an estimated 3,000 cubic
yards of contaminated soil arid sludge using oxidation-reduction
to destroy inorganics. followed by onsite stabilization of the
treated soil and sludge. backfilling the stabilized material onsite
and capping the area with either a RCRA-approved or non-
RCRA cap, based on the irsulis of a treatabibty study;
extracting and treating contaminated ground water onsite using
alkaline chlonnauon to remove cyanide and VOCs;
precipitation/filtration to remove metals, and air stnpping and
carbon adsorption to remove VOCs. followed by either onsite
discharge to surface water or offsite discharge to a P01W.
disposing of the spent carbon from the treatment processes in
accordance with ARARs, and conducting ground water
monitoring
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing a
multi-layer clay cap over the landfill, installing a stormwater
runoff system Including dikes. impoundments, and drainage
ditches to control cap runoff, pumping and treatment of
contaminated ground water onsite using air stnpping and carbon
adsorption, reinjection of the treated ground water ouisite, or if
infeasible, evaluating other disposal options including
infiltration, irrigation, or direct discharge, monitoring ground
water, implementing Institutional controls including deed, land.
and ground water use restrictions, and site access restnctions
including fencing. and providing a contingency for installation
of a passive gas and collection and control system. if methane
is detected
Chemical-specific soil/sludge clean-up
goals ate based on health-bnsed levels
and Include chromium 310 mg/kg;
nickel 1,1 10 mg/kg; and antimony
25 mg/kg Chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goals are based upon
health-based levels, and include
ben7ene 5 ugh; 1,2-dichloroethane
038 ugh, 1,1-dichloroethene lug/I;
1,2-dichloroethene 70 ug/1; l.l,l-TCA
200 ugh, TCE 2 8 ug/l; vinyl chloride
0015 ugh; barium 1.000 ugh;
chromium 50 ugh; copper 1,000 ugh;
lead 20 ugul; nickel 100 ugh; zinc
500 ugh; and cyanIde 154 ugh
Chemical specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on the federal and
slate MCLs
$6,392,000
(present woiih)
$2,804,000
(O&M)
(5 or more
years)
$5,191,000
(present worth)
$109,000-
5409,000
(annual 0&M)
(25 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefType/
Wonh l
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
0&M Costs
4 Marine Corps Logictics
Base. GA
3.200-Acre Active
Military Facility
08/14192
Surface and subsurface
soil and sediment of
PSC 16 and 17
contaminated with
organics. including
PCBs and PAl-Is, and
metals, including
chromium and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes covenng
PSC 16 with a multi-layer cap; excavating and disposing of
sediment from within the catch basin adjacent to PSC 16
ofTsiie. excavating and transpolling hazardous soil from PSC Ii
olfsite for stabilization and disposal; backfilling excavated areas
with clean soil and tevegetating the area, installing ground
water monitonng wells; and implementing institutional controls
including land use restnctions on future activities within the
souite areas, as well as site access restrictions such as fencing
The proposed remedy for PSC 16 will
meet ARARs, however, because
capping is not a treatment technology.
no health-risk based clean-up goals
will be achieved Contaminated soil
from PSC Il will be stabiliied ofisite
In accordance with RCRA land
disposal standards Although these
actions are intended to be final for soil,
ground water contamination at 01.13
will be Investigated under a separate
ROD, and final goals will be set.
$717,200
(present woiih)
$41,500
(annual O&M)
(I year)
4 Milan Army
Ammunition Plant. TN
22,436-Acre Army
Ammunition
Manulactunng Plant
09130192
GW contaminated wiih
VOCs. Including
carbon disulfide; other
organics. including
HMX, RDX, 2,4.6-
TNT. 2.4-DNT. 2.6-
DNT. l.3-DNB. L3i-
tnnitrobenrene, and
njtroben.zene. and
unorganics. including
nitrate
Not specified
The selected interim remedial action for this Site includes
pumping and pretreatment of contaminated ground water
immediately downgradient of the former 0-line ponds using
electrochemical precipitation to remove inorganics, followed by
onsite filtration to remove suspended solids, and UV oxidation
to destroy the majonly of the organic contaminants, and
granular activated carbon (GAC) to remove the remaining
organic compounds; re-injecting the treated water onsite
upgradient of the former ponds; analyzing the precipitated filter
cake and the carbon filters for hazardous waste characteristics
and disposing of them offsite accordingly, monitoring ground
water, and implementing institutional controls, Including ground
water use resinctiOns
Chemical-specific ground water
discharge levels are based on best
practicable treatment. are slightly
higher than human health-rick
standards (HBN) and SDWA MCLs,
and include nitrate 10,000 ugh (MCL);
carbon disulfide 3,500 ug/l (HBN):
l,3-djnitrobenzene 5 ugh (HUN); 2,4-
dinitrotoluene OS ugh (HUN); 2.6-
dinitroioluene 05 mg/I (HUN). HMX
2,000 ugh (HUN), nitrobenzene
17.5 ug/l (HUN); RDX 10 ugh (HBN);
1,3, 5-trinitrobenzenc 20 ug/l (hUN):
and 2,4,6-TNT 10 ug/l (HBN)
Health-based standards will be fully
met in the final remedial action under
one final ROD addressing ground
water immediately downgradient of the
former ponds (OUI), soil in and
around the former pond (0U2). and the
ground water plume (OUl4)
326.980,000
(present woilh)
31.413.000
(annual 0&M)
(30 yeais)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type!
Worth/
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
OW and air
contaminated by VOCs.
Including TCE, tohiene.
and xylenes. and
metals. Including lead
OW contaminated with
VOCs, including
benzene. and metals.
including chromium
and lead
09/29/92 9.700.000 gals (OW)
The selected remedial action for this site includes onsite
pumping and treatment of contaminated ground water using air
stripping to remove VOCs. with onsite discharge of the treated
water to the Cumberland River, capuring and treating resulting
vapors using activated carbon, and disposing of the spent
cartxrn ofisite as RCRA FOOl waste: and monitonng ambient
air and ground water
The selected remedial action for this site Includes collecting
additional ground water quality data for a 1-year period.
conducting a treatability study to size the ground water
treatment equipment and to determine if a technology for
pretreatment is necessaiy, extracting and onsite pretreatment of
an estimated 9 7 million gallons of contaminated OW using
either clanfication. filtration, or addition of chemical
complexing agents to remove suspended solids or iron, followed
by treatment with air stnpping to remove VOCs, with offsite
discharge of the treated water to the Norihside POTW system,
testing and disposing of the sludge generated during the
pretreatment process in the most economical means, conducting
a review of the existing OW monitoring system to ensure
proper monitonng of OW quality arid the effectiveness of the
system, and rnorutonng OW, providing for contingencies if
certain portions of the aquifer cannot be restored to their
beneficial use including providing engineenng or long-term
gradient controls by low-level pumping. considering a waiver of
chemical-specific ARARS for the aquifer, reevaluating the
remedial technologies for OW restoration, continued monitoring
of specific wells, and institutional controls to restnct access to
certain portions of the aquifer
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on state effluent
discharge limitations and Include TCE
0172 mg/l; l,l-DCE 00021 mg/I;
vinyl chloride 0 128 mg/l; PCBs
00043 ug/l; cis-l,2-DCE 007 mg/I;
methylene chloride 0011 mg/i;
benzene 0833 mg/l, and lead
0 072 mg/I Ambient air performance
standards also will be met and Include
cis-l,2-DCE 5 ug/m’; TCE 5 ug/m’;
and vinyl chloride 5 ug/m 5 .
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up levels are based on the North
Carolina Water Quality, EPA, and
MCL standards and Include benzene
I ug/l; chromium 50 ug/l; and lead
15 ug/l.
4 NatIonal Electric
Coil/Cooper Industries,
KY
3 5 .Acre Active
Manufacmunng Plant
09/3W92 Not specified
a’
4 New Hanover County
Airport Bum Pit. NC
Former Training Area
for Fire lighters
$106,000
(capital cost)
$150,000
(annual O&M)
$1,932,800
(present worth)
$1,073,700
(O&M)
(4 5 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/ ’Typel
Worth /
Signature Dale)
Remedial Action
Thr eatlProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Potters Septic Tank
Service Pits. NC
5-Acre Septic Tank
Service Pits
08)05/92
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. induding
tien,ene. toluene. and
sylenec. and metals.
including chromium
and lead
lOl.(XJ0 y& (subsurface
soil)
The selected remedial action (or this site includes collecting and
pretreating surface water using oxidation. pH adjustment, and
flocculation!clarificaiion to remove heavy metals, followed by
treatment by an air stripper to remove VOCs. and carbon
polishing to remove PCBs. discharging the water olisite to a
NPDES-pennitled facility for final treatment pnor to discharge.
controlling air emissions from the air slripping process using
carbon adsorption, ii necessary. with regeneration or disposal of
the spent carbon, and conducting quarterly surface water
monitonng
Goals are based on the more stringent
of state or federal standards and federal
land disposal resirictions pertaining to
storage and transportation of hazardous
wastes. Chemical-specific ground
water goals include benzene, 5 ug/l;
toluene 1.000 ugh, xylenes 1,000 ugll;
chromium SOug/l; lead 15 ugll; and
naplnhalene 30 ugh Chemical-specific
goals for subsurface and surface soil
Include benzene 001 mg/kg; toluene
34 mg/kg; zylenes 3.5 mg/kg:
chromium 97.2 mg//kg; lead 25 mg/kg;
and naphthalene I 8 mg/kg
$11,800,000
(present wotih)
$384,281
(annual O&M)
(50 years)
4 Savannah River
(USDOE) (Operable
Unit I), SC
300-Square Mile DOE
Defense Production
Faciliry
06129/92
Soil, sludge, and SW
contaminated with
VOCs. including TCE
and PCE. metals.
Including lead, acids.
and radioactive
matenals, including
uranium
39.000 yd’ (soil)
37.000 yd’ (sludge)
The selected remedial action for this site includes pumping and
Onsute treatment of any standing water that remained In the
basin, excavating. dewatenng. and stabilizing approximately
37.000 cubic yards of basin sludge using Portland cement,
placing. consolidating, and compacting the stabilized sludge into
the basin, discharging the sludge effluent (rum the dewatenng
process offsute to a permitted NPDES outlall, consolidating
approximately 39,700 cubic yards of contaminated soil
excavated from the seepage area. Lost Lake. and a portion of’
the sewer line into the basin, installing and maintaining a low
permeability cap over the settling basin, which includes a
surface soil layer that will be graded and vegeiated to promote
drainage. monitonng ground water, and implementing
insututional controls including deed restrictions
No chemical-specific clean-up goals
were provided in this Interim ROD. but
will be provided for the final M-area
HWMF remedial action Ibe goal of
this interim ROD Is to Integrate prior
RCRA dedsions Into the CERCLA
process The goal of the remediation
Is to minimize the migration of
contaminants to the ground water and
eliminate surface transport pathways
$3,000,000-
$5,000,000
(present worth)
$20,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
State/Type!
Worth!
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Savannah River
(IJSDOE) (Operable
Unit 2). SC
300-Square Mute DOE
Defense Production
Facility
06/29/92
Soil, sediment, debnc,
and SW contaminated
with VOCs, including
TCE. metals, including
chromium and lead.
and acids
3.000 gals (SW)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and compacting the process sewer line and associated soul and
sediment, placing them in the basin, and installing a low
permeability cap over the basin, sampling the accumulated
rainwater in the basin with onsitc discharge and/or treatment, if
constituent concentrations in the accumulated rainwater exceed
NPDES discharge standards; maintaining the cap, monitoring
ground water, and implementing institutional controls, including
deed restncuons
No chemical-specific clean-up
standards were specified in this interim
ROD. hut will be provided for the final
MET LAB IIWMF remedial action.
The goal of this Interim ROD Is to
integrate prior RCRA decisions Into
the CERCLA process The goal of the
remedjation is to miniml7e the
migration of contaminants to the
ground water and eliminate surface
transport pathways
$2,000,000
(present woiih)
$20,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
4 Savannah River
(USDOE) (Operable
UnIt 3). SC
300-Square Mile DOE
Defense Producbon
Facility
06/29/92
(3W contaminated with
VOCs, including PCE
and TCE
Not specified
1,200 acres ((1W
plume)
The selected interim remedy for this site Includes Installing
II or more ground water recovery wells under the RCRA
program throughout the AIM area: extracting and treating
contaminated ground water using an air stripper to remove
volatile solvents, followed by onsite discharge to an NPDES
permitted outfall: upgrading the air stripping tower to include
an off-gas treatment system based on the result of a treatability
study
No chemical-specific clean-up goals
were specified In this Interim ROD.
but they will be provided for the final
remedial action. The goal of this
remediation Is to reduce ground watcr
contaminants and minimize migration
of the contaminant plume.
$7,800,000
(present woiih)
$20,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
4 Standard Auto Bumper,
FL
I-Acre Chromium and
Nickel Plating Facility
Soul contaminated with
metals, including
chromium and lead
2.500 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
2,500 cubic yards of contaminated soil with concentrations
exceeding a l0 nsk level and disposing of the soil offsite.
backfllLing the excavated areas with clean fill, and monitoring
ground water
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on the exceedance of a l0
nsk level, including hexavalent
chromium 52 mg/kg; nickel
370 mg/kg: and total chromium
519 mg/kg
$338,186
(present worth)
$40,186
(present worth
O&M)
09/28/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
State!Typel
Worth!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
ThreatlProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
SW contaminated with
VOCs. including
hcn ene. PCE. TCE.
toluene. and sylenes.
other organics.
including PCBs and
PAl-Is, and metals.
including lead
Not sped fled
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Not applicable
Reservation (Operable
Unit IS). TN
Inactive Uranium
Enrichment Facility Not applicable
09/30192
The selected remedial action for this site includes collecting and
pretreating surface water using osidation. p11 adjustment. and
flocculation/clanfication to remove heavy metals. Followed by
treatment by an air stnpper to remove VOCs. and carbon
polishing to remove PCBs. discharging the water offsite to a
NPDES-permitled facility for final treatment prior to discharge.
controlling air emissions from the air stnoping process using
carbon adsorption. ir necessary. with regeneration or disposal of
the spent carbon: and conducting quarterly surface water
monitonng
The selected remedial action for this Site includes no further
action No additional action is necessary to protect human
health and the environment
Chemical-specific surface water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and primary health advisory. These
include benzene 0005 mg/i; PCE
0005 mg/i; TCE 0005 mg/i; toluene
I mg/I; sylenes (total) 10 mg/I;
naphthalene 0 13 mg/i. and
lead 005 mg/I
Not applicable $0
(present worth)
4 USMC Camp Lejeune
Military Reservation.
NC
500-Acre Military
Reservation
09123/92
(1W aquifer
contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben7ene and TCE. and
metals, including
arsenic, chronuurn. and
lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this Site includes extracting and
pretreaung contaminated ground water using an oil/waler
separator. treating the water onsite using precipitation, chemical
reduction, and sedimentation to remove inorganics. and air
stnpping to remove VOCs. treating emissions using carbon
adsorption. based on the results of a treatabiliiy study;
discharging the treated water offsite to the Hadnot Point Sewage
treatment plant for es-situ biological treatment. pnor to final
onstte discharge to the New River. transporting the free product
to a waste oil recycler or incinerator ofisite, conducting long-
term ground water monitonng. and implementing institutional
controls including ground water use restrictions
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up standards are based on SDWA
MCLs and state standards and Include
benzene I ugfl. TCE 28 ugfl. lead
15 ugh; arsenic 50 ugh, and chromium
5Oug/l
$7,600,000
(present worth)
$351,500
(O&M)
(30 years)
4 USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable
Unit 6). TN
Nuclear Weapons
Production Facility
09/30192
0 *
U I
$350,000
(capital cost)
$117,700
(annual O&M)
$0
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
SiatelType!
WoriW
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Whitchouse Waste Oil
Pits (Amendment). FL
7-Acre Oil Reclamation
Facility and Acidic
Waste Oil Disposal Area
0611 (192
4 Wilson Concepts of
Flonda. FL
2.Acre Former
Manufacturing and
Metal-Finishing Facility
Soil. debris. GW. and
SW contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene loluene. and
xylenes other organics.
including PCBs and
phenols, and metals.
including arcenic.
chromium, and lead
56.93() y& (soil and
sludge)
Not applicable
Not applicable
The amended remedial action for this site includes excavating
and screening the soil and sludge wastes from within seven
waste pits to remove coarse debris, with decontamination and
ofisite disposal of the dehns not amenable to biotreatincnt.
treating 56.930 cubic yards of screened soil and sludge/wastes
using soil washing, followed by onsite es-situ hiotreatmeni of
soil wash water and suspended contaminated lines using a
slurry phase bioreactor. with distharge of the treated water to
an Onsite drainage ditch if aischarge levels are im t. or further
treatment in the onsite treatment system prior to discharge.
treating contaminated lines and sludge onsite using
solidilicationlstabili7ation. with replacen nt in the drainage
ditch, extracting contaminated ground water with analysis and
onsite treatment using granular activated carbon (GAC)
adsorption and chemical precipitation units. pnor to discharge to
surface water, installing and maintaining a 6-inch vegetative
cover over the excavated area, fencing the site, conducting a
pilot-scale Ireatability study to further develop the treatment
train, and monitoring ground water If the ground water
treatment system is not capable of achieving the clean-up goals
at the end of any 5-year penod. the following contingencies will
apply containment measures to prevent further migration of the
ground water plume. consideration of a waiver of chemical-
specific ARARS for the aquifer. implementation of institutional
controls including deed restnctions. tu restrict access to certain
portions of the aquifer, and monitoring onsite and offsite wells
The selected remedial action for this site includes no further
action with ground water monitoring at and around the site for
1 year
Soil clean-up levels are based on a
direct contact exposure pathway (risk-
based) Chemical-specific goals for
soil include arsenic 42 mgfkg. bcnzene
04 mg/kg: chromium 526 trig/kg: lead
500 mg/kg, naphtha!ene 317 mg/kg.
PCB I mg/kg. phenol 47.467 mg/kg,
PCE 4 mg/kg. loluene 2.000 mg/kg:
and TCE 07 ing/kg The ground
water clean-up levels are in accordance
with the federal and slate waler quality
standards Chemical-specific goals for
ground water include arsenic 50 ug/l.
benrene I ugh: bcn7o(a)pyrenc 02
ugfl. chromium 100 ug/l: lead IS ugh:
3.4-methyl phenol 850 ugh,
naphthalene 10 ug/l. phenol 10,000
ugh. toluene 24 ug/l. TCE 3 ug/l: and
xylenes 50 ugh
Not applicable
SI 5.500.000
(present worth)
$3,400,000
(O&M)
(30 years)
$48,000
(present worth)
536.0(XI
(annual O&M)
(I year)
09/22192
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Type/
Worthl
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThrratIProh lem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present
Capital and
O&M Costs
4 Woodhury Chemical
(Pnnceton Plant). FL
5-Acre Pesticide and
Fertilirer Formulation
and Storage Facility
06125192
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action.
with quarierly ground water monitonng
Not applicable
$22,500
(present worth)
$10,000
(annual O&M)
(1 year)
4 Yellow Water Road
Dump. FL
14-Acre Former Storage
Area for PCB-
Contaminated Liquids
and Elecincal
Equipment
06130/92
(3W contaminated with
PC s
Not specified
The s lected remedial action for IIUS Site includes adding 4
additional ground water monit000g wells downgradient of the
former operational area, monitoring ground water, and
implementing institutional controls, including deed and ground
water use restncuons and fencing Downgradient monitoring
will be performed quarterly for 2 years. afler which the ground
water monjtonng frequency will be reevaluated if no PCB
contamination is detected IF PCB contamination is identified
above MCLs in compliance wells, contingent remedial activities
would be implemented, including construction of ground water
extraction wells, installation of a ground waler filtration system,
with a granular activated carbon treatment system. and a treated
effluent discharge system. which uses onsite infiltration ponds
or drainage swales. and disposal and/or treatment of the residual
carbon and filtration waste offsile
The chemical-specific ground water
clean-up goal Is based on the SDWA
MCL for PCBs o105 ugIl. Huwever,
because of the technical
impracticability of using a treatment
system to remove PCBs from ground
water, a waiver of SDWA MCLs Is
required for ground water located
directly beneath and In proximity to
the former operational area.
$407,629-
$1,377,600
(present worth)
$575,105
annual O&M
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
State/Type!
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components or
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woilla!
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 Alsco Anaconda. Oil
4 8-Acre Former Sludge
Disposal Area
09/30/92
6W contaminated with
organics. including
cyanide. fluonde.
PCBs. and his
(2 -ethylhe xyl)
phthalate. and rnctajs.
including chromium
and lead
Not speciflcd
The selected remedial action for this site includes natural
flushing and attenuation of contaminants from the contaminated
aquifer, and allowing ground water to discharge Onsite to the
Tuscarawas River. installing onsile ground water monitoring
wells, installing and sampling background wells: sampling
Tuscarawas River sediment and benthic organisms, and
implementing institutional controls including deed resinctions to
prevent installation or dnnking water wells Onsite until rerncdial
action levels for ground water have been achieved
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up levels include the following, which
are SDWA MCLs or proposed MCLs:
chromium 0 I mg/I; cyanide 02 mg/I;
fluoride 4 mg/I. and bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phihalate 0004 mg/I Lead levels will
meet an action level ol 0015 mg/I.
Clean-up below background levcls will
not be required
$504,600
(present worth)
$455,400
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
a’
00
American Chemical
Services. IN
36-Acre Chemical
Manufaclunng Facility
09/30/92
Soil debris, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben7ene. TCE. loluene.
and xylenes. other
organics. including
PCB5. PAils, and
phenols, and metals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial t c1ion for this site includes excavation
arid ofisite incineration of approximately 400 intact buried
drums, decontaminating and disposing of miscellaneous debns
offsite. treating contaminated soil using in-situ vapor extraction,
conducting an in-Situ vapor extraction pilot study for Onsite
Area buried waste, excavating and treating buried waste or
PCB-contaminated soil onsile using low temperature thermal
treatment, with vapor emission control during excavation, and
possible imrnobilu,atjon of inorganics afler treatment: depositing
the trratcd residuals that meet health-based levels onsiie and
covering the area with a soil cover: pumping and onsile
irsatment of contaminated ground water along with wash water
from the decontamination processes and condensate from the
soil treatment processes using a method to be determined during
the RD phase. with onsite discharge of the treated water to
surface water and wetlands, continuing to evaluate and monitor
wetlands, with mitigation of affected wetlands r necessary.
controlling and monitonng air emissions from excavation and
treatment processes, conducting long-term ground water
monitoring, and implementing, to the extent possible,
institutional controls including deed restrictions, and site access
restnctions such as fencing
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on risk-based levels and
include benzene I 0 mg/kg; tolucne
167-5,000 mg/kg. xylenes 867-
26.000 mg/kg. PCBs 10 mg/kg (with
10-Inch soil cover), chromium
47-1.400 mg/kg, and lead 500 mg/kg
The lead clean-up level for soil Is
based on the lntenm Guidance on
Establishing Soil Lead Cleanup Levels
at Superfund Sites and the PCB clean-
up level for soil is based on TSCA
policy for unrestncted access.
Chenucal-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on nsk-based
levels, SDWA MCLs. and Include
benzene 5 ug/l. PCE 5 ugh, PCBs
006 ughl, and arsenic 88 ug/l
$37,800,000-
$46,800,000
(present worth)
$17,670.000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
StateTl’ypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThreatfProhlcm
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean.up Goals
Present Worthl
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 Bolors Nobel
(Amendment). Mt
85-Acre Active
Specialty Chemical
Production Plant
07/22192
5 Butterworth #2 Landfill.
Ml
180-Acre Municipal
Landfill
09129/92
Soil and sludge
contaminated with
SVOCs. including
bcn,idine and
d,chlorobenrjdine
762.000 yd (soil and
sludge)
Soil contaminated with
VOCs. including PCBs
and pesticides, and
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
Not specified
The selected amended remedial action For this site includes
excavation and onsite disposal of approximately 767,000 cubic
yards of contaminated sludge and soil in onsite RCRA-type
secure landfill cells, constructed as pa il of the original remedial
action, expanding and upgrading the unused landfill adjacent to
the lagoon area to meet the RCRA standards, stonng lesser
contaminated material in the unused landfill, Installing
extraction wells downgradient of the unused landfill as a tertiary
leachate containment system. and monitonng the landfill and
existing leachate collection system This ROD amendment does
not address any issue associated with ground water treatment
The selected remedial action for this site includes removing and
disposing of exposed drums containing hazardous materials at
an offsite RCRA facility, upgrading the landfill cover to include
a clay cap, and gas venting and treatment systems to meet state
standards. revegetating the area: installing additional monitoring
wells in the upper and lower aquifers, and implementing a long-
term monitonng program for ground water, surface waler.
sediment, and biota. establishing ACLs for site ground water
based on the current level of contamination, mitigating affei.ted
wetlands, implementing institutional controls including deed and
ground water use restncliOns
EPA has determined that landfllling of
contaminated soil and sludge without
treatment provides the equivalent level
of protection to human health and the
environment from site-related risks as
that provided by the remedy In the
1990 ROD Ground water clean.up
criteria will be addressed In a
subsequent final ROD.
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals were not established in this
ROD because current contamination
levels will be determined through
sampling of compliance monitoring
wells for eight consecutive quarters
over a 2-year period The indicator
parameters to be analyzed quarterly
will Include all chemicals established
as chemicals of concern After the
initial 2-year penod of quarterly
sampling, ground water shall be
monitored for the next 3 years on a
quarterly basis, then, analysis will be
made for the primary contaminants of
concern
$45,498.2 16
(present worth)
$89,030
(annual O&M)
(3 years)
$15,230,000
(present worth)
$110,000
(annual O&M)
(30 yeats)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statefrype!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WotiW
Capital and
O&M Costs
-J
0
5 Cannelton lndustnes. Mt
75-Acre Former Tannery
Fadbty
09/3W92
Soil, sediment, and
dehns contaminated
with VOCs. including
TCE and sylenes, other
organics. including
PAils. pesticides,
phenols, and PCfls.
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, and inorganics
199.700 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating.
dredging, and dewatenng debris, waste, soil, and sediment that
exceed the clean-up cnteria: placing these media in an onsile
solid waste landfill, and closing the landfill in accordance with
RCRA subtitle D. or more stnngent stale standards, filling in
onsile excavated areas with clean soil to stabilize the shoreline;
collecting ground waler from the dewatering/constniction
activities and treating the water, if needed, prior to offsite
discharge to POTW, or onsite discharge to surface water;
conducting additional ecological studies. monitonng ground
waler and surface water, and implementing institutional controls
to control land use, and potentially, deed restrictions to control
ground water use
Chemical-specific soil, sediment, and
debris excavation standards ate based
on state direct human contact (DI-IC)
standards and include cadmium
100 mg/kg (DHC). lead 400 mg/kg
(DFIC), arsenic 12 8 mglkg
(background), and carcinogenic PAHs
033 mg/kg (MDL). A chemical.
specific excavation goal for chromium
was established using back calculations
based on a l0 cancer risk level for
hcxavalent chromium and an HI of I
For trivalent chromium, resulting in a
clean.up standard of 5.300 mg/kg for
Invalent chromium and 54 mg/kg for
hexavalent chromium.
$19,700,000
(present worth)
$458,000
(annual O&M)
(years 0-I)
$449,000
(annual O&M)
(years 2.3)
$579,000
(annual O&M)
(year 4)
$303,000
(annual O&M)
(years 5.30)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
Stnte!T’ype/
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
ThreatIProbkm
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wonh/
Capital and
O&M Costs
l . a
-J
5 Central Illinois Public
Service. IL
I-Acre Former
Manufactured Gas Plant
09/3 tY92
Soil, sediment. debns.
and GW contaminated
with VOC5. including
ben7ene. toluene. and
sylenes. and other
orgarucs. including
PAHs and phenols
9.000 yd’ (soil)
3.000 ydi (sediment)
The selected remedial action for this site includes documenting
the previously implemented souree control measures which
Included removal and olfsite disposal of the structures
associated with the onginal gas piani, excavation and ofisite
disposal of approximately 9.000 cubic yards of visibly
contaminated soil down to the ground water table level and
excavation and offsite disposal of 3.000 cubic yards of soil and
sediment from the drainageway section leading to Seaman
Estate pond. backfilling excavated areas with clean soil from
ofisite, plugging and abandoning private drinking water wells,
and connecting affected residents to a public water supply. The
selected remedial actions to be implemented now Include
extracting and neutralizing contaminated ground water prior to
onsite treatment In a liquid phase carbon adsorption column,
with onsite discharge of the treated water to the drainageway
downgradient of Seaman Estate pond, transporting contaminated
carbon oflsite to a facility for regeneration or incineration.
removing precipitated solids from the treatment process, and
testing them for hazardous waste characteristics, prior to
appropriate disposal, conducting long-term ground water and
surface water monitoring; and implementing erosion controls,
institutional controls, Including deed and land use restrictions,
and site access restnclions, including fencing
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up standards, which are based on state
and federal drinking water criteria.
include benzene 0005 mg/l; toluene
I mg/I. ethylbenzene 07 mg/I; yIenes
10 mg/I; anthracene 2 I mg/i;
bcnzo(a)pyrene 000023 mg/I: and 2-
rncthylphcnol 035 mg/I. In addition to
meeting the Individual ground water
objectives indicated ceilain toxIcity
equations as defined In the ROD must
be satisfied to protect against livcr
tumora and liver, kidney, and blood
toxicity.
$9,346,034
(present worth)
$401,400
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefTypel
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 City Disposal Sanitary
Landfill. WI
38-Acre
Inactive Landlill
09/28/92
Soil. debris, arid GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beruene. TCE, toluene.
and xylencs. other
organics. including
phenols. metals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead.
arid inorgarucs
70(1000 yd’ (soil and
debns)
The selected remedial action for this site includes installing a
landfill gas control system to control air emissions, treating
contaminated soil and debris in cells 6 and 12 using an in-situ
vapor extraction (ISVE) system with an air intrusion cut-oil
wall to remove and treat VOC5. treating the extracted vapors by
flanng. installing a hazardous waste landfill cover. Design C.
over cells 6 and 12. and a solid waste landfill cover. Design B,
over the rest of the landfill, extracting ground water, and
conducting treatahility studies to determine the best treatment,
pretreating ground water onsite using precipitation to remove
metals, followed by treatment using chemical oxidation or
another comparable technology, with onsite discharge to
Badfish Creek. monitoring ground water and residential wells:
and implementing deed, land and ground water use restnctions
Chemical.specilic ground water clean-
up goals arc based on Preventative
Action Limits (PALS) established in
NR 140 of the Wisconsin
Administrative Code and include
benzene 0067 ugh. 2-butanone (PAL
or MCI not established): 1.1
dichloroethane 85 ug/l; methylene
chloride IS ugh: toluene 686 ug/l.
vinyl chloride 00015 ugh; and
xylenes 124 ugfl Air emissions from
the gas control and ISVE systems will
meet the CAA requirements RCRA
standards will apply to the construction
of the landfill caps
$14,851,387
(present worth)
For source
control:
$90,978
(annual O&M)
(Sears 0-5)
$21,258
(annual O&M)
(years 6-25)
For GW
$645,859
(annual O&M)
(sears 0-20)
$114,481
(annual O&M)
(years 20-40)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Typel
Signature DaleJ
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WottW
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 CIare Water Supply. Ml
Municipal Well Field
09/I 6/92
Soil, sediment, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs, Including
ben7ene. PCE. TCE.
and xylenes
54,800 yd’ (soil and
sediment)
The selected remedial action for this Site includes dewatering
and treating 54.800 cubic yards of contaminated soil and
sediment. including the soil under buildings, using in-Situ vapor
extraction (ISVE) to remove VOCs. treating air emIssions 1mm
the ISVE process using granular activated carbon, returning
spent carbon units to the supplier for offslic regeneration,
possibly enhancing the effectiveness of the remedy with limited
excavation of hot spots, where SVE may not be practicable.
temporanly capping treated areas. or adding nutrients, based on
the results of pie-design studies, extracting and treating
contaminated ground water onslie using UV/chemical oxidation.
with reinjection of the treated ground water into the aquifer;
treating water from the dewatenng process using carbon
adsorption prior to discharge. monitonng ground water: and
implementing institutional controls, including deed and ground
water use restrictions
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on protection of ground
water and include benzenc 20 ug/kg;
vinyl chloride 04 ug/kg; TCE
60 ug/kg; PCE 14 ug/kg: methylene
chloride 100 ug/kg; irans-l.2-DCE
2,000 ug/kg; cis-I,2-DCE 1,400 ug/kg;
xylenes 6,000 ugfkg: toluene 20,000
mg/kg; ethylbenzene 1,000 mg/kg; 1.1-
DCA 14,000 mglkg; I,2.DCA
8 mg/kg. I.l.2-TCA 12 mg/kg; 1,1.1-
TCA 4,000 mg/kg; and slyrene 20
mg/kg Chemical-specilic ground
water clean-up goals are based on
SDWA MCLs. and State MCLs under
Michigan’s Act 307 Type B Cleanup
Levels and include benzene I mg/l;
vinyl chloride 002 mg/I. TCE 3 mg/I;
PCE 0.7 mg/I. methylene chloride
5 mg/I. trans-l.2-DCE 100 mg/I; cis-
l,2-DCE 70 mg/I; xylenes 300 mg/i;
lolueric 800 mg/I; ethylbenzene
70 mg/I; l,I-DCA 700 mg/I; l.2-DCA
04mg/I. l.1.2-TCA 06mg/i; 1,1,1-
TCA 200 mg/i; and slyrene I mg/i
$11,754,247
(present wonh)
$43 1.183
(average
annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
SiatelTypei
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
ThreatfProblern
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 Columbus Old
Municipal Landfill. IN
19-Acre Old Municipal
Landfill
03/31/92
5 Electrovoice. Ml
Active Marsufaciunng
Facility
06 /23192
Not applicable
Not applicable
Soil, sludge, and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben,ene. PCE. TCE.
toluene. and xylenes.
other orgaiiics.
including PAHs.
met als. including
arsenic. chromium, and
lead, and Inorganics
2.100 ydi (sludge)
The selected remedial action for this Site is no further action.
which includes ground waler morutonng and a live-year review
of site conditions to evaluate the protectiveness of the remedy
In the event that the Indiana Department of Transportation and
the City of Columbus proceed wiih construction of the proposed
roadway across the site, EPA will require the iniplementalion of
a contingency remedy, which includes implementing a landfill
cover maintenance prograim developing a ground water
recovery system implementation plan, Installing a minimum of
‘wo additional ground water niomtonng wells, installing fencing
with appropriate warning signs, implementing a ground water
monitonng program, and implementing institutional controls.
including deed restnctions on land and ground water use.
The selected remedial action for this site includes treating
contaminated soil in the dry well area onsite using vapor
extraction, excavating the 2.100 cubIc yards of remaining
sludge, with offsite solidification and landfilling: collecting and
treating onsite contaminated ground water using either granular
or powdered activated carbon, air stripping, chemical
oxidatiorslreduCtion or photolysis(oxldation. with discharge of
the treated water ofisite to a POTW: and monitoring off-
property ground water If. following these actions, the dry well
soil does not meet treatment standards, further remedial action
consistent with RCRA closure will be evaluated, which Include
installing a hazardous waste cap over the lagoon area soil.
conducting an investigation of the potential existence of a lower
aquifer in the area of the former dry well area. monitonng on
and ofisite ground water, and Implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions for the property and
suripunding properties to prohibit future installation of drinking
water wells
Not applicable
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on state standards and
include arsenic 0.4 ug/kg; benzene
20 ug/kg; PCE 14 ug/kg; TCE 60
ug/kg; toluene 16.000 ugfkg; and
sytenes 6,000 ug/kg. Chemical.
specific ground water clean-up goals
are also based on state standards and
Include benzene I ugh; TCE 3 ugh;
toluene 800 ug/l: and xylenes 20 ug/l
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
$4. 100,000
(present worth)
$330,000
(annual O&M)
(years 2-5)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 Grand Traverse Ov ijH Not applicable
Supply. Ml
39-Acre Active
Commercial Laundering
Facility
02/03/92
The selected remedial action for this site Is the no action.
however, ground water monitonng for Inorganics will continue
for 1 year EPA has determined that conditions at the site due
to contamination by organic compounds pose no current or
potential threat to human health or the environment.
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
Soil, sediment, debris.
GW. SW. and air
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene, toluene, and
xylenes: other organics.
including PAils, PCBs.
pesticides, and phenols,
and metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
l47,000 yd’ (soil)
33,000 yd’ (batlery
casings)
The selected remedial action for this site includes demolishing
onsite buildings to allow cleanup of contaminated soil beneath
strictures, and disposing of the debris in an onsite or offsite
landfill, onsite decontamination of buildings not requiring
demolition, consolidating contaminated surface soil onsite.
treating an estimated 180,000 cubic yards of soil, sediments.
and battery chips onsite using in-Situ solidificationlslabilizallon;
constricting a containment wall around the treated soil,
sediment, and debris, and covering the solidified material using
a multi-layer cap; extracting contaminated ground water from
the shallow aquifer beneath the site: treating collected ground
water and surface water onsile using aeration, filtration. carbon
adsorption, and Ion exchange, prior to onsite discharge to the
Grand River; conducting additional studies to further define the
extent of contamination in the intermediate and bedrock
aquifers; monitoring ground water and surface water, and
implementing institutional controls including deed and ground
water use resinctions. and site access restrictions such as
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goats
are based on site risks, state ARARS.
or background levels and include PCBs
I mg1kg (state), arsenic 66 mg/kg
(background); lead 5 mg/kg (stale).
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals include benzene I ugh (state);
arsenic 17.9 ugh (stale); and lead
1,423 ugh (background)
Not applicable
U i
— I
UI
Not applicable
5 11 Brown Compan ,. Ml
Former Landfill and
Battery Reclamation
Facility
09/30192
$15,000,000
(present worth)
$220,000
(annual O&M)
(years 2-3)
fencing
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Typel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThreaLlProh lem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wonhl
Capital and
O&M Costs
-J
C ,’
5 Hagen Fami. WI
28-Acre Fomier Waste
Disposal Facility
09/30192
5 Kohler Landfill. WI
40-Acre Active Landfill
03130192
GW contaminated with
VOCs including 1.1-
dichloroethene,
ethylben7ene. benrene.
tetrahydrofuran.
toluene. vinyl chlonde.
and sylenes. and
metals, including
aiseruc and lead
Not specified
Soil and leachate
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beniene, toluene. TCE.
and xylenes. other
organics. Including
PAHs and phenols, and
metals. Including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
The selected remedial action for this site includes extracting and
pretreating on- and off-properly ground water to remove metals
and inorganic solids: treating on-properly ground water using an
activated biological sludge treatment system, treating off.
properly ground water using a treatment technology to be
determined dunng the remedial design stage: discharging the
treated ground water onsite to the wetlands, surface water, or
possibly reinjecting the treated water into the aquifer to promote
in situ biodegradation. based on the results of a bench-scale
study, treating sludge generated from the treatment process.
pnor to disposal In a RCRA landfill, treating off-gases
emissions From the treatment process using carbon adsorption.
with regeneration or treatment of the spent carbon: monitoring
pnvate wells located around the site, implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions, and access restrictions
The selected remedial action for this site includes closing the
landfill according to slate regulations. constructing a multi-layer
cap over the fill matenal to i-educe infiltration into the waste
mass, Installing a penrocter leachate collection drain and
treating leachate onsite using air stripping, prior to onsite
discharge to the Sheboygan River, and Implementing
Institutional controls including deed restrictions and site access
r estnCliOfiS
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on the State of
Wisconsin Preventive Action Limits
(PALs) and include ben7ene
o 067 ug/l; 1,1 -dichloroethene
0024 ugIl, ethylbenzene 272 ugh;
teti-ahydrofuran 10 ug/l; toluene
686 ug/l; vinyl chloride 00015 ugfl;
xylenes 124 ugIl; arsenic 5 ugh: and
lead 5 ug/l.
Clean-up goals will be met In
accordance with state landfill closure
codes, and discharge codes. Chcinical-
specific ground water clean-up goals
will be addressed In a future ROD.
$13,612,000-
$24,163,000
(present worth)
$1,062,000
(annual O&M)
( I year)
$4,700,000
(present worth)
S 1,000,000
(annual O&M)
Not specified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelType/
Signature Dale)
Remedial Action
Thrrat)Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wotlh!
Capital and
O&M Costs
— I
-4
5 La Grande Sanitary
Landfill. MN
80-Acre Landfill Site
09/30192
5 Metal Working Shop,
Ml
2.7-Acre Manufactunng
Facility
Soul. debns, and GW
contaminated with
organic! and metals
Not specified
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes convening a
gas monitonng well to a gas vent to control the accumulation of
explosive gases, sealing off and abandorung the onsite Shop
Well to ensure that it will not be used as a potable water
sourre. stahiliung the west slope of the landfill, and placing a
soil cover over the exposed landfill waste on the northwest
corner, sloping and reconstructing the borrow pit area adjacent
to the west slope to ensure long-term integrity of the existing
cover system: conducting long-term monitoring of ground water
and combustible gas, and implementing institutional controls.
including deed and ground water use resinctions, and restricting
Site access
The selected remedial action for this site Includes no further
action because no significant levels of contaminants exist onsite,
and no additional action Is necessary to protect human health or
the environment
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals were not specified Because
of the low level nsks posed by the site.
treatment of onSit e media is not
considered necessary
Not applicable
$501,000
(present worth)
$22,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
06 /30192
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefFype/
Signature Daie/
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth/
Capital and
O&M Costs
L.J
-J
5 MIDCO I (Amendment).
IN
4-Acre Abandoned.
Industrial Waste
Recycling. Storage, and
Disposal Facility
04/13192
Subsurface soil.
sediment, and OW
contaminated with
VOCs Including
lotuene. TCE. and
xyleneS, metals,
including chromium
and lead, and
inorganics
5.2($) - 7, (X) yd’ (soil)
100 yd’ (sediment)
The amended remedial action for this site Includes reducing the
amount of soil to be treated to a minimum of 5,200 cubic yards
because of the amendment to soil CALS and the determination
that arsenic may not be present above background levels at the
site, treating the contaminated soil oncite using with soil vapor
extraction, followed by in-Situ solidificauorilstabilization.
excavating and treating an estimated 500 cubic yards of
contaminated sediment from the surrounding wetlands onsite
using solidjlicauoi /stabilization, p .mping and treatment of
contaminated ground waler using air stnpping and carbon
absorption, followed b) onsile deep well injection, constructing
a final RCRA cover over the entire site, implementing
institutional controls including deed restrictions, and Site access
resinctions. conducting long-term monitoring and providing for
a contingency remedy In the event that ground water clean-up
action levels for the Calurnet Aquifer are technically
impracticable to attain, which includes low-level pumping to
contain contaminated ground water and additional institutional
controls The ground water treatment or underground injection
portions of this remedy may be combined with remedial actions
for the nearby Midco II site
Ground water clean-up standards for
the Calumet Aquifer are not changed
from the 1989 ROD Treatment
requirements prior to DWI are luriher
defined compared to the 1989 ROD
and include, at a minimum, treatment
to MACs. which are required for
RCRA delisting Specific MACs
include methylene chloride 31 5 ugfl:
inchiomethenc 31 5 ugh; toluene
6,300 ug/l; chromium 630 ugll; nickel
630 ug/l; and lead 950 ug l Treatment
below MACS will be required, if
necessary, to protect underground
sourves of drinking water Soil
treatment action levels are Increased
from lxl0 and HI=l In the 1989
ROD to 5 l0’ and HI=5 In this
amendment.
$10,000,000
(present worth)
$460,000
(annual O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
She Name.
Statefrypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
‘0
5 MIDCOII
(AmendmenO. IN
7-Acre Abandoned
Chemical Waste Storage
and Disposal Facility
04/13/92
Subsurface toll,
sediment, and OW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
totuenc. TCE. and
xylenes . tals.
Including chromium
and lead, and
I norga nici
18.300 yd’ (soil)
500 yd’ (sedimenO
The amended remedial action rot this site includes reducing the
amount of soil to be treated from an estimated 35,000 cubic
yards to an estimated 12,200 cubic yards: excavating and
treating the contaminated soil onsile using soil vapor extraction.
followed by in-situ solithficatlonF stahilurarion excRvatlnp in
ditch adjacent to the northeast boundary of the site, with onsite
sottdulicatlon/stabiluzatuon, pumping and onsite treatment of
contaminated ground water using air stnpping and carbon
adsorption. or possibly precipitation, with deep well injection of
the treated water: constructing a ‘inal vegetated RCRA cover
over the entire site. lmp ementing Institutional controls
including deed restrictions, and site access restnclions:
conducting long-term monitoring and providing for a
contingency remedy II clean-up action levels for the Calumet
Aquifer arc technically Impracticable to attain which includes
low-level pumping to contain contaminated ground water and
additional institutional controls The ground water treatment or
underground injection portions of this remedy may be combined
with remedial actions for the adjacent Midco I site
Ground waler clean-up standards are
not changed from the 1989 ROD
Treatment required pnor to OW are
further defined compared to the 1989
Don .
for RCRA delisting Specific MACs
inctude methylene chlonde 31 5 ugh.
trichloroethene 31 5 ugh: lotuenc 6.300
ugh: chromium 630 ugh, nickel
630 ugh, and lead 99 5 ugh
Treatment below the MACs will be
required II necessary to protect
underground sources of drinking water
Soil treatment action levels are
increased from lxlO 4 and Hl=l In the
1989 ROD to 5xt0 4 and Hl=5 In this
ROD
$13,000,000
(present worth)
$660,000
,___
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
StateIFype/
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capilal and
O&M Costs
00
5 Muskego Sanitary
Landfill. WI
56-Acre Active Sanitary
Landfill
06/12/92
Soil and sediment
contaminated with
VOCs. Including
beniene. ICE. toluene.
and xylenes. and other
orgamcs. including
PAHs, PC8s.
pesticides. and phenols
Not speci lied
The selected remedial action for this site Includes installing a
cap over the Old and Southeast ll Areas, adding a landfill
leachate control system at the Old Fill Area and improving the
existing leachate control system at the Southeast Fill Area.
discharging the collected leachatc onsile to the sewer if
pretreatment requirements are mci. or treating leachate along
with contaminated ground water as pail of the subsequent OU
managing sludge residuals from the treatment processes as a
hazardous waste. Itt exhibits the charactenstic of toxtcity.
capping of the Non-Contiguous Fill Area. treating soil within
the drum trench and north and south refuse areas using in-Situ
vapor extraction to remove VOCs, treating the extracted gas
using either activated carbon or thermal destruction with
catalytic oxidation, or another treatment method prior to
emission to the atmosphere, utilixing an active gas control
system. In conjunction with the leachale collection system at
both the Old and Southeast Fill Areas to destroy extracted gases
with a ground flare, and conducting semi-annual ground water
monitoring and implementing Institutional controls including
deed restrictions and site access restrictions including fencing
A performance based clean-up si ndard
will be applied to the area covered by
the ISVE systetn in the Non-
Contiguous Fill Area The clean-up
standard will be based on residual soil
gas concentrations that are low enough
to assure compliance with ground
water clean-up standards, which will
be specified in the subsequent ROD For
the contaminated ground water
$9.91 4.000
(present worth)
$309,500
(annual O&M)
(years 0-5)
134, 1 Ifl
(years 6-30)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!Iypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worihl
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 New Stighton/Arden
Hills, MN
25-Square-Mile
Ammunition
ManuIactunng Facilily
09/3(W92
Peerless Plating. Ml
I-Acre Former
Electroplating Facility
09/21/92
GW contaminated with
VOCs. Including
bcnzene. TCE. and
xylenes. other organics.
including phenols, and
metals. Including
chromium and lead
Not specified
Soil. debns. and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. Including
benzene. TCE, toluene,
and xylenes, metals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead.
and Inorganics
6.500 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes pumping and
offsite treatment of contaminated ground water at the leading
edge of the south plume using precipitation and filtration to
remove inorganic solids and a pressurized granular activated
carbon system to remove VOCs. discharging the treated ground
water ofisite to the poable water supply of the City of New
Rnghton. disposing of filtration residuals and spent carbon
offsite, Implementing institutional controls including ground
water use restrictions, and morutonng ground water.
The selecird remedial action for the site includes demolishing
onsite buildings to facilitate soil sampling beneath the buildings.
arid disposing of the associated debris olisite; treating
approximately 6500 cubIc yards of contaminated soil onsite
using in-situ vapor extraction, followed by onsite stabilization
of excavated soil; testing the stabilized soil, prior to offsite
disposal at a RCRA facility, controlling air emissions using
carbon adsorption; pumping and onsite treatment of ground
water using air stripping, followed by precipitation. pH
adjustment, and chemical coagulation, with discharge of the
treated ground water onsite to surface water; controlling air
emissions using a carbon filter, treating the residual sludge to
meet LDR standards, prior to ofistue disposal at the RCRA
Subtitle C facility; regenerating the spent carbon at an ofisite
thermal treatment facility, and monitoring ground water
Chemical-specific ground waler clean-
up standards, which are based on state
standards and SDWA MCLs and
MCLGs, include li-dichloroethane
70 ugh; (state); l.l.dichloroethene
6 ugh (slate); cis I .2-dichloroethene
70 ugh (MCI): l,I.l-tnchlomoethane
200 ug/I (MCL); 1,1,2-trichloroethane
3 ugh (proposed MCLG). and TCE
S ugh (MCI).
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals arc based on SDWA MCIs
and State standards and include
beazene I ugh, arsenico2ug/l;
cadmium 4 ug/l, and lead 5 ugh
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on RCRA LDRs and health-
based levels and Include benzenc
002 mg/kg: arsenic I 7 mg/kg;
cadmium 08 mg/kg. and barium
40mg/kg
54,851.000
(present woiih)
5276.000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$7,971 (
(present worth)
$32 3.tUJ
(annual O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateiType/
Signature Date/
Remedial Action
ThreatlProhlem
Waste Volume
Components or
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goats
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
00
I - . . )
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical
(Indianapolis PIanO. IN
120-Acre Former Coal
Tar Refinery and
Creosote Wood
Treatment Plant
06I3 W92
5 ReIlly Tar & Chemical
(St. Louis Park), MN
80-Acne Former Coal
Tar Distillation and
Wood Preserving Plant
0913 fY92
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene and toluene.
other organics.
including PAl-Is.
metals. Including
arsenic. chromium, and
lead, and other
inorganic;
Not specified
GW contaminated with
orgamcs. including
PAHs
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this Site includes either
estracting contaminated ground water downgradient of the site
and treating the water using biological treatment, followed by
filtration and activated carbon adsorption. wtth offsite discharge
of Smgd to a POTW. with the remainder reinjected to the
&iuifer. or combining ground water esuraction from up-gradient
wells, with treatment using precipitation/clanfication. followed
by activated carbon, with reinjection to the aquifer in
conjunction with estracting ground water from interior ol the
site, and treating this by precipitation/clanfication. followed by
air stnpping, with offsite discharge to a POTW, monitonng
ground water and implementing engineering controls The final
selection of options and specific design parameters will be
detenmned during the remedial design, based on the results of
treatability tests to determine the optimum design and operating
requirements
The selected remedial action for this site includes intercepting
and containing contaminated ground water using gradient
control wells: discharging the water ollsite for treatment at the
local P01W; and continued monitoring the discharged water to
determine if’ within 3 to 5 years. this could be discharged
directly to a storm sewer and then to surface water At that
time. If necessary, an onsite or ollsite treatment facility will be
built to treat the water using activated carbon, prior to
discharge, with regeneration and reuse of any spent carbon
Interim ground water clean.up levels
are based on the more stringent of a
io cumulative lifetime cancer nsk, or
MCLs for carcinogens, and MCLGs,
MCLs. or a HI = I for noncarcinogenS
Chemical-specific ground water goals
Include benzene S ugh (MCL): toluene
1,000 ugll (MCL); xylenes 10,000 ug/l
(MCL), pyndine and pyndine
derivatIves 35 ughl (HI); arsenic
50 ug/l (MCL); chromium (MCL); lead
5 ugh (MCL); and ammonia 30 ugh
(MCI) Treated ground water
discharged to the POTW must meet
separate clean-up cntena under CWA
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on site-specific
Drinking Water Criteria These levels.
which were developed by siate and
EPA experts. include bcnzo(a) pyrene
and dibenzo(a.h)anthracefle 5 6 ng!I:
carcinogenic PAHs 28 ngfl. and other
PAHs IS nghI
SI 5.(X0.IXXJ
(prescnt woiih)
SI ,000,(M$3
(annual 0&M)
(30 years)
$370,000
(capital cost
per well)
5300.0 (X)
(additional
capital costs)
$45,000
(annual O&M
per well)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
She Name,
State/Typei
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat!Probkm
Waste Volume
Componenis of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wotih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 Savanna Army Depot,
IL
Active Military
Installation
03131/92
Soil, debris, and SW
contaminated with
VOCs end organics,
Including TNT:
nitroixnzene (NB).
2,4-dinitrotoluene
(DNT); 2-amino-4.
&DNT: 1.3.5-
tnmirobenzene (TNB).
and hexahydro’l.
3,5-trlnitro-- 1,3,5-
tnazine (P DX). a
pesticide
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating an
estimated 18.230 cubic yards of contaminated soil from the
upper and lower lagoons, drain troughs, and piping, treating the
soil onsite using a rotary kiln incineration thermal treatment
process. followed by onsite disposal of the treated soil and
Ilyash in the upper lagoon area, reprocessing any treated soil.
which fails the hazardous waste characteristic tests, treating soil
that does not meet TCLP standards using stabilization, pnor to
disposal. decanting standing waler ii the lagoons, with
treatment, if necessary; restoring any affected wetlands, and
conducting perimeter air monitoring
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on health-based criteria and
include TNT 2) mg/kg; 2,4-DNT
93 mg/kg, 2-A-4.6-DNT 1.191 unglkg:
1,3,5- mB 37 mg/kg; RDX
575 mg/kg, and NB 372 mg/kg
Treated soil will be subjected to TCLP
and testing for other hazardous waste
characteristics Residual soil left In the
ground will have no concentrations of
explosive compounds that are greater
than health-based critena
$10,251,000
(present worth)
SI 1.400
(annual O&M)
(2 years)
18,230 yd’ (soil)
Soil and GW
contamihated with
VOCs, including
benzene: other
organics. Including
PCBs and pesticides,
and metals, including
arsenic
Not specified
The selected Interim remedial action for this site includes
Implementing site access restrictions at the area of the Site that
was used for landfilling and disposal of liquid wastes, posting
warning signs; conducting quarterly ground waler moruiorin .
and providing an alternative water supply to residents who are
potentially impacted by offsite migration of contaminated
ground water
No petformance clean-up goals were
provided for remedial action ‘The
subsequent ROD will address the
clean-up goals for the chemicals of
concern in soil, sediment, ground
water, and surface water
5 South Andover
(Operable Unit 1)
(Amendment). MN
50-Acre Privately
Owned Parcels of Land
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including PCE,
itE. and toluene, and
metals. including
anenic. chromium, and
lead
The amended remedial action for this site includes monitonng
ground water at the site; abandoning nonessential wells, and
resampbng wells, ii action levels are exceeded The remedial
design Investigation showed that there is no definable plume at
the site, rather, there are random detections of compounds
helow background and regulatory standards Therefore. EPA
and the state are deleting three of four components identified in
the 1988 ROD remedy selection
Action levels for ground water at the
site are based on SDWA MCLs
$150,000
(present worth)
(O&M)
(not provided)
5 Skinner Landfill. OH
78-Acre Landfill
09/3W92
3160.000
(capital cost)
$30,000
(annual O&M)
06(09/92 Not specified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
State/Type)
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Prublem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worthl
Capital and
O&M Costs
5 South Andover
(Opet-able Unit 2). MN
50-Acre Privately
Owned Parcels of L rrd
12/24/91
Soil and debris
contaminated with
orgarucs, including
PAils and PCBs : and
metals, including lead
2.100 yd’ (PA H-
contaminaied soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and onsile treatment of 2.100 cubic yards of PAH-coniaminated
soil using es-situ biological treatrr nt; excavating and disposing
of the remaining 9.300 cubic yards of PAH-, PCB- , and metal.
contaminated soil 1mm areas 2. 3. 4, and 7 in an offsite solid
waste landfill, sampling and removing olTs.te approximately
20 onsire drums: and monitoring surface water and sediment
Soil clean.up goals will meet AWQCs
and Minnesota surface water quality
standards. Noncarcinogenic risk will
be to a Hl=I Chemical•specific goals
for soil cleanup include PAl-Is 2
mg/kg; PCDs 2 mg/kg; antImony 23
mg/kg. and lead 500 mg/kg
$2,470,000
(present worTh)
$195,000
(total cost
0&M)
9.300 yd’ (PAR PCB.
and metal-contaminated
soil)
5 Spickler Landfill. WI
10-Acre Inactive
Municipal and lnductnal
Landfill
06103/92
Soil, sludge. and
leactiate contaminated
with VOCs. including
berizene, PCE. toluene.
TCE. and xylenes.
other organics,
including pesticides.
metals. including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, arid other
Inorganics. including
asbestos
The selected remedial action for this site Includes treating
wastes in the mercury brine pit either by solidification and/or
stabilization, based on results of a ireatability test, and installing
an Impermeable cap over the treated material. installing a solid
wasle cap over the New and Old Fill areas with an active
leachate collection treatment system and a gas collection
system, discharging the treated leachate to wellands. surface
water, or a POTW. based on the results of TCLP testing;
tmnftonng ground water. leachare. and landfill gases:
maintaining the landfill caps; and Implementing engirteenng and
instinntonal controls including deed restrictions
Extracted leachate will be treated 10
oppropri ate discharge levels as
specified by federal and state
requirementh prior to discharge to the
wetlands, surface water, or a P01W
Capping and closure of the mercury
bone pit are subject to the
requirements of RCRA. Subtitle C.
$4.S59 ,0 00
(present worth)
SI 13.000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
Not specified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
StateiType)
Signature Dare)
Remedial Action
Threat /Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth)
Capital and
O&M Costs
U )
00
Vi
5 Tar Lake, Ml
200-Acre Former
Manufacturing Site
09129/92
Soil, tar sludge, OW,
and SW contaminated
with VOCs, including
benzene, toluene, and
xylenes, and other
organics. Including
PAHs and phenols
30.000 yd’ (tar sludge)
40.000 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
approximately 30.000 cubic yards of tar sludge and
approximately 40.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil in and
around Tar Lake, with dewatering using extraction wells to
facilitate excavation, consolidating the excavated materials into
two adjoining RCRA containment cells to tie constntcted within
the contamination area; adding solidification agents, such as
bentonite and cement to the tar sludge, and capping the cell
with a RCRA Subtitle C cap. Installing a leachate collection
system, pumping to contain the contaminated ground water,
water from the dewatering process, and the ponded water on
Tar Lake. and treating these using caibon adsorption or another
technology based on the results of a treatabiltty study to be
conducted during the pie-design stage; injecting the treated
water upgradlent of the extraction wells to perfonn a closed
loop system, monitoring ground water and Implementing
institutional controls, Including ground water use restrictions
All soil and sludge with an excess
cancer risk level greater than lx10 4
will be excavated from the site
Chemical-specific soil and sludge
tItan-up levels were based on the
Mtchigan Environmental Response Act
and health-based critcna and include 2-
methylphenol 8.000 ug kg. benzcne
04 uglkg; benzo(a)anthracene.
benzo(b)fluoranthene. and
licnzo(k)fluoranthene all at 100 ug(kg.
phenols 6.000 uglkg. toluene
16,000 ug kg; and xylenes 6,000 ugikg
Because the ground water containment
is an intenm measure, ground water
clean-up standards ate waived
Chemical-specific clean-up levels will
be provided in the final action for
ground water onsite
$20,100,000
(present worth)
$191,800
(annual O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Typel Present Worth!
Signature Date.! Threat/Problem Components of Capital and
Remedial Action Waste Volume Selected Remedy Clean-up Goals O&M Costs
5 Torch Lake (Operable Soil, debris, and slag The selected remedial action for this site includes placing a soil Soil clean-up levels are not established S6.l26JXlO
Units I and 3), Ml pile/beach contaminated cover with vegetation over 442 acres of tailings in Lake Linden. for this remedial action (present worth)
with organics. Hubbellflamarack City. and Macon. and 9 acres in Hubbell.
2.700-Acre Copper including. PAils, and placing a soil cover with vegetation over 229 acres of tailings in 109,(XX)
Milling and Smelting metals including Calumet Lake. Boston Pond. Michigan Smelter. Dollar Bay slag (annual O&M)
Facility arsenic chromium, and pile. and Grosse Point, rencving dehns such as wood, empty (10 years)
lead dnirns. and other garbage for ofFsite disposal. and
09/3W92 implementing institutional controls, including deed restnctions
ÔRO Acre; (soil/tailings) to control the use of tailing piles and slag piles/beach The Isle
Royale tailings will be excluded From the area to be covered
with soil and vegetation Twelve acres out of the
approximately 223-acres of the Iste-Royale tailings wilt be
developed as a sewage treatment plan l. 90-acres are designated
to be developed as a residential area, and 60-acres ate currently
being used as a source maienal to make cement blocks Also
eacluded From the area to be covered are the area designated by
the Houghton County Road Commission for use as source
material for road traction dunng the winter, the Quincy Smelter
area (based on the assumption that this area will be developed
as part of a National Historic Park), and the North Enity,
Redndge. and Freda tailings If any of these excluded areas has
not been addressed as planned within 5 years after RD
submittal, that area will then be subject to the requirements of
this ROD
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Hunt .
St at e/Typei
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
ThreatlProbtem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Renrdy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wotitt
Capital and
O&M Costs
00
S Tn County Landfill. IL
66-Acre Former
Landfills (Two)
09/3cW92
Soil, sediment debris.
GW. SW. and air
contaminated with
VOCs, including
berizene and TCE,
other organics,
including PAl-Is, PCBs.
and pesticides, and
metals. Including
arsenic
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and consolidating contaminated sediment 1mm the leachate
ditch with contaminated onsite soil and drummed dnll cuttings.
installing a clay cap over these materials and regrading and
ievegetaiing the site, installing Interceptor trenches to collect
contaminated onsite ground water and leachate with
pretreatment, if necessary, pnor to either onsite discharge to
surface water or offsite discharge to a PO1’W, as detennined
during the RD; diverting surface water 1mm the waste areas,
and collecting and treating surface water olTsite, treating landfill
gases using a senes of gas extraction wells connected to a
btowerfllanng facility, pnor to discharge to the atmosphere,
assessing and mitigating affected wetlands, providing for
contingency measures to address changed conditions or
previously unknown contamination problems, allowing offsite
contaminated ground water to naturally attenuate, morutoring
soil, sediment, and surface water, and implementing institutional
controls including deed, land, and ground water use restrictions.
and site access restrictions such as fencing
‘There are no chemical-specific
standards established for soil and
sediment, however, risk-based levels or
local background concentrations may
be utilized The selected remedy will
reduce potential exposure to
contaminated ground water to within
acceptable risks of to-s to to excess
cancer risk and an I- Il of less than I.
$12,624,000
(present worth)
$243,500
(annual O&M)
(2 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statef rype!
Signature Date/
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth/
Capital and
O&M Costs
“a
00
00
5 Twin Cities AS Reserve
(SAR Landfill). MN
2-Acre Former Disposal
Area for t,J S Air Force
Main Base Refuse
03/31/92
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
2-butannne and TCE.
arid metals. including
arsenic and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action rcr this site includes allowing
contaminated ground water to naturally attenuate, maintaining
the site, imnitonng ground water and surface walen and
implementing insutuuonal controls, including deed resinctions,
and site access restnctions, such as fencing
The remediation goal is to reduce the
levels of contaminantc in the ground
water to below MCLs established
under the SDWA and to ensure that
contaminant levels do not exceed
federal or state Water Qua tty Criteria
for freshwater species or potential
dnnlung water sources The
remediation will achieve a carcinogcnic
risk level within EPA ’s target range
for acceptable excess carcinogenic nsk
of 10’ to l0 . Cbetnical’specif’ic
ground water clean-up goals arc based
on SDWA MCI.s or Minnesota RAL.
Including arsenic 10 ug/l (RAt);
hetyllium I ugJl (RAL); cadmium
4 ugIl (RAL), lead IS ug/1 (SDWA),
nickel 70 ugIl (RAt), selenium 10 ugfl
(RAL). TCE 5 ug h (SDWA), and
vanadium 20 ugh (RAL)
5737 .0 (K)
(present worth)
5684.0 1K)
(present worth
O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateFTypei
Signature flatS
Remedial Muon
Threat /Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Cmts
i 0
‘0
6 Cal West Metals. NM
43 8-Acre Former
Battery Breaking.
Recycling, and
Secondary Lead
Smelting Facility
6 Crystal Chemical
(Amendment). TX
24 4-Acre Sue (6 8-Acre
Abanderned Herbicide
Manufacturing Facility
and 176 Acres oF
Affected Surrounding
Properties)
Banery waste piles.
soil, sediment, and
debris contaminated
with organics.
including PATh. and
metals, Including
arsenic and lead
12.000 ydi (wit)
2,700 ydi (source waste
maten al)
Soil contaminated with
the metal arsenic
55.000 ydi (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating.
consolidating, and treating an estimated 15,000 cubic yards of
contaminated battery waste matenats, soil, and sediment onsite
using siabitizationisolidil’icauon, disposing of the treated
matenats in the southwest corner of the fenced area and capping
the disposal area with cement and a 12-inch soil cover,
decontaminating onsite buildings and equipment, and sampling
ground water
The amended remedial action for this site includes excavating
55.000 cubic yards of contaminated ofisite soil with arsenic
levels above 30 mg/kg and placing the soil onsite; constructing
a mutulayer cap over the entire site; and implenienting
lnstiiutional controls, including land use restrictions
Chemical-specific soil and sediment
clean-up goals are established on
health-based levels for carcinogenic
and noncarcinogenic risks and include
arsenic 037 mg/kg. lead 640 mg/kg:
mercury 082 mg/kg; and PAl -Is
3 mg /kg benzo(a)pyrene equivalents
Contaminated materials with lead
concentrations exceeding 640 mgFkg
will be treated to meet the RCRA
TCLP standard of 5 mg/kg teachable
lead pnor to onsite disposal
The cap will comply with RCRA
requirements for tandtill closure The
excavation goal for arsenic in soil is 30
mg/kg
$1,557,000
(present worth)
$5,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
S5.803.3(X)
(present worth)
$ l41t079
(annual O&M)
0&16(92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
St at errypel
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
ThreatIProtilem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
a
6 Double Eagle Refincry.
OK
12-An Forntr Oil
Reclamatton Plant
09/28/92
Soil, sediment, sludge.
dehns, and SW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene and PCE.
other organics.
including PAils and
PCHs metals, including
arsenic and lead, and
acids
42.000 yd’ (soil.
sediment, and sludge)
The selected remedial action for this Site includes excavating
approximately 2.700 cubic yards of contaminated matenals from
the two offsite areas, Radio Tower and Parcel I- i, and
consolidating these onsite within the East/West lagoon along
with contaminated materials from the DER impoundment and
open areas, treating the 42,000 cubic yards of consolidated
matenals onsite using neutralizing agents for the acidic wastes
and solidificationfstahiliration to remove inorganics. using
surface water from the impoundments tn the stahiliration
processes, excavating the solidified matenal and transporting
this olTstte for disposal in a RCRA landfill, demolishing
contaminated onsite equipment or structures, including ahove-
ground storage tanks, with salvage and/or removal, disposing of
any asbestos-containing matenal, as needed, and munitonng
ground water
Chemical-specific goals for soil,
sediment, and sludge are based on
meeting a risk of l0 to lo t and an
111= 10, including lead 500 mg/kg;
PAils, and PCUs 25 mg/kg All other
residual materials will meet RCRA
TCLP regulatory limits prior to offsite
disposal
$6.400JXX)
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
6 Fourth Street Abandoned
Refinery, OK
27-Act-c Oil Refinery
and Recycling Facility
09/28 )92
Soil, sediment, sludge.
and debris
contaminated with
organlcs. including
PAils and PCBs.
metals, including
arsenic and lead, and
tnorganics. including
asbestos
1,200 yd’
(contarrunated material)
42.000 yd’
(consolidated soil,
sediment, sludge, and
debris)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
1.200 cubic yards of the contaminated material from the Parcel
H area and consolidating this onsite along with other
contaminated material, treating appmximately 42,000 cubic
yards of the consolidated soil, sediment, sludge, and debns
onsite using neutralization of the acidic waste and stabilization
of the lead-contarrunated materials, disposing of the treated
wastes at a permitted landfill, and cleaning, consolidating.
demoltshing, and salvaging and/or removing contaminated
equipment. structures, and asbestos, as necessary
Soil clean-up levels are established for
consolidated materials that will he
stabilized to ensure that leaching does
not exceed the TCLP Chemical-
specific goals for soil correspond to the
TSCA clean-up level for industrial
land use, regional guidance for setting
remedial goals. and tndustnal land use
for the FSR site These include lead
5 (K) mg/kg: PA Rc 30 mg/kg: and PCRs
25 mg/kg
56.4 (Xl.tU)
(present worth l
so
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Typel
Signature Da?d
Remedial Action
ThreatIProbtem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Rerrcdy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
ij.)
‘.0
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit
I). LA
12 8•Acre Former
Vacuum Truck and Oil
Field Dnlling Plant
09/3 1Y92
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit
2). LA
128-Acre Former
Vacuum Truck and Oil
Field Drilling Plant
09f3tY92
Soil, sediment, pit
sludge, and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beniene. other
orgarucs including
PCBt and nspthalene.
and meals, including
arsenic and hanum
19 500 yd’ (soil and
sedirrtnt)
15,100 yd’ (soil and
sludge)
Soil. sludge. and SW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene. PCI. ICE.
toluene, and xylenes.
other organics,
including dioxin,
PAils, PCBs.
pesticides. and phenols.
and metals, Including
arseruc. chronuum, and
lead
3.250 yd’ (soil and
sludge)
1.700.000 gals (SW)
The selected remedial action (or this site includes consolidation
and onsile incIneration of approximately 12.000 cubic yards of
organic- and inorganic-contaminated waste pit sludge and 7.950
cubic yards of associated soil. 12.000 gallons of tank contents.
arid 155 cubIc yards of tank sludge. followed by
stabiliradon/sotidilication of the residual ash, If necessary,
stabilizing and solidifying onsite approximately lg,900 cubic
yards of site inorganic-contaminated soil, and 600 cubic yards
of surface sediment, disposing of all of these residuals in an
onsite excavation and covenng the area with a clay cover:
allowing ground water to naturally attenuate: monitoring ground
water in the upper and lower aquifers, conducting orsite and
ofrsiie air monitonng. treating air emissions as needed, and
intplenicniing institutional controls, including deed rçstrictions
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
2,700 cubic yards of contaminated sludge and 550 cubic yards
of associated soil from the Washout Pit to 2 feet below where
contaminant levels exceed the remedial action goals. and
consolidating these materials mn the West Pit to achieve
positive drainage. backfilting excavated areas with clean soil,
and covering the West Pit with an impermeable synthetic
membrane cover, pumping and onsite treatment of 1.700.000
gallons of contaminated rainwater, with discharge of the treated
rainwater onsite. abandoning three onsite water supply wells.
and monitonng air dunng the excavation
Chernical-specilic soil, sediment, and
pit sludge goals are based on SDWA
MCLs, and include arsenic 16 ugfkg.
hatium 5,400 mg/kg. and bena.ene
0 66 mg/kg Ground water is expected
to meet the National Primary Drinking
Water and health-based standards
Cherrucal-specilic goals for ground
water are based on SWDA MCIs and
MCLGs. and include arsenic 50 ug/l
(MCI): barium 2,000 ug/l (MCI).
cadmium 5 ug/l (MCI). total
chromium 100 ugIl (MCI); total
mercury 2 ugh (MCI); and benicne
S ug/1 (MCL)
Chemical-specific remedial action
goals were developed for the
accumulated rainwater based on slate
effluent pollution concentration limits,
and for the soil and sludge based on
health-risk values Soil and sludge
excavalion levels include arsenic
16 ug/kg, barium 5.400 mg/kg:
heniene 066 mg/kg. and carcinogenic
PAils 3 mg / kg Cliemical-specilic
goals or surface water include arsenic
137 ug/l. banum 2 ugIl; bensene 100
ugh, chromium 343 ugll. endrin ISO
mg/i. lead 275 ug/l. PCE 100 ug.I,
phenol 47 ugh. and TCE 69 ugh
$1 3,026.000
(present worth)
$18,050
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$525,200
(present worth)
$5,000
(annual O&M)
(27 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Slate/Type!
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThreatlProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
‘0
6 Koppers (Texarkana
Plant) (Amendment). TX
62-Acre Former Writid
Treatment Facility
03/04/92
6 Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill. OK
72-Acre Inactive
Municipal Landfill
06 29/92
Soil, sediment, debris.
and OW contaminated
with VOCs, Including
ben7ene. loluene. and
sylenes, other organics.
including PAl-Is and
PCP. and metals,
including arseruc
Not specified
Soil. dehns. and OW
contaminated with
VOCs. Including
benzene, and metals.
including arsenic
Not specified
The amended remedial action for this ROD includes
Implementing all treatmeni actions provided for in the 1988
ROD, which include onsite soil washing as well as treatment of
ground water using an oil and water separator and granular
activated carbon treatment purchasing onsite residences,
permanently relocating affected residents, demolishing homes
and removing and disposing of debris offsiie. Implementing
institutional controls, including deed and land use restnctions.
and reclassifying the properly from residential to non-residential
use
‘The selected remedial action for this site includes repairing and
improving the esisting cap and adding a vegetative soil layer to
reduce erosion and infiltration, allowing ground water to
naturally attenuate: Installing a landfill gas monitoring system:
using ground water monitoring and periodic sampling to
monitor leachate migration, providing a contingency for active
ground water extraction and treatment. if afler 5 years natural
attenuation has not decreased contaminant levels, and
irnptemenhing institutional controls including deed, land, and
ground water use restrictions
Chemical-specific clean’up goals
remain the same as those prov ded in
the 198K ROD Soil clean-up goals
Include excavation to a 100 mg/kg
action level of total carcinogenic PAHs
based on a risk level between Ø4 and
l0 ”. Ground water clean-up goals are
not provided but were based on Best
Available Treatment Requirements
(BAT) for the Organic Chemical,
Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers Industry
All potential drinking waler impacted
by the site will meet SDWA MCLS
Cbemical.specific cleanup goals for
ground water include arsenic
005 mg/I; barium 1 mg/I; selenium
001 mg/kg; and vinyl chloride
0002 mg/kg Chemical.specilic clean.
up goals for the soil and debris were
nut provided
$1 2,400.t X)
(present woith)
$316,200-
$329,200
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
$3,600,Ifl)
(present worth)
O& M
(not provided)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
SiateIrype/
Signature Date/
Remedial Action
ThrtatfP ioblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costc
Soil, sediment. dehns,
OW, and SW
coniaminated with
VOCs, including
beniene. toluene, and
xylcnes other organics.
including PAHs and
phenols. and metals.
including arsenic,
chromium and lead
The selected remedial action for this site includes in-Situ
bioremediation of organic contaminated sediment, in-Situ
stabilization of inorganic contaminated sediment, followed by
capping. removing and treating all surface water collected from
surface irnpoundmenls. excavating and onsite containment of
contaminated soil and sediment that exceed health-based levels,
excavating and neutrali7ing low p 1-I sediment, followed by
replacing the treated materials in the onginal areas, excavating
and recycling asphaluc matenals. treating sediment and soil that
cannot be treated in-situ using prepared-bed bioremediation.
followed by stabilization, if needed, and onsite disposal and
containment, extracting and containing LNAPLs-contaminated
ground water, and treating the collected ground water along
with surface water and storm water in an onsfle treatment
faciliry with a treatment process, which would include an oil
and water separator to remove NAPLs and air stripping and/or
activated carbon to remove organics, and using either oxidation.
reduction, precipitation. and filtration or any combination of
these to remove Inorganics. injecting nutrients along with the
treated water into the contaminated portion of the aquifer to
enhance in-situ buoremediation, recycling the recovered
hydrocarbons. monitoring ground water, plugging all
unnecessary wells, and implementing institutional controls.
including deed and ground water use restnctJons and Site access
resinctions, such as fencing
The chemical.specufic standards are
based on Remedial Action Objectives
(RAOs) for each affected medium
For soil, subsurface soil, and sediment,
RAOs are health-based depending on
whether exposure would result from
leaching (ground water protection) or
ingestion Chemical-specific standards
for ground water and surface water
include arsenic 005 mg/kg. barium I
ing/kg, benzene 0005 mg/kg;
chromium 0 I mg/kg; lead 0015
mg/kg; 2-methyl napihalene 0 15
tog/kg; 2. and 4-methyiphenOl I S
mg/kg. naphthalene 0 15 mg/kg.
phenol 22 mg/kg, and toluene I mg/kg
Chemical-specific standards for
sediment and surface soil include
arsenic 25 mg/kg; barium 13,500
mg/kg. beniene 22 mg/kg:
ben7o(a)anthracene 4 I mg/kg.
chromium 1,350 mg/kg, ethylbeniene
27.000 mg/kg: lead 600 mg/kg. toluene
54.000 mg/kg; and xylenes 540.000
mg/kg Chemical-specific standards
for subsurface soil include arsenic 305
mg/kg: ben7ene 02 mg/kg: chromium
770 mg/kg. lead 865 mg/kg.
naphthalene 79 mg/kg. and phenol 125
mg/kg
6 Oklahoma Refining. OK
160-Acre Petroleum
Refinery
06 (09/92
‘0 Not specified
$31.7 l2.(L)0
(present
worth)
$425,(XX)
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statellypei
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
Thre at/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capitol and
O&M Costs
6 Prewiti Abandoned
Refinery. NM
70-Acre Abandoned
Crude Oil Refinery
09/30/92
Soil, sludge. and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
beruene. ICE. toluene.
arid sytenes. other
organics. Including
PAils, metals.
including lead, and
inorganics. including
asbestos
49.000.000 gals (GW)
The selected remedial action for this site includes extracting
contaminated ground water and using an oil and water separator
to remove NAPLs, treating approximately 43.000 gallons of
extracted NAPLS onsne using soil vapor extraction to remove
VOCs from soil, along with a thermal catalytic oxidizer to
destroy VOC vapor emissions, excavating. consolidating, and
onsite landlarming of approximately 1.175 cubic yards of waste
from the West Pits area and approximately 1.500 cubic yards of
soil contaminated with high levels of hydrocaibons. and placing
a vegetative cover over the area after completion of ireairnent.
excavating. containenzing. and removing offsite IS cubic yards
of asbestos contaminated material and soil: excavating and
treating as necessary. 1.900 cubic yards of lead-contaminated
surface soil with levels in excess of 500 mg/kg or subsurface
soil with lead levels greater than 1,000 mg/kg. followed by
ofrsite disposal; excavating any sludge retneved from the
oil/water separator. with olTsite pretreatment and/or disposal;
treating any contaminated soil identified beneath the separator
onsiie by landfarming or offsite by incineration, pending testing
results, and backfill’ng the separator area, pumping and onsite
treatment of the contaminated ground water using air sparging
to remove organics. and reinjecting the treated water Onsile,
Installing and maintaining activated carbon treatment units at
domestic welts that exceed MCLs; momtonng soil, ground
water, private wells, and air, and implementing institutional
controls, including deed, land, and ground water use restrictions.
and site access restrictions
Clean-up standards for soil and waste
are based on health-based levels and
EPA policy and provide for the
complete removal of asbestos, and the
cleanup of lead to 500 mg/kg within
the top 2 feet of soil and 1.000 mg/kg
of lead for soil depths greater than
2 feet. Chemical-specific ground waler
clean-up goals are based on state
standards and SDWA MCLs and
include beniene 5 ugfl; toluene
750 ug/l; xylenes 620 ug/l; and lead
IS ug/l. Chemical-specific goals for
soil and sludge include benzo(a)pyrefle
09 nsglkg; benzo(a)anthracene 9
mg/kg; and lead.
S 16.30l.576
(present worth)
$1,097,844
(total cost
O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefFypei
Signature Date!
Remedial Acuon
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
i - /i
7 29thandMead
Groundwater
Contamination. KS
1.440-Acre Active
Manuraciunng Facility
09F29192
7 Des Moines ICE. IA
Indusinal and
Commercial TCE Site
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. Including
1.1 DCA l.l.l-TCA.
TCE and PCE
4 IXk) (XK) ri (soil)
Not appIi ahIe
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site includes continued
operation and expansion of the existing SVE system to
remcd ate other onsite source areas, monitoring the peiformance
of the SVE system, and establishing goals dunng the RD phase.
enhancing the hydraulic control of the exisling ground water
extraction and air stopping treatment system by adding a well at
the southern site boundary, treating ground water onsute using
air stopping, with discharge oF the treated waler ofisite under a
NPDES permit. monitonng air emissions from the ground water
treatment system aid the SVE system. with possible treatment
of the emissions, if necessary, and nuonilonng the ground water
coltection/ireatmeni system and the conlaminani plume
The selected remedial action for 0U3 includes no action with
periodic ground water monutonng Ground water from the 0U3
area will continue to be captured and treated by the OUl
extraction and treatment system
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
for the expanded SVE system will he
developed during the Remedial Design
phase Chemical-specific ground waler
clean-up goals are based on SDWA
MCLs and CWA distharge limits and
mcludc l.l-DCA 7 ugh. PCE 5 ugh).
l.l.l-TCA 2(’) ug/l. and TCE 5 ugll
Not applicable
$1,638,456
(present woith)
$78,900 -
$ 182.2(K)
(annual O&M)
(I X years)
$1)
(present worth)
(O&M)
09/18/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name.
Staie/Typei
Signature Daref
Remedial Action
ThreaVPrnhlem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth/
Capital and
O&M Costs
‘3
0
7 Fazmer Mutual
Cooperative. IA
6-Acre Active Grain
Storage Facility
09129192
7 Hydro-flex. KS
2 95-Acre
Manufactunng Facility
03 109192
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including
carton tetrachlonde.
and other organics,
including pesticides
Not specified
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial anion for this site includes allowing
ground water to naturally attenuate. inonitonng ground water to
determine the effectiveness of the remedy, and providing for a
contingency in the event that use of the impacted aquifer as a
water supply is necessary prior to complete restoration This
contingency includes developing and implementing a blending
program ror the City of Hospers water from the upper and
lower aquifers until MCLs have been achieved, testing the
upper aquiter pnor to it$ use, treating contaminated ground
water for use as drinking water, or containing contaminants to
enable use of the impacted aquifer without treatment
The selected t’emedial action for this site is no further action
because there Is cun’ently no significant contamination in the
sediment-free ground water, or any significant continuing source
of contamination to the ground water from the site
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SUWA MCLs
and include carbon tetracttiorldc
0005 mg/I. chloroform 0 I mg/i:
alachlor 0(1)2 mg/I. atra;ine
o 003 mg/I. cyanrine 10 ug/l; and
meiolachlor 100 ug/l.
Not applicable
$93.000-
$ls l.um
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
SO
(present worth)
$1)
(O&M)
7 Pester Refinery. KS
10-Acre Inactive
Petroleum Refinery
09/30/92
Soil and sludge
contaminated with
VOCs. including
ethylbenzene. toluene,
and zyleries: other
organics. including
PAHs and phenols. and
metals, including
arseruc. chromium, and
lead
70.000 ydi (soil)
20.000 ydi (sludge)
The selected remedy ror this site includes dewatenng the pond
and transporting the associated sludge offsite to a RCRA facility
for re-refining into a usable petroleum product and/or disposal.
treating the soil using in-situ soil flushing: discharging the wash
water to an oil/water separator to remove free oils and
sediment, followed by nutnent addition with aeration to enhance
biological action, and discharging the water to a treatment
facility or back to the pond for continued treatment until testing
demonstrates that clean-up levels have been achieved:
moniionng air, and implementing institutional controls
including deed restrictions and site access restnctions such as
fencing
Chcmical-specilic soil and sludgc
clean-up goals are based on health-
based levels, and include
benzo(a)anthracene 13 mg/kg and
chrysene 13 mg/kg Other
contaminants of concern will he treated
10 meet EPA acceptable risk levels, if
necessary
52.374, 1 1 1 % )
(present worth)
5464.700
(present worth
O&M)
(3 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StaielTypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WotiW
Capital and
O&M Costs
‘C
-4
8 Biudenck Wood
Products. CO
64-Acre Wood
Preserving Facibty
03/24/92
Soil, debris, sediment.
arid OW contaminated
with VOCs. including
ben.rene. loluene. and
xylenes. organics.
including PAHs.
dioxins. arid other
phenolic compounds.
metals including
arsenic and lead, and
inorganics. including
asbestos
59000 yd (organic-
contaminated soil)
800 yd’ (metal-
contaminated soil)
120 yd’ (sediment)
42.000 gals (organics
and sludge)
850 yd’ (debris)
205 yd’ (asbestos-
containing meterials)
225 tons (scrap metal)
9.500 gals (GW)
The selected remedial action for this site includes demolishing
and decontaminating onsite buildings, stockpiling dehns onsite
lemporanly. then transporting approximately 850 cubic yards of
building debris and 205 cubic yards of asbestos-cuntaimng
materials offsite for disposal at a permitted landfill.
decontaminating 225 tons of scrap metal onsile. with ofisile
reclamation, pumping or excavaung sludge or liquid contents
1mm drums and vessels. stonng the drummed waste onsite
leniporanly, then transporting the waste olisite for reclamation.
pumping. approximately 9.500 gallons of contaminated water
from building sunips and basements of onsile structures, and
stabibring. drumming. and transporting the drums offsiie to a
RCRA landfill, excavating approximately 59.000 cubic yards of
organic-contaminated soil and 120 cubic yards of Fisher Ditch
sediment. dewatenng the sediment, followed by onsite treatment
of the soil and sediment using ex-siru hioremediauon in an
onsile land treatment unit (LTIJ) over a 7-year penod.
conducting trealability tests to determine the best stabilization
compound for the wastes, then treaung 800 cubic yards of
metals-contaminated soil onsiie using stabili7atlon, with disposal
at an olfsiie RCRA landfill, closing the existing surface
impoundments. recovenng approximately 526 million gallons of
ground water and light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPLs)
from the surlicial aquifer using subsurface drain trenches and
recovery wells, removing LNAPL5 in an oil/water separator,
arid reclairmng the LNAPLS at an oifsite recycling facility.
treating the remaining waler using a two-phase fixed-film
bioreacior. mixed with nutnents and an oxygenated chemical.
then retnjected into the aquifer to stimulate bactenal growth to
promote further contaminant breakdown within the shallow
aquifer. and also using small quantities within the soil
remediation processes, collecting DNAPLs and OW from
existing monitonng wells in the Denver aquifer, and treating
these in the oil/water separator, with offsiie recycbng,
monltonng OW, and implementing deed and GW use
restnctjOflS
Chemical-specific excavation goals for
soil and sediment were based on healih
nsk clean-up level indices (CLIs)
greater than I Cheimucal-specific soil
and sediment clean-up goals are based
on health-based cntcna for orgaiitc
contaminants and RCRA LDR
standards for metal contaminants and
include toluene 0 5-10 mg/kg: xylcnes
0 5-10 ing/kg. benro(a)pyrene
152 mg/kg. dibenro(a.h) anthracene
139 mg/kg; 2.3,7.8 TCDD equivalent
00006 mg/kg; pentachlorophenol.
naphthalene, and pyrene at 95-99
percent reduction: arsenic 5 mg/kg.
cadmium I mg/kg and lead 5 ing/kg
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and the Colorado Basic Standards and
include 2,3.7.8 TCDD equivalent
5x 10 ug/l: inchlomcthylcne at 5 ugh.
TCE I 6 ug/l, carhorole 4 I ugh.
phenol 623 ugh. pentachiorophenol I
ug/l. pyrene 312 ug/l. and naphthalene
41 6 ugh The ability to achieve these
clean-up levels cannot be dciermined
until the extraction system has been
implemented. thereloie, EPA may need
to modify the remedy if necessaly
This ROD provides a chemical-specific
waiver for the Denver aquifer because
of technical impracticability
$l S.55 1.033
(present worth)
S7.400. IR S
(present worth
O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelType/
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Thre atfProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WorTh/
Capital and
O&M Costs
L i )
C
00
8 Denver Radium
(Operable Unit 8). CO
ID-Acre Fonner
Radioactive Extraction
Industry
0 1/28 192
Soil, dehns, and GW
contaminated with
irietais, including
arsenic and lead, other
inorganics. Including
asbesios and
rtd,oaciive matenals
39000 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes demolishing
and decontaminating buildings. tanks, and equipment onsite,
lemporanly stonng debris from vicinity properties onsite at the
Shattuck area, pending either offsite dicposal and/or scrap
recycling, or salvaging of dehns. disposing of asbestos-
containing matenal from buildings ofIsite, conducting pilot
scale treatahility studies dunng remedial design to opumire
stabilization design, excavating and transporting 5.000 cubic
yards of radium coniaminated soil from the railroad nghts-of-
way and 6,000 cubic yards from the vicinity properties;
consolidating these with 38.500 cubic yards of soil from the
Shatiuck property, and treating the soil onstte using cement-
bawd stabilization, placing a cap over the stabilized matenal.
and revegetating the area, filling previously excavated areas
with clean fill, testing for, rerrediating and disposing of any
RCRA hazardous waste offsise, allowing the ground water to
naturally attenuate, monitonng ground water and air; and
implementing institutional controls, including deed, land, and
ground water use restrictions
Chemical-specific soil action levels are
based on Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and Department of Energy
standards for Radium-226, exceeding
5 pci/g above background in the top
15cm of soil and IS pci/g above
background in any layer below the top
IS cm, thonuin-230. 42 pcilg;
uranium; 75 pcslg. and risk-based
standards For arsenic 160 mg/kg;
selenium 490 mg/kg. and lead
540 mg/kg
S26.6(kUX)0
(present worth)
$ l20.(fll
(annual O&M)
(200 years)
8 Denver Radium
(Operable Unit 9). CO
li-Acre Former Rock
Plant
12123 /91
Soil contaminated with
metals, including
arsenic and lead
Not specified
The selected remedial action for the site includes constructing a
3 7-acre multi-media cap over onsite contaminated soil with
metal concentrations exceeding action levels, utilizing the
existing concrete floor of the bnck plant and asphalt parking lot
in concert with the bacldilled soil cap. providing inspection and
repair of the concrete floor, as necessary, upgrading the asphalt
with geotexule fabnc and an additional 6-inch layer of asphalt;
monitoring downgradient ground water, long-term monitoring 10
ensure effectiveness of the cap. and implementing institutional
controls including deed restrictions to limit the ground water
use and to maintain the integnty of the cap
Design of the cap will comply with
RCRA and state requirements
Chemical-specific soil remediation
goals, which are based on health
cnteria. Include prevention of exposure
and direct contact with action lcvel
concentrations exceeding arsenic
79 ugil. lead 1.000 ugIl, and zinc
17.000 ug/l
SI ,702a%)
(present worth)
(O&M)
(not provided)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statefl’ypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
‘0
‘0
S Hill Air Force Base. UT
6,700-Acre Air Force
Base
09/25/92
Soil contaminated with
an Inorganic, sodium
hydroxide
Not specified
The selected intenm remedial action for this site includes
removing two underground storage tanks. backfilling the
escavated area with the previously excavated soil and clean fill.
and conctructing a 29.000 square rooi sloped temporary asphalt
cap at the ground surface arter removal of the tanks to ensure
drainage of precipitation into the existing storanwater system
The tank removal project will be conducted under a state permit
and administered by the state under its Underground Storage
Tank (UST) program, under a state-issued permit. which will
regulate decontamination and proper disposal of the tanks and
their associated piping, as well as testing for contamination of
the native soil underlying the tanks and piping
Chemical-specific performance
standards for this interim action will be
specified in the final ROD for all of
0U3 This ROD invokes an ARAR
waiver on the basis that this is part of
an intenm remedy. therefore. RCRA
closure requirements will not he
attained
$55,343
(present worth)
$540
(annual O&M)
(3 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region,
Site Name,
State/Type!
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WortW
Capital and
O&M Costs
§
8 Idaho Pole. MT
50-Acre Active Wood
Treatment Facility
09 /28/92
Soil, sediment, and GW
contaminated with
organics. including
dioxins. oils, PAils,
pesticides, and phenols.
and inorganics
19.000 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this sire includes excavating
and consolidating approximately 19.000 cubic yards oF
contaminated soul from the pasture area, ditch sediment and
bottoms, and the former round house area, pretreatung the soil
onsite using an oillsoluds separaior to remove the oily wood-
treating fluid, followed by biological treatment of the
contaminated soul and sediment in a land treatment unit (L’IIJ),
and capping the LT IJ with a RCRA cap, treating 23,000 cubic
yards of soil in inaccessible locations contaminated with oily
wood treatment fluids using tn-situ soul flushing. enhancing in-
situ biological degradation of soul contaminants by the addition
of oxygen and nutrients, collecting the flushed water and
skimming the oil, combining thus oil with recovered oil From
the other sire areas, followed by recycling or offsite disposal in
accordance RCRA. filling excavated areas with clean soil:
pumping and onsute treatment of approximately 1 billion gallons
of contaminated ground water within the boundaries of the oily
plume. followed by transfer to an oil/water separator-
clarifier/filtration plant, treating the water using a fixed film
hioreactor. consolidating the solids from the separation process
into the LTU for treatment along with the contaminated soil:
treating approximately 210 million gallons of coniaminated
ground water from under the pasture area by in-situ
biodegradation. reinjecung the treated ground water onsute or
treating this using additional treatments. suth as carbon
polishing to meet POTW pretreatment standards, if necessary,
monitoring ground water providing any contaminated
residential wells with un-home carbon/reverse osmosis treatment
system until MCLs are reached, and implementing engineering
and institutional controls, including deed, land, and ground
water use restrictions
Soil and sediment goals are bawd on a
site-specific risk analysis levels and
wilt correspond to a l0 to l0
lifetime cancer risk Cherriical-specufic
clean-up goals for soil include
PCP 48 mg/kg (risk), total
B2 PAIls 15 mg/kg (risk). total
D PAHs 145 mg/kg (HO). and TCDI)
it 0001 mg/kg Ground water clean-
up levels are based on SOWA MCLs
and proposed MCLs Chemical-
specific goals for ground water include
pentachlorophenol 1 ug/l (MCL).
benao(a)pyrene 02 ug/l (MCL), and
2.3.7.8-TCDD 3xlO’ ug/l (MCL)
39,074.962
(present wonh)
$928,790
(O&M)
(10-30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Sue Name.
Staiefrypel
Signature Datef
Remedial Action
ThreatlProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
8 Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit I) UT
1.100-Acre Defense
Supply Depot
06/26/92
S Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 3). UT
1.100-Acre Defense
Supply Depot
09(28/92
Soil, debris, and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. Including ICE.
other organics.
including dior .uns and
pesticudet. and metals.
Including arsenic and
lead
4 (X1 0 y& (soil and
dcbns)
Soil and debris
contaminated with
organics. Including
pesticides: metals.
Including aisertic. and
other Inorganics
530 yd’ (toll and
debris)
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and transporting 4.000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and
debns olTsite to a RCRA pcrmrned hazardous waste or
Indusinol landlull. hackfillung the area with clean fill, extracting
and treating contaminated ground water onsute using air
slnpping to remove contaminants. add,ng a GAC system to the
air stripper if dioxins and (urans are detected in the emuent at
conceniratuons above the proposed MCI for dioxins and furans.
transporting wastcs from the groor.d water treatment process.
Including any spent carbon oITs’te ‘or incineration.
stabilization/fixation or disposal, recharging the aquifer with the
treated water using injection wells; monitonng air emissions,
and nainitodng ground water
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating.
handsoiling. and mechanically sieving 530 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and debns from he Chemical Warfare Agent
Identification Kit and the Riot Conim) and Smoke Grenade
burial areas. Incinerating offsite any debris or soul contaminated
by chemical warfare agents or grenade fragments at a DOD
facility, excavating soil and debris from the Miscellaneous
Items Burial Area. and treating soil and debns that does not
meet TCLP treatment standards using solidification, or another
appropriate technology pnor to disposal In an olfstie RCRA
landrill along with the untreated debns. returning excavated soil
that meet’ cnlena to the excavated areas, excavating and
disposing of oIfsite compressed gas cylinders and the water
punlication tablet bottles from the Compressed Gas Cylinder
and Water Punfication Tablet Burial Areas
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are heahh.nsk based and include
dioxin 0001 mg/kg. arsenic 35 mg/kg:
zinc 1.500 mg/kg: and lead 500 mg/kg
Chemical-specific ground waler clean-
up goals are also health-risk based and
Include cis- 1 .2-dichlomethefle 70 ug/l.
ICE 5 ugfl: and vinyl chloride 2 ug/l
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on a future residential
exposure scenario, which was
calculated under a residenlial ingestion
scenario where a person was assumed
to be exposed as a IS-kg child
ingesting 200 mg of soil per day for
6 years, and also a 70-kg adult
ingesting 100 mg of soil per day for
24 years These include arsenic
35 mg/kg and mcrculy 2 mg/kg
$2,200,000
(present worth)
$146,000
(annual O&M)
(7 years)
$393.(X )
(prescnl woiih)
S I)
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Statellypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WotihF
Capital and
0&M Costs
8 ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 4), UT
1.100-Acre Defense
Supply Depot
09(28/92
8 Potiland Cement (Kiln
Dust 02 & 03). UT
71-Acre Cement
Manufacturing Facility
03/31/92
Soil. debns. and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
ben2ene. other
organics. including
pesticides and PCBs.
and metals. Including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
4,500 yd’ (soil and
debris)
400 yd’ (debris)
65.000.000 gaJs (GW)
Soil and waste CKD
contaminated with
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
27.000 yd’ soil above
SIX) mg/kg lead or 70
mg/kg arsenic
3f0 tons chivn
bearing bricks
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
and transporting otfsite approxImately 4.500 cubic yards ct
contaminated soil, debris, and approximately 400 cubic yards of
waler punflcation tablets for disposal at a RCRA landfill,
conducting TCLP tests to confirm the characteristics of
excavated soil and debris and to detennine their suitability for
land disposal, treating any soil and debns failing TCLP olfsite
using activated carbon, other stahiliration/fixation methods, or.
for dioxins. Incineration, excavating and removieg any
contaminated cylinders for ofisite treatment and disposal.
backfilbi.g excavated areas with clean fill and soil, with
revegetation. extracting and treating onsite 65 million gallons of
coniaminated ground water using air stripping to remove V(JCs
and carbon adsorption to remove organics followed by
reinjection into the shallow aquifer, monitoring ground water
and air emissions, and removing wastes generated during the
treatment pmeess offsite for disposal or incineration
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
approximately 27.000 cubic yards of soil with concentrations
greater than lead 500 mg/kg or arsenIc 70 mg/kg, with onsite
solidification of soil with concentrations of lend equal to or
above S mg/I. based on TCLP analysis. treating approximately
3&) tons of chrome-bearing bricks onSite using chemical
fixation, followed by solidification. transporting all excavated
arid treated matenal olfsite to an appropnate disposal facility:
placing an 18-inch protective cover of clean fill over the entire
site, and implementing institutional controls including
restnctions. as necessary
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on the TBC remediation
criterion for PCBs of 25 mg/kg (EPA
Directive 9355 4-OIFS) and the TBC
cnteuion for dioxins of 0001 ing/l
(General Approach Used by the Dioxin
Disposal Advisory Group Regarding
Pentachlorophenol Waste) All
remaining goals are based on a future
residential exposure scenario and
include ben,ene 210 mglkg (cancer
risks of l0 ), arsenic 35 mg/kg
(cancer risk of l0 ): and lead
500 mg/kg. Chemical-specific ground
waler clean-up goals are ba.ccd on
federal MCLs for bcniene 0005 mg/i.
cls.l.2-DCE 0070 mg/i: vinyl chloride
0002 mg/I; and PO3s 0005 mg/i.
Treatment levels for soil are dictated
by federal Land Disposal Regulations
(LORs) and state solid waste disposal
regulations Soil will be treated to
5 ugfl lead, or less, as measured by
TCLP hefore land disposal. chrome-
bearing bricks will he treated to
5 mg/kg by TCLP analysis pnor to
disposal Federal and st te air
regulations on total suspended
particulates and fugitive dust control
will apply
$3.800.(XX)-
$4,500,(U)
(present worth)
S230,(XX)
(annual O&M)
(12 years)
$6,400,000
(present worth)
(O&M)
(not provided)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type)
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
8 Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE) (Operable
Unit 2). CO
6.550-Acre Nuclejr
Weapons Research.
Development.
Production, and
Plutonium Processing
Complex
09//01/92
Soil and GW
cont3rrunaied with
VOCs. Including PCE.
TCE, toluene. and
syleriet. rr tals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead.
other inorgarucs and
radioactive maicriats
Not specutied
The selected interim remedial action for this site includes
constructing an In-situ vacuum-enhanced soil vapor extraction
system to perform pilot scale remedial tests: filtering extracted
vapor using granular activated carbon, with ofisute regeneration
of spent carbon, installing ground water depression pumps at
the East Trenches Area to expose residual DNAPLs not released
through vapor extraction: collecting vapor extraction
condensates and ground water in oncite ground water holding
iank , and transporting the condensates and ground water olTsite
for treatment at a POTW. monitonng radiation levels dunng
equipment construction, mitigating any affected wetlands, and
implementing a full scale rernediaticn it pilot scale test results
show a I ppm hydrocarbon recovery rate
Soil and ground water clean-up goals
are based on health based criteria of
106 to tO’ levels for cancer risk.
background levels, and SDWA MCLs
and MCLGs They include chemical-
specific goals for ground water for
acetone tO ugh; TCE 5 ugh. sylene
10.000 ugh. toluene l.(X)0 ugh;
methylene chloride 5 ugh. aluminum
02 mg/I: antimony 06 mg/I. arsenic
005 mg/i; barium I mg/I; chromium
001 mg/I, Iron 03 mg/I. lead 0005
mg/I. mercury 00002 mg/i, selenium
001 mg/i, gross alpha II pC i/i. gross
beta 19 pCi/I; Pu ‘ 9 ’ °005 pCi/I
Cheinical-specitic clean-up goals for
soil include arsenic S mg/i. barium 100
mg/i; cadmium I mg/I. chromium 5
mg/i, lead 5 mg/I; mercury 020 mg/I,
selenium 5 ‘7 mg/I, TCE 5 6 mg/kg;
acetone 0 59-160 mg/kg. xylcncs
28 mg/kg; and methylene chlonde 33
mg/kg
present worth
(not provided)
O& M
(not provided)
8 Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE) (Operable
Unit 4). CO
6.550-Acre Nuclear
Weapons Research.
Development.
Production, and
Plutonium Processing
Complex
SW contaminated with
VOCs, including TCE.
meiiJs. including
chromium, and
radioactive materials.
including Pu “sand
Am
8,000.000 gals (SW)
The selected interim remedial action for this Site includes
constructing and utiti7ing three temporary surge tanks and
associated piping to contain and transfer water collected by the
ITS, evaporating approximately 3 million gallons of water from
pond 207-A and 5 million gallons of water from the 207-B
ponds using onsite flash evaporators and associated tanks.
transfemng the distillate to a holding tank for reinjection into
the Raw Water System for plant cooling tower usage, and
collecting the flash evaporator concentrate In holding tanks, and
Onsite soliditication of the residual, conducting treatabitity
siudies using surrogate pond waler to simulate the proposed
treatment syslerri.
Chemical.specilic surface water clean-
up goals are based on site-speciliC
radionuclide standards and MCLG5 or
MCLs and attainment of relevant CWA
water quality criteria
SR. 107 ,IXX)
(present worth)
Sl,l70.( ’U I
(annual O&M)
(3 years)
04/06/92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Regk ,n.
Site Name.
Siatefl’ypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
ThreaVProhlem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth]
Capital and
O&M Costs
8 SIlver Bow CteekfButie
Area. MT
Mining and Processing
Area
06/3 cY92
Soil. sediment. (3W.
and SW contaminated
with metals. including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead, and inorganic!
474400 yd’ (soil)
2890000 yd’
(sediment)
The selected remedial action For this site includes excavating all
tailings and contaminated soil from the by-pass channel and the
area below Pond I not planned for we-closure, and
consolidating the wastes over existing dry tailings within the
western portion of Pond 1. placing a cover of lime, fill, and soil
over the dry tailings and revegetating. modifying the by-pass
channel to safely mute potential flood flows, ustng soil and
gravel that nieet geotechnical requitements and have copper
levels of less than 5W mglkg to raise and strengthen existing
hei-ms, constructing new berms, raising and slrenglhening the
north-south aspect of the Pond I berm, and stabiliiing the east-
west aspect of the Pond 1 berm to withstand a maxitnum
credible earthquake for this area, extending and armoring the
north-south aspect of the Pond I berm: relocating the lowermost
portIon of the by-pass channel, convening the present channel
tnto a ground water Interception trench, installing pumps to
allow for a pump-back system to transport ground water and
surface water to the active area for treatment, if levels exceed
specified standards: constructing wet-closure henns to enclose
the submerged tailings and contaminated sediment, chemically
fixing tailings and sediment with lime, and flooding the w.t
closure cells with water with a pH of greater than 8 5.
construcung a run-ofT interception system along the east side of
the Inactive area and toe drains, and installing a collection
tnaiufold for both the Acuve and Inactive areas, and
Implementing ecological monitonng and Institutional controls.
including deed, ground water, and land use restrictions
Soil as final excavation grade for this
interim action will exhibit
concentrations of metals within the
ranges of arsenic $ 4-42 I mg /kg.
cadmium 0 8-4 mg / kg: copper
06-287 mg/kg; lead 8 4—45 5 mg /kg ;
and jinc 04—573 CbemlcaI specific
interim ground water clean up goals.
which are based on state drinking
water criteria, include arsenic 50 ug/i;
cadmium ID ug/l. copper 1.000 ugH.
Imn 31)0 ugH; lead 50 ugH; manganese
50 ugh; and 7inc 5.000 ugH Final
soil, sediment, ground water, and
surface waler action levels for the
various contaminants are not identified
In this ROD and will be detennined
based on ongoIng risk assessment work
at other OUa within the Clark Fork
Basin
3l8.l(KM*K)
(present worth)
367.2(10
(annual O&Ml
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelType/
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components oF
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capitol and
O&M Costs
-J
9 lawrence Livermore
National Lab (USDOE).
CA
800-Acre Multi-
disciplinary Research
Facility
0M 15/92
9 Pacific Coast Pipeline.
CA
20-Acre Petro-Che,njcal
Refinery
03/31/92
Sediment and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benrene. PCE. TCE,
and toluene. other
orgartics. including
pesticides, metals.
including lead and
chromium, and
ridioactlve rnatenals
Not specified
Soil and GW
contamjnate! with
VOCs. Including
benzene and toluene.
other organics.
including PAHs. and
metals, including
arsenic, chromium. and
lead
The selected remedial action for this Site includes using
vacuum-induced venting to extract contaminants in vapor form
from the onsite unsaturated sediment and treating using catalytic
oxidation and/or activated carbon: pumping water at 24 initial
locauons to contain and remeduate the ground water plume
using both eusting and new extraction wells, constructing seven
onsite facilities (labelled A to 0) to treat the extrocied ground
water designing each treatment system specifically to treat the
specific combinations of contaminants, including
ultravioletioxldation to treat VOCs at facilities A, B, E. and F.
air stnpping to treat the chloroform and carbon tetrachloride at
facilities C. 0. sad C, Ion exchange at Facility 0 to remove
chromium, and granular activated carbon at treatment facility F
to remove lead, controlling air emissions from the treatment
processes at all facilities using granular aciivatcd carbon.
recharging or reusing the treated water onsite: and monitoring
ground water
The selected remedial action for this site includes treating areas
that threaten to contaminate ground water at levels above site
clean-up standards using soil vapor extraction after a I-year
subsurface study: designing. constructing. and operating an
Onsute ground water extraction and treatment system that uses
activated carbon, discharging the treated ground water to the
onsite aquifer by injection, or reuse of the treated ground water
in a beneficial way, such as umgation. thermally destroying or
regenerating the spent carbon. mon itonng ground water to
ensure effectiveness of the treatment system. and maintaining a
perimeter Fence
Chemical-specific sediment and ground
water clean-up goals are the inane
stnngent SDWA MCLs and California
State MC1s and include bcn7enc
I ugFl, PCE 5 ugh. TCE 5 ugIl. Icad
15 ugh, total chromium 50 ugh. total
tnhalomethafleS 100 ugh, and carbon
tctrachlondc 0 5 ugh Sediment of the
unsaturated zone will be reinediated
iinly if it Is predicted that it would
result in concentrations above an MCI
ii allowed to migrate into the ground
water. Unsaturated 7oflC remediatmon
will be complete when modeling shows
that coniaminafltS will no longcr
migrate and cause ground water to
exceed MCL The CWA (NPDES)
discharge limits for these chemicals
will also be met if effluent waters from
the remedial treatment are discharged
to ditches or arroyos onsite
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for
ground waler in the aquifer arc based
on state MCLs, and the TBCs State
Action Level for toluene. including
benzene I ugfl (state), l,2-DCA
O 5 ugfl (state); ethylhenlefle 680 ugh
(state). methylene chloride 0 I mg/I.
and toluene 100 ugh (state action
levclfTBC)
S 104.l(X). IMX)
(present worth)
S2l .585,($)O
(annual O&M)
(50 years)
$2,300. 1 U)-
$7,000.(U)
(present worth)
$490,000
(annual O&M)
(30 ycars)
Not specified
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
St at efrype!
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Thtr aVProblem
Waste Volume
ConWonents of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woilhl
Capital and
O&M Cotta
9 Purity Oil Sales. CA
6 8-Acre Former Waste
Oil Re-refining Facility
O9/3 W92
Soil. sediment, and
debris contaminated
with VOCs. including
benzene. PCE. TCE.
totuene. and xylenes.
other organics.
including PAFIs and
pesticides. and metals.
including arsenic.
chromium, and lead
500 y& canal sediment
8.600 y& (soil)
72.000 yd’ (soil)
45.000 yd’ (surface
soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes constructing a
sluny wall around the penmeter of the site to minimize
migration of contaminants. excavating approximately 500 cubic
yardt of contaminated canal sediment and spreading them over
the site: filling the excavated areas with 8.600 cubic yards of
Imported soil, applying foam to control emissions dunng
excavation and slurry wall construction, transporting and
disposing of rubble uncovered during the excavation process
olisite. possibly at a RCRA facility, enclosing the entire length
of the North Central Canal in a reinforced concrete pipe.
treating 72.000 cubic yards of deep soil Onsite using a soil
vapor extraction (SVE) to remove VOCs: treating air emissions
from the SVE process using carbon adsorption. prior to
discharge to the air, disposing of spent activated carbon olfsite
at a pennitied RCRA facility; covering the cite with a RCRA
multi-layer cap, with a retaining wall to support the cap,
monitoring ground water, conducting environmental monitoring
to ensure the integrity of the cap: and implementing institutional
controls, Including deed restrictions
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
were not provided, however. vadose
zone monitoring will be performed to
ensure that the SVE system is reducing
the VOC mass so that It no longer
threatens to contaminate ground water
at levels above SDWA MCLs.
$36,254,000
(present worth)
$74 1 ( U)
(annual O&M)
(9.4 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelTypei
Signature Datei
Remedial Action
ThreatlProbiem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selecied Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
9 Rhone.Poulenc/ZoecOfl.
CA
13 19-Acre Pesticide
Manufacturing Plant.
Sludge Pond. end
Chemical Storage
Facility
03/04 !92
Soil. dehns. and GW
contaminated with
metals. Including
arsenic and lead
32.000.000 gals (GW)
The selected remedial action rot this site includes excavating
and removal of any offsite soil 1mm areas at the Sandoz and
Pains properties with arsenic levels greater than 5.000 mg/kg.
removing or paving over soil for properties other than Sandoz
and Barns, with arsenic levels greater than health based levels
of 70 mgfkg. treating soil at the Sandoz and Bains properties
coniarninaied with arsenic levels greater than 500 mg/kg onsitc
using silicate stabilization, excavating and treating contaminated
soil from beneath onsite structures after future demolition using
stabilization, installing a slurry wai and dewatenng around an
area of approximately 75.800 cubic yards of arsenic
contaminated soil and the ground water remaining after soil
remediation, Installing a cap and liner on the currently unpaved
portions of the Sandoz property, the Pains railroad tratk area.
and portions of the adjacent properties. monitoring ground
water with a conungency that, it arsenic exceeds 40 ugh in
penmeter wells or background levels in the deep aquifer.
ground waler treatment will be peifornwd to contain the plume.
and implementing institutional controls including deed
restrictions for the Sandoi and Bains properties and other areas
where paving is selected.
The chemical.specifiC clean-up
standard for soil is based on the health-
based standard for arsenic 300 inglkg
Ground water is based on state and
SDWA MCLs for arsenic 50 ugh.
$9. 100.000
(present worth)
SI. lO O.(U)
(total O&M
cost)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatelTypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Setected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present WoiiW
Capital 3fld
O&M Costs
9 Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 3). CA
485-Acre U S Army
Support. Service, and
Storage Facility
I 2/09/91
9 Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4). CA
485-Acre Military
Facility
O9f3 W92
Soil contaminated with
VOCs. Including PCE
and sylenes. and other
organics. including
PAHs and pesticides
Not specified
Soil contaminated with
metals, including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
15.500 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this site includes constructing
and installing an onsite soil vapor extraction system to remove
VOCs from contaminated soil, dehumidifying the air stream and
treating the collected water vapor using UV/hydrogen peroxide.
treating air emissions using granular activated carbon and
IransportJng the residual carbon offsite for recycling and
treatment, monitonng air emissions dunng the treatment
process. and sampling media after 6 months to determine
compliance with clean-up standards
The selected remedial action for this Site includes excavating
and treating approximately 13.500 cubic yards of contatrunated
soil onsite using soil washing. dcwatering and then backlilling
the treated soil onsite in the excavauon areas, and storing the
ririsate temporanly in onsite holding tanks for recycling;
treating ilnsate from the treatment process using chemical
precipitation. clanficatiorslflocculation. and chemical coagulation
to remove metals, pnor to discharge into the sanitary sewer;
dewatering the sludge containing the precipitated metals, and
stabilizing this ii necessary, followed by disposal in a RCRA
landfill or recovery at an offsite reclamation unit
Chemical-specific soil clean-up levels
are based on health-based cntcria of
reducing the noncarcinogenic HI to
approximately I and include 2-
butanone (MEK) I 2 mglkg;
ethytbenzcne 6 mg/kg; PCE 0 2 mg/kg:
and total xylcnes 23 mg/kg
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on PIlE for the priinaiy
medals of concern including arccnlc
5 mg/kg: cadmium 40 mg/kg: and lead
174 mg/kg A treatabilily variance
from LDR requirements is likely
Achievable treatment levels will be set
by field pilot tests employing the
selected technology.
$614,414
(present woiih)
$0
(O&M)
S5.02(l.tfl)
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/rypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiihl
Capital and
O&M Costs
9 Westinghouse Ele t,ic
(Sunnyvale Plant). CA
75-Acre Active
Industrial Facility
IIY I 6f91
Soil and GW
contaminated with
PCBs solvents, and
fuel compounds
400 yd’ of soil
containing greater than
25 mg/kg PCB
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating
approximately 400 cubIc yards of contaminated soil containing
greater than 25 mg/kg PCB to a depth of eight feet and
incinerating the soil at an offsiic federally permitted facility;
filling the excavated areas with clean soil and installing an
asphalt cap, permanent containment of ihe shallow contaminated
ground water onsite where DNAPLs are detected using
extraction, treating contaiiiinated ground water onsite ucing a
technology to be selected dunng the remediation design phase
based on the results of future treatahilily and bench-scale
studies, which may include using phase separation. membrane
or carbon filtration, ultraviolet/ chemical oxidation, air stripping,
and a carbon polish, with offsite disposal and incineration of
any product phase recovered. spent carbon, and/or filtration
membranes, discharging the treated ground water onsute unless
an alternative end-use for the treated effluent can be
impleniented; notifying EPA of any future intention I D cease
operations, abandon, demolish, or perform construction in
BuIlding 21, monitoring ground water, and implementing
institutional controls including deed and land use restnctions
EPA is Invoking a waiver of the
requirement to meet the MCL ror
PCB-contaminated ground water in the
source area where DNAPL Is detected
based upon the technical
impracticability of remcdiailon Soil
containing greater than 25 mg/kg PCB
will be excavated to a depth c i 8 feet,
based on EPA guidance for PCB
remediation at CERCLA sites with
restricted access The 25 unglkg clean-
up standard Is a To Be Considered
(TBC) criterion Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals are based
on the more stringent of state or
federal SDWA MCI_S. including
ben7ene I uglkg (slate); TCE 5 ugikg
(federal), toluene 1.000 ug/kg (federal).
sylenes 1.750 uglkg (slate): and PCB
05 ug(kg (federal)
$8,300,000
(present worth)
$225,000
(annual O&M)
(30 Years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefFypei
Signature Date/
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Component! of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth/
Capital and
O&M Costs
10 Arrtom (Diexier
Enterprise). ID
I 2-Acre Abandoned
Waste Oil Recycling
Facility
06 13 W92
Not applicable
Not epplicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further acuon.
which is based on the post-removal soil and ground waler
sampling. supplemental remedial soil and ground water
sampling, and the risk assessment Removal actions onsite have
reduced concentrations of conuarrunants in the soil to levels that
do not pose a nsk to human health and the environment
Not applicable
so
(present womlh)
so
(O&M)
10 Bangor Ordnance
Disposal (USN
Submarine Base). WA
12-Acre Disposal Site
I 2/10(91
Soil and GW
contaminated with
organic!. including
PCBs. metals, including
lead, and esplosive
compounds. including
TNT. DNT. and RDX
7.100 y& soil
The selected remedial action for this site include! eacavating
and consolidating approximately 7.0 (X) cubic yards of ordnance.
contaminated soil and 100 cubic yards of lead-contaminated coil
from Debris Area 2. and modifying the soil, as necessary using
mechanical or chemical means to ensure elTccliveness of
subsequent treatment, treating soil onsite using soil washing.
followed by treatment of the process leachate using
UV/oxidation. with reuse of the treated water, placing a I-food
soil cover over the residual ot-dnance-coniaminaled soil, and
mevegetating the area; disposing of any treated soil still
containing concentrations of lead above the action level offsiie
at a permitted facility, conducting treatahilily studies to suppoli
final design of the ground water restoration plan, installing
approximately eight extraction wells near the Burn Area.
pending final design; treating the extracted ground water onsite
using UVloxidition. installing an effluent polishing system. in
the event that ground water treatment is inadequate, discharging
the treated water onsite, and monitoring ground water
Chemical-specific soil clean-up goals
are based on state standards arid
include TNT 33 mg/kg; DNT I 5
mg/kg: RDX 9 I mg/kg; lead 250
mg/kg Chemical-specific ground
water clean-up goals are based on state
standards and include DNT 0 I ug/l.
RDX OS ugIl; lead IS ugh. phihalates
4 ughl; and PCBs 0 I ugul.
$2,700.(U)
(present wurih)
(O&M)
(not provided)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Sue Name.
St ate/Typel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
W& te Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Woiih/
Capital and
O&M Costs
10 Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex.
ID
21-Square .Mile Inactive
Industrial Complex
09/22/92
Soil, sediment, debris.
GW, and SW
contaminated with
organics. including
PCBs. metals. Including
arsenic and lead. and
inorganics. including
asbestos
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes revegetating
the Hillside Area with less than 50 percent cover, contour
terracing eroded hillsides and installing erosion control
structures, re-establishing npanan habitat and mitigating eroding
tailings In Smelterville flats; consolidating jig tailings into CIA.
establishing soil barriers in contaminated areas, relocating the
A-I gypsum pond sediment to CIA. capping the A-4 gypsum
pond or consolidating it within CIA. consolidating materials
from the 1982 smelter cleanup within the smelter closure.
relocating the slag pile tailings from the West Page Swamp in
Page Pond and capping the pond. Improving the channels (or
Humboldt and Grouse creeks: reprocessing. recycling, or
treating all principal threat materials, including copper flue dust
using cement-based stabilization, removing and recycling
salvageable Items; decontaminating onsite stnictures. capping
the CIA. Lead Smeller, and Zinc Plant with low penncability
caps: collecting and treating the CIA. Lead Smelter, and Zinc
Plant leachate; treating acid mine drainage from the Bunker Hill
mine in the Central Treatment Plant prior to discharge to the
wetlands treatment system: closing the onsile solid waste
landfills, continuing blood level monitoring for lead and high-
efficiency vacuum loan program to site residents, cleaning all
homes exceeding 1,000 ppm lead house dust, and implcinenting
an Intenor dust morutonng program. recovering and treating the
ground water In Government Gulch, constructing a passive
wetland treatment system in Smclterville Flats and Pinehurst
narrows to treat CIA seeps. pretreated acid mine drainage, and
ground water and surface water from Government Gulch, and
leachate from the lead and zinc closure areas, using absorption
and precipitation of metals within an anaerobic substrate, using
a second ground water system to passively treat upper zone
ground water, abandoning and closing potentially contaminated
wells, and providing an alternative source of water for army
affected residences. monitonng air, surface water, ground waler.
and implementJng instirutjonal controls, including land use
resmncijonS and fencing
Chemical-specific soil excavatnrn
goals. which are based on health-risk
levels, include lead 1,000 mg/kg Soil
will be stabilized to meet RCRA LDR
standards prior to disposal in CIA.
which will be capped Clean
replacement soil will contain less than
arsenic 100 mg/kg. cadmium 5 ing/kg:
and lead 100 mg/kg Chemical-
specific sediment and debris clean-up
levels were not specified. however.
materials that cannot be reprocessed or
recycled will be stabilized oncitc prior
to disposal in CIA Chemical-specific
ground water clean-up goals arc based
on SDWA MCLs and state standards
and include arsenic 005 mg/i.
cadmium 0005 mg/i. lead 005 mg/i:
and zinc S mg/I Chemical-specific
surface water clean-up goals are based
on federal water quality criteria under
the CWA and include cadmium
00011 mg/I. lead 00032 mg/I. and
,inc0 110mg/i
$52,035,000
(present woilh)
$11,096,000
(annual O&M)
(30 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State!rypei
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Wonhl
Capital and
O&M Costs
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs. Including
ben,ene, toluene. and
sylenes. and oils
Not specified
The selected remedial action for this site includes In- situ
bioventing of BlEX contaminated soil in the vadose zone, with
monitonng of soil gases: collecting floating petroleum
hydrocarbons from the ground water through wells, culveris, or
trenches. Incinerating recovered product onsite or trarispotling
this offsite for recycling or disposal. treating extracted ground
water, as needed, using air stripping, oil-water separation. or
carbon filtration, as determined during the remedial design
stage, and discharging the residual water onsite, morutonng
petroleum product levels: collecting BTEX.LNAPLS using
vacuum extraction wells, with carbon adsorption, Followed by
olfsite disposal of carbon residuals: treating collected liquids
using an oil and water separator, air stripper, or carbon
adsorption: destroying air emissions using tip flare incineration:
and monitoring ground water.
No chemical-specific soil and ground
water clean-up goals are provided for
this Interim remedy Final
performance goals will be ectablished
in the final remedy for site soil and
ground water remediation. All air
emissions and eliluent discharges
generated by this interim remedy will
comply with the applicable rederal and
slate environmental regulations.
10 Elrnendorf Air Force
Base, AK
13,130-Acre Air Force
Base
09 lF92
Soil and (3W
contaminated with
VOCs. including
benzene. ioluene. arid
xylenes. and other
organics
Not specified
The selected interim remedial action for this site includes
collecting and containing the floating BTEX-LNAPLs with
passive and active recovery systems: using a sump to separate
the fuel and water, then recycling the fuel: treating
contaminated ground water using air stnpping. with discharge
of the treated water offsite to a PO’flW. controlling air
emissions from the treatment process using carbon adsorption.
and disposing of spent carbon filters offsite. temporarily stonng
excavated well construction soil onsite, and monitonng ground
water
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and will be provided in the final ROD
for the 0U2 source area ST4I
S467,3 X)
(preseni worth)
S27i X)
(annual O&M)
(5 years)
10 Fort Lewis (Landlill No
5), WA
ISO-Acre Milltary
Landfill
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action:
however. onsite ground water rouniionng will continue in
accordance with slate and local solid waste landfill operating
and closure requirements
Not applicable
so
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
10 Eielson Air Force Base.
AK
l9,700-Acre Tactical
Support Insiallation
09/29/92
53.867
(capital cost)
$3,375
(annual O&M)
(5 years)
07 110 (92
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
Siatefrypel
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
10 Joseph Forest Products.
OR
l8.Acre Wood
Processing Facility
09I3W92
10 McChord AFB (Wash
RackfTreatment). WA
4.600-Acre Weapon and
Aircraft Maintenance
Facilities
09128/92
Soil and debns
contaminated with
metals. including
arsenic. chromium, and
lead, and tnorgaiucs.
including asbestos
2.796 yd’ (surface and
subsurface soil)
Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCa, other organics.
including oils, and
metals, including lead
Not specifled
The selected remedial action for this site includes demolishing
contaminated onsite stnactures. including the process, storage.
and miring tanks, and the wooden sinictures and concrete slabs.
followed by olfsite disposal. decontaminating the concrete dnp
pad and tanks, followed by recycling or offsile disposal of
debris. excavating surface and subsurface soil, with screening
and segregation of haiardous waste for nffsiie disposal with
stabibration. ii necessary. prior to disposal at appropriate
facihues, backfillirg any excavated areas, removing asbestos
from the facility, with ofisite disnosal. removing underground
storage tanks and any a sociaied contaminated soil, with
scrapping or offsite disposal. monitoring ground water, and
implementing institutional contiols. including deed and land use
restrictions or environmental notices
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavating.
consolidating, and treating fuel-contatninated soil onsile with
ex-situ bioremediation. then backfilling the treated soil into an
onsite trench. insialling passive subsurface extraction trenches to
collect LNAPLs. with onsiie separation using fuel skimmers
(oil/water separator), transporting the recovered fuel offsitc in
drums to either a recycling facility, if specilications are met, or
to a perrTutted disposal facility, conducting long-temi ground
water monitoring, and implementing institutional conirols,
Including deed and ground water use restnciions. as well as site
physical controls
Excavation goals for soil/debris arc
based on EPA’s risk standards of
for surface soil and l0 for suh’,urface
soil Chernical-specilic goals for
subsurface soil include arsenic 36
mg/kg. chromium t.35l ing/kg; and
copper l0.000 mg/kg Subsurface soil
goats include arsenic 336 ing/kg:
chromium 1,351 mgJkg and copper
10.000 mg/kg
Chemleal-specilic ground water clean-
up goals are hascd on SDWA MCLs.
MICA Method A, and background
levels, and include coil clcan-up levels
total petroleum hydrocarbons
l.(XXJ ugh (MTCA Method A). and
lead II ugIl (background)
$550.0(X)
(present worth)
S24.O( I
(annual O&M)
(3 years)
$640.(XX)
(present worth)
$54,000
(annual O&M)
(years 0-I)
$23,000
(annual O&M)
(years 3-5)
$22,000
(annual O&M)
(years 6-25)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name,
StaielTypel
Signature Datel
Remedial Action
Threat/Probtem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
/ Clean-up Goats
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
tO Mountain Home Air
Force Base (Operable
UnIt 4). ID
7-Acre Fire Department
Training Area
0&t6f92
Not applicable
Not applicable
The selected remedial action for this Site 5 no further action
Based on the results of the human health risk assessment the
USAF. EPA. and the state have determined that chemicals
remaining In the toil pose no unacceptable risks to human
heatth or the environment
Not applicable
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
GW contaminated with
VOCs. including TCE.
and metals. Including
chromium and lead
The selected remedial action for this site Includes containing the
solvent contaminated ground water using extraction, followed
by onsite treatment using metal precipitation, air stnppir.g. and
carbon adsorption. and reinjecling the treated water Into the
affected aquifer. and monitoring ground water
Chemical-specific ground waler clean-
up goals are based on SDWA MCLs
and Slate Model Toxics Control Act
(MICA) and include TC.E 4 ug/l
(MICA). l,l,l-TCA 5 ugh; l.l-DCA
200 ugh (MTCA): l.t-DCE 007 ugh
(MTCA); l.2-DCE 70 ugh (MICA):
vinyl chloride 002 ugll (MTCA);
carbon tetrachloride 0 3 ugh (MTCA):
chromium 80 ugh (MICA); and lead
4 ugIl (MTCA) Because this action
does not constitute a final remedy for
the ground water, subsequent actions
will fully address risks posed by
conditions at this operable unit
0%
10 N AS Whldbey Island-
Ault Field. WA
260-Acre Naval Faiillty
Waste Disposal Area
04 12 1192 Not specifled
$2,201,700
(present worth)
$1,230,000
(total O&M
cost)
(3 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StateITypei
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Precent WotihJ
Capital and
O&M Costs
A
— I
10 Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment).
ID
17-Acre Recycling
Facility
04/29/92
10 Pesticide Lab. Yakima.
WA
10-Acre Pesticide Lab
and Research Laboratory
09/30/92
Soil and debris
contaminated with
organlcs. including
PCBs. and metals,
including lead
8.200 yd (PCB-
contaminated and
comm ngted PCB/lead-
contaminated soil)
Not applicable
Not applicable
The amended remedial action for this site includes excavating,
processing. transporting, and ofisite disposal of approximately
8.200 cubic yards of PCB-coniaminaied and commingled
PCBflead-contarninated soil as follows- excavation and offsiie
disposal of approximately 6.500 cubic yards of untreated PCB-
contaminated soil. Ireating approximately 900 cubic yards of
contaminated soil commingted with over 25 mg/kg PCB and
lead levels exceeding 5 mg/kg. using solidification, followed by
olisile disposal in a penTulled, hazardous waste facility.
treating approximately 100 cubic yards of PCB-. lead-, and
halogenated organic compound (HOC)-contaminated waste
using offsiie incineration, followed by solidifying and disposing
of the ash offsiie, decontaminating, stockpiling onsite. and
coveting approximately 700 cubic yards of debns for possible
future salvage and recycling: and backfihling. grading, and
restoring the surface site drainage
The selected remedial action for this site includes no luriher
action with ground water monilonng for I year
Chemical-specific soil excavation goals
are based on RCRA hazardous waste
and characterization regulations and
TSCA PCB regulations. and include
I lOCs 1,000 mg/kg: lead S mg/kg
(TCLP): and PCBs 25 mg/kg
Not applicable
$2,360,500
$2,429,000
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
$0
(present worth)
$0
(O&M)
10 Umatilla Army Depot
(Lagoons). OR
19,700-Acre Army
Ordnance Depot
09/25/92
Soil contaminated with
explotives. including
DND. 2.4-DNT. HMX.
NB. TNB. TNT. and
RDX
4.800 yd’ (soil)
The selected remedial action for this sue includes developing a
cornposting lacibty onsite. consirucung a roadway between the
lagoons and the onsiie composung facility to Iransporl the
excavated and treated soil, excavating to a 5-foot depth.
approximately 6,800 tons of contaminated soil with
concentraiions of TNT or RDX exceeding 30 mg/kg. treating
the soil onsute using ex-situ bioremedjauon via composling.
backiilling the excavated lagoon areas with the compost. then
covering the compost with a 2-fool layer of clean soil and
grading and revegeiating the area
Chemical-specific excavation goals for
soil ate based on nsk-hascd remedial
action cnteria (RAC) and include TNT
30 mg/kg (RAC) and RDX 30 mg/kg
(RAC) These levels correspond to an
excess cancer nsk under the industrial
use scenario of 7xl0 . which is wiihin
the range of acceptable cancer nclec
SI ,870.(XX)
(present worth)
$t.084.(XX)
(total O&M
cosi)
(2 years)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
StatefTypei
Signature Date!
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Capital and
O&M Costs
OW contaminated with
VOCs. including TCE
and PCE. metals.
Including lead, and
radioactive materials
Sediment contaminated
with metals, including
hexavalent chromium:
other organics; and
radioactive materials
The selected remedial action for this Site includes pumping the
contaminated ground water from the injection well and treating
the ground water onsite using filtration to remove suspended
solids, followed by air stripping arid carbon adsorption to
remove organics. and Ion exchange to remove inorganics and
radlonuclides: modifying the existing TAN Onsite disposal pond
to receive treated ground water and ensure that It does not
exceed discharge limits, transponing any spent carbon olTsitc to
a permitted facility for regeneration. installing two additional
ground water monitoring wells within the contaminant plume:
monitoring air emissions: and implementing administrative and
Institutional controls. Including ground water use restrictions
‘The selected remedial action for this site Includes onsite
physical separation of large and fine-grained materials, followed
by treatment of 20.700 cubic yards of very-fine grained
contaminated sediment onsite by chemical extraction with an
acidic solution to remove cesium- 13 7 . cobalt-60, and chromium,
followed by recovering contaminants from the acidic solution
using Ion exchange, precipitation or distillation, testing
residuals, and treating to meet applicable storage and/or disposal
criteria, then storing the waste onsite temporanly until final
disposition can be determined, returning Iazger grained materials
to the pond and along with the treatment process residuals, and
backfilling and revegetating the area, conducting pilot studies to
opumJz.e the extraction process, and implementing Institutional
controls Including deed restrictions
Chemical-specific ground water clean-
up goals, which are based on SDWA
MCLs. and include TCE 5 ug/l: PCE
5 ugh, lead 50 ugh: and stmnIiuifl
300 pCihl Air emissions also will be
monitored and will m l exceed state air
quality standards, which Include
TCE 000051 lb/hr. PCE 0013 lb/hr.
lead 15 ug/in’; and strontiuin
10 mremfyd
Federal and state clean-up standards
for ceslum-37, cohalt-60. and
chromium have not been established at
this tune. Clean-up objectives for
ceslum-37 are based on a io’ to
range for cancer risk to human health
Because this action does not constitute
a final remedy for this operable unit,
subsequent actions will fully address
risks posed by the Warm Waste Pond
sediment and associated contaiiiinatlon
Not specified
10 US DOE Idaho
National Engineering
Lab (Operable Unit 2),
ID
Portion of a 890-Square-
Mile Nuclear Reactor
Technology
Development and Waste
Management Facility
09/28/92
10 US DOE Idaho
National Engineering
Lab (Operable Unit 5).
ID
Portion of 890 Squarr-
Mile Nuclear Reactor
Technology
Development and Waste
Management Facility
20,700 yd’ (sediment)
$7.71 S.IJXI
(capital cost)
$3, 194,(U)
(total O&M
cost)
(2 years)
$7,195,000
(capital cost)
5300.(Xi t)
(loIal O&M
cost)
(1.5 yeArs)
12105/91
-------
FY92 Record of DecIsion Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
State/Type)
Signature Date)
Remedial Action
Threat/Problem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean•up Goals
Present Worthl
Capital and
O&M Costs
Sediment. debns. and
sludge contaminated
with metals, including
chromium, and
radioactive materials
Soil and ordnance
debris contaminated
with organics.
Inorganics, and natural
decomposition products
The selected Interim remedial action for this site includes
removing and solidifying/stabilizing the 100 cubic yard5 of
contaminated sediment from the evaporation pond by grouting.
followed by onsite disposal in the Radioactive Waste
Management Complex (RWMC) at INEL along with existing
low-level waste containers, removing sludge and sediment From
the waste sump, treating the sludge by grouting. ii feasible,
based on the results of treatability studies, and disposing of the
treated sludge onsite in RWMC. ckconiaminating the discharge
pipe, and sampling the remaining sediment to venfy residual
contaminant concentrations
The selected Interim remedial action for this Site includes
conducting soil sampling oF the detonation areas, excavating,
containerizing, and transporting an estimated 185 cubic yards of
soil exceeding action levels ofisite For treatment using
incineration, with offslte disposal of residuals: researching
historical records pertaining to ordnance activities at INEL:
conducting a field search of the six NPG areas for unexploded
ordnance, controlled onsite thermal treatment (detonation) of
any identified ordnance, with onsite disposal or recycling of any
residual metal debris, and posting signs where the public has
access to ordnance areas
Sediment and sludge excavation goals
are based on a site-specific residential
use scenario for a population that
begins residence at the site within
100 years in the future Chemical-
specific goals include chromium
800 mg/kg and cesium-l3 7 30 pCi/g
Action levels for soil were detennined
based on health.based criteria and
Include TNT 44 mg/kg and RDX
lB mg/kg A screening level for DNT
has not been developed as it is a
breakdown product of TNT Soil at or
above these screening levels will be
excavated, containenzed. and
transported to an offsite incinerator
Any resultant ash will be dicpoccd of
by the incinerator facility
Containerl7ed soil will be sampled and
analyzed for TCLP analytes to
determine whether they should be
classified as a RCRA waste
100 yd’ (sediment)
—
‘0
10 US DOE Idaho
National Engineenng
Lab (Operable Unit 22).
ID
Portion of a 890 .Square ’
Mile Nuclear Reactor
Technology
Development and Waste
Management Facility
09/3(Yfl
10 U S. DOE Idaho
National Engineenng
Lab (Operable Unit 23).
ID
Portion of a 890-Squarr
Mile Nuclear Reactor
Technology
Development and Waste
Management Facility
06f02/92
185 yd’ (soil)
$480,000
(total cost)
(O&M)
(not provided)
$2,359,500
(present worth)
so
(O&M)
-------
FY92 Record of Decision Summary Table
Region.
Site Name.
SiateIrypel
Signature Da le)
RemedIal Action
itireaUProblem
Waste Volume
Components of
Selected Remedy
Clean-up Goals
Present Worth!
Caplial and
O&M Costs
10 WyckofflEagle Harbor.
WA
33W-Acre InactIve
Wood Treatment Facility
and Shipyard
09 / 29 /92
Subildal/intertidal
sediment and upland
sxrces contaminated
with organics.
Including PAl-Is, and
rrwtals, Including
arsenic, chromium, and
lead
314.9W en ’ (sediment)
The selected remedial action for this site includes dredging,
dewatenng, excavating approximately 1.000 to 7.000 cubic
yards of intertidal sediment thai exceeds levels of 5 mg/kg
mercury and/or lower moderate PAH concentrations, followed
by treatment using solidilication/siabilization, as necessary, to
comply with LDR as determined by bench scale tests;
transporting sediment, which cannot be treated to meet LDR
offsite for disposal at a RCRA permitted landfill, treating
wastewater from the dewatering process onsite using carbon
adsorption before discharge into the harbor, capping the
sediment In areas of high concern with a I-meter thick layer of
clean sediment; placing a thin layer of clean sediment in
subtidal areas of low to moderate concern to enhance natural
sediment recovery, conducting long-term environmental
motutonng; and Implementing Institutional controls to prevent
exposure to contaminated fish and shellfish.
Sediment clean-up goals are based on
the Staie of Washington Sediment
Management Standards (Sediment
Standards), which provide chemical
criteria for both a minimum clean-up
level (MCUL) and he more stringent
sediment quality standards (SQS).
Chemical-specific goals for defining
cleanup areas Include anthracene 1,200
mg/kg; chrysene 460 mg/kg;
naphihalene 170 mg/kg; pyrene 1.400
mg/kg; and mercury 058 mg / kg
(MCLJL) the long-term goal for the
harbor Is the SQS.
$6,200,000-
$16,000,000
(present worth)
11.100.000
(present worTh
O&M)
(10 years)
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX
S
Listed below are major keyword categories and subcategones for Superfund PY 1992 Record of Decision
(ROD) abstracts presented in this document. The keyword category list is followed by a comprehensive
listing of each ROD containing each of the noted keywords, listed by site, State, and Region.
Primary Hazardous Substances Detected Remedy Selection
Acids ARAR Waiver
Arsenic Institutional Controls
Asbestos Interim Remedy
Benzene No Action Remedy
Carcinogenic Compounds O&M
Chromium ROD Amendment
Dioxin
Inorganics (other than metals) Water Supply
Lead
Metals Alternate Water Supply
Mining Wastes Drinking Water Contaminants
Oils
Organics Site-Specific Characteristics
PAHs
PCBs Floodplain
PCE Sole-Source Aquifer
Pesticides Wetlands
Phenols
Radioactive Materials Sandards/Regulations/PermitslGuidance
Solvents
TCE Hybnd/Alternate Closure
Toluene Clean Air Act
VOCs Clean Water Act
Xylenes Water Quality Cntena
RCRA
Contaminated Media Closure Requirements
Clean Closure
Air Landfill Closure
Debris Safe Drinking Water Act
Ground Water MCLS
Sediment MCLGs
Sludge State Standards/Regulations
Soil Toxic Substances Control Act
Surface Water Public Health Advisory
State Guidance
Public Health and Environmental Threats State Permit
Direct Contact
Public Exposure
421
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
Testing/Pilot Studies Miscellaneous
Leachability Tests Municipally-Owned Site
Treatabthty Studies
Historically Significant
Technology
ACL
Aeration Background Levels
Air Monitoring Deferred Decision
Air Stripping Initial Remedial Measure (IRM)
Biodegradation/Land Application Contingent Remedy
Capping
Carbon Adsorption (GAC)
Decontamination
Dredging
Excavation
Filling
Ground Water Monitoring
Ground Water Treatment
Incineration/Thermal Destruction
Leachate Collection/Treatment
Levees
Offsite Discharge
Offsite Disposal
Offsite Treatment
Onsite Containment
Onsite Discharge
Onsite Disposal (includes residuals)
Onsite Treatment
Plume Management
Publidy Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Relocation
Slurry Wall
Soil Washing/Flushing
SolidificatIon/Stabilization
Solvent Extraction
Surface Water Collection/Diversion
Surface Water Monitoring
Surface Water Treatment
Temporary Storage
Treatment Technology
Vacuum Extraction
Venting
Volatilization/Soil Aeration
Vitrthcation
422
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
Listed below are major keyword categories and their subcategones for Superfund Records of Decision (RODs)
Following each of these categories is a broad sampling of RODs containing the listed keyword. Some categories
may become obsolete or new categories may develop over time due to changes in the focus of the Superfund
remedy selection process; these categones have been noted, as appropnate. The Superfund managers in each
Region have copies of all RODs.
KEYWORDS (BY CATEGORY) AND ASSOCIATED ROD SITES
(BY SITE, STATE (REGION))
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Acids
Fike Chemical, WV (Ill), U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I). VA (III). Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), Sc (IV); Spickler Landfill,
WI (V), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI)
Arsenic
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), Newport Naval EducationTl’rairung Center. RI (1). PSC
Resources, MA (I), Ellis Property. NJ (II), Facet Enterprises, NY (II), lxnpenal Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ
(II). Industrial Latex, NJ (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Preferred
Plating, NY (II), Ramapo Landfill. NY (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). C & D
Recycling, PA (III), Lindane Dump, PA (III). Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III), Tonolli. PA (ill), U.S
Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I), VA (III), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit
5), VA (III), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV), Benfield industries, NC ( IV), Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant). AL (IV).
JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC ( IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC ( IV), Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Butterworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V),
Cannelton Industries, Ml (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Electrovoice. Ml (V). H Brown
Company, Ml (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V), Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Skinner Landfill, OH (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V). Torch Lake
(Operable Units I and 3). MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN
(V), Ca] West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI).
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI), Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill. OK (VI). Oklahoma
Refining, OK (VI), Pester Refinery, KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (yin). Denver Radium (Operable
Unit 8). CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT
(VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (Vfll). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII).
Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3). UT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII).
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (LX),
Rhone-PoulencIZoecon, CA ( IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), WyckofUEagle Harbor. WA (X)
423
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Asbestos
Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II), Fike Chenucal, WV (III); Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV);
Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI);
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8).
CO (VIII); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Joseph Forest Products. OR CX)
Benzene
Newport Naval Education/Training Center. RI (I). PSC Resources, MA (I), 1ibbetts Road. NH (I), Endicott
Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II); Facet Enterprises. NY (II); Higgins Farm. NJ (II),
Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill. NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II); Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable
Unit 7). NJ (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II). Ramapo Landfill, NY (II); Rowe Industries Groundwater
Contamination. NY (II). Chem-Solv, DE (III ). Lindane Dump. PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III); Strasburg
Landfill, PA (III). U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (III); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh
Plant), AL (IV), National Electnc Coil/Cooper md, KY ( IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV);
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV). USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN (IV), USMC
Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), American
Chemical Services, IN (V), Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V); City
Disposal Samtary Landfill, WI (V). Clare Water Supply. MI (V); Electrovoice. MI (V), H.Brown Company. Ml
(V).Hagen Farm. WI (V). Kohler Landfill, WI (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V). New Bnghton Ardefl
Hills. MN (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V), Skinner Landfill,
OH (V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V).Tar Lake. Ml (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Double Eagle Refinery, OK
(VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2).
LA (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill. OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewilt Abandoned Refinery.
NM (VI). Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable
Unit 4). UT (VIII), Jasco Chemical. CA (IX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX), Pacific
Coast Pipe Lines. CA (DC). Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X);
Elniendorf Air Force Base. AK CX)
Carcinogenic Compounds
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I). Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I).
Newport Naval Education/Training Center. RI (1). Otis Au National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I). PSC
Resources. MA (I), Tibbens Road, NH (I). Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(Ii), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis Property, NJ (II). Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); Evor Phillips
Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterpnses. NY (II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). Higgins Farm,
NJ (ii). Imperial OillChampion Chemicals. NJ (II). industrial Latex. NJ (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill.
NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II). Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7). NJ (TI), Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II), Plattsburgb Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1). NY (II). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 3). NY (II), Preferred Plating. NY (El). Ramapo Landfill. NY (II). Robintech/National Pipe, NY (II), Rowe
Industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). Abex Corp, VA (III), Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (III), Butz
Landfill. PA (lU) C & D Recycling. PA (UI). Chem-Solv, DE (ill); Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA
(III). Dublin Water Supply. PA (III). Eastern Diversified Metals. PA (UI); Fike Chemical. WV (III); Lmdane
Dump. PA (III). MW Manufactunng. PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III). Raymark, PA (III). Rhinehart Tire Fire
424
-------
SECTiON IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Carcinogenic Compounds (Continued)
Dump, VA (III); Strasburg Landfill, PA (111); Tonolli, PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable
Unit I), VA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (ill); USA Aberdeen,
M.icbaelsville, MD (III); Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV); Alabama Army
Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Benfield Industries, NC (IV), Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (IV); Ciba-Geigy
(Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Florida Steel, FL (IV). Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV); Milan Army Ammunition Plant.
TN (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper md, KY (l v), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV); Potter’s
Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV); Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV); Standard Auto
Bumper. FL (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military
Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV),
Aisco Anaconda. OH (V), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), Ml (V),
Butterworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V); Cannelton Industries, Ml (V); Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), City
Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Clare Water Supply, Ml (V), Electrovoice. Ml (V); H.Brown Company. Ml
(V). Hagen Farm. WI (V), Kohler Landfill. WI (V); La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), MIDCO I
(Amendment). IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V); Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); New
Bnghton/Ardcn Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating Ml (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V),
Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V); Savanna Army Depot. IL (V); Skinner Landfill. OH (V),
South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake. MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable
Units I and 3), MI (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill). MN (V), Cal West
Metals. NM (VI). Crystal Chemical (Amendment). TX (Vi); Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Fourth Street
Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI). Koppers (Tex trkana Plant)(Amendmeflt), TX (Vi). Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI), 29th & Mend
Groundwater Contamination, KS (VU). Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative, lÀ (VII). Pester Refinery, KS (VII).
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII). Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I).
UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4). UT
(VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO
(VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4). CO (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII),
Hassayampa Landfill, Al. (IX), Iron Mountain Mine. CA (IX), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX). Lawrence Livermore
National Lab (USDOE), CA (I X). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (LX), Punty Oil Sales. CA (LX),
Rbone-PoulenclZoecofl. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (LX). Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4). CA (IX). Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA ( IX). Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X). Elmeridorf Air Force Base, AK (X). Joseph
Forest Products. OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA (X). N.A.S Whidbey Island- Ault Field,
WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), II) CX). Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons). OR (X). US
DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 22). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Ei gineenng Lab (Operable Unit 23). ID (X),
Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA CX)
42$
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Chromium
Bninswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (I); Tibbens Road. NH (I); Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH
(I); Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II); Ellis Property. NJ (Ii); Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (Ii); Facet Enterpnses,
NY (II); Ishp Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II); Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (II);
Preferred Plating, NY (II). Rainapo Landfill, NY (II); Rowe Industnes Groundwater Contamination, NY (II);
Abex Corp, VA (11!): C & D Recycling, PA (III); Lindane Dump, PA (III); U.S Defense General Supply Center
(Operable Unit 1). VA (ill), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsviie, MD (III); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV);
WI) ElectrorucslChanflel Master, NC (IV); Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV); New Hanover County Airport
Burn Pit, NC (IV); Porter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operabie Unit 2), SC
(IV), Standard Auto Bumper, FL (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste
Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV). Aisco Anaconda, OH (V); Amencan Chemical Services, IN (V), Butterworth #2
Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton Industries, MI (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Electrovoice, MI (V);
H.Brown Company, Mi (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II
(Amendment), IN (V), New Brighton/Arden Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating, Ml (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical
(Indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V); Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). Ml (V), Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI),
Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Pester Refinery, KS (VII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII);
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (Viii), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO
(Viii), Silver Bow CreekfButte Area. MT (VIII). Hassayainpa Landfill, AZ (LX), Lawrence Livermore National
Lab (USDOE), CA (LX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), N.A.S Whidbey Island - Auli Field. WA (X). US
DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 22), ID CX). Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor. WA (X)
Dioxin
Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III). Fike Chemical. WV (III). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2),
LA (VI); Brodenck Wood Products. CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I).
UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII)
inorganics
Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (Ii), Endicott Village Well Field. NY (Il), Preferred Plating. NY (II). Fike
Chemical. WV (III), Agrico Chemical. FL (IV). Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV). Ciba-Geigy
(Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV). JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV);
Alsco Anaconda. OH (V).Cannellon Industries, MI (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Electrovoice.
MI (V). M [ DCO I (Amendment). IN (V). MIDCO Ii (Amendment), iN (V), Peerless Plating. MI (V),Reilly Tar
& Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN (V),Spickler Landfill, WI (V). Prewiti Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI);
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base. UT (VIII), Idaho Pole. MT (VIII); Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Silver
Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex ID CX), Joseph Forest
Products. OR CX). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5). ID CX). US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23). ED CX)
426
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUSSUBSTANCES DETECTED
Lead
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME (I); Newport Naval EducaiionlTraimng Center, RI (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I); Tibbens Road, NH (I); Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II); Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II),
Ellis Property, NJ (If); Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II); Facet Enterprises, NY (U); Imperial Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ (II). Industrial Latex. NJ (11). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill. NY (II); Plattsburgh Air Force
Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II), Preferred Plating. NY (II); Ramapo Landfill, NY (II); Rowe Industries
Groundwater Contamination. NY (11), Abex Corp. VA (III), Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (III), C & D
Recycling, PA (III). Eastern Diversified Metals. PA (III), Lindane Dump, PA (Ill), Rhrnehart Tire Fire Dump.
VA (III), Tonolli, PA (III), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (ill): Agrico Chemical. FL (IV), Alabama Army
Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Benfleld industries. NC (IV), Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy
(McIntosh Plant), AL (IV), Flonda Steel. FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base. GA (IV). National Electric
Coil/Cooper Ind, KY (IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pus.
NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I). SC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). SC
(IV), Standard Auto Bumper, FL (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV), USMC
Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), Alsco
Anaconda, OH (V), American Chemical Services, IN (V). Butterworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton Industries,
MI (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Electrovoice. Ml (V), H Brown Company, MI (V). Hagen
Farm, WI (V), Kohler Landfill, WI (V) MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V).
New Brighton/Arden Hills. MN (V), Peerless Plating. MI (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN
(V). South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V). Spickler Landfill, Wi (V). Torch Lake (Operable Units I and
3), Mi (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Double Eagle Refinery. OK (VI). Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery.
OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit
2). LA (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI). Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (Vi). Pester Refinery, KS (VII).
Brodenck Wood Products. CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable
Unit 9), CO (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit
4), UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3). UT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2),
CO (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII). Hassayampa Landfill, AZ ( IX), Iron Mountain Mine, CA
(LX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (LX). Purity Oil
Sales, CA (IX). Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Bunker
Hill Mining and Met.allurgical Complex, ID (X). Joseph Forest Products. OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash
Rack/Treatment), WA (X). N A S Whidbey island - Ault Field. WA (X). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling
(Amendment). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle
Harbor. WA (X)
Metals
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI (I). PSC
Resources, MA (I). Tibbeits Road. NH (I). Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
(II). Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II). Ellis Property, NJ (II). Endicoti Village Well Field. NY (II) : Evor Phillips
Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterpnses. NY (II). imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (U).
lshp Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II). Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable
Unit 7). NJ (U); Plattsburgb Air Force Base (Operable Unit I), NY (II), Platisburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 3). NY (11); Preferred Plating. NY (II). Rarnapo Landfill, NY (II). Rowe industries Groundwater
Contamination, NY (II). Abex Corp. VA (III). Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (III). Butz Landfill. PA (UI),
427
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION F? 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Metals (Continued)
C & D Recycling, PA (ifi); Chem-Solv, DE (III); Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III), Fike Chemical, WV (III);
Lindane Dump. PA (III); MW Manufacturing, PA (UI); Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III); Suasburg Landfill,
PA (III); Tonolli, PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA (Ill); U.S. Defense
General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (III); USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (UI); Agnco Chemical,
FL (IV): Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV). Benfleld industries. NC (IV); Carrier Air Conditioning,
TN (IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Florida Steel. FL (IV). JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC
(IV); Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV). National Electric Coil/Cooper md, KY (IV); New Hanover County
Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit
1), SC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV); Standard Auto Bumper, FL ( IV); USDOE
Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV ), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation. NC (IV):
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV); Alsco Anaconda. OH (V); Amencan Chemical Services, IN
(V), Butterworth $2 Landfill, MI (V), Cannelton industries. MI (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V);
Electrovoice. MI (V), H.Brown Company. MI (V): Hagen Farm. WI (V); Kohler Landfill, WI (V); La Grande
Sanitary Landfill. MN (V); MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V), M [ DCO II (Amendment). IN (V), New
Bnghton/Ardefl Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating, M l (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V),
Skinner Landfill. OH (V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN (V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V): Torch Lake
(Operable Units I and 3). Ml (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V); Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN
(V), Cal West Metals. NM (VI). Crystal Chemical (Amendment). TX (Vi). Double Eagle Refinery. OK (VI);
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI); Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill. OK (VI). Oklahoma
Refining. OK (VI), PrCWIII Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). Pester Refinery, KS (VU). Broderick Wood Products.
CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII). Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9). CO (VIII). Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII). Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4). UT (VIII). Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & $3), UT (VIII). Rocky Flats
Plant (USDOE)(Opcrable Unit 2). CO (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII), Silver
Bow CreeklButte Area, MT (VIII). Hassayanipa Landfill. AZ (IX). iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX). Lawrence
Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (LX). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales. CA (IX):
Rhone PouleflC/ZOeC0fl. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX): Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex. ID (X). Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash Rackflrealmeflt), WA
(X). N.A.S Whidbey Island• Ault Field. WA (X). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment). ID (X). US
DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab
(Operable Unit 5). ED (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle
Harbor. WA (X)
Mining Wastes
Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). M l (V), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII), Iron Mountain
Mine. CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X)
428
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Oils
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA
(III); Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
(IX); Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X); McChord AFB (Wash Rackfrreatment), WA (X); Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment), ID (X)
Organi&VOCs
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I) . Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I),
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI (I), Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbetts Road. NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis Property, NJ (II); Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor Phillips
Leasing, NJ (II), Facet Enterprises, NY (U): General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm,
NJ (II). Impenal Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II) , Industrial Latex, NJ (II); Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill.
NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (II). Naval Air Engineenog Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operdble Unit I). NY (II), Plansburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 3), NY (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II). Ramapo Landfill. NY (II). Robintech/National Pipe. NY (II), Rowe
indusmes Groundwater Contamination, NY (II). Abex Corp, VA (III), Butz Landfill, PA (Ill): Chem-Solv. DE
(Ill). Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (III). Dublin Water Supply. PA (Ill). Eastern Diversified Metals,
PA (III), Fike Chemical, WV (III), Lindane Dump, PA (111); MW Manufacturing, PA (III). Paoli Rail Yard, PA
(III), Rayrnark, PA (III), Strasburg Landfill. PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I),
VA (Ill), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (Ill), USA Aberdeen. Michaelsville. MD
(III), Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (HI). Agnco Chemical. FL (IV). Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL
(IV). Benfield Industries. NC (IV). Camer Air Conditioning. TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant), AL (IV),
florida Steel, FL (TV); Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV).
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV). Manne Corp Logistics Base. GA (IV), Milan Army Ammunition
Plant. TN (IV); National Electric Coil/Cooper hid. KY (IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV),
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV), Savannah
River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3). SC (IV), USDOE Oak
Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation. NC (IV),
Whitebouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump. FL (IV). Aisco Anaconda. OH
(V).Amencan Chemical Services. IN (V). Bofors Nobel (Amendment). Ml (V),Bunerworth #2 Landfill. Ml
(V) .Cannelton lndusmes. Ml (V). Central Illinois Public Service. IL (V). City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI
(V).Clare Water Supply, MI (V).Electrovoice, MI (V). H Brown Company. MI (V), Hagen Farm. WI (V).
Kohier Landfill. WI (V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill. MN (V). MLDCO I (Amendment). IN (V). MIDCO II
(Amendment), iN (V). Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), New Bnghton/Arden Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating.
Mi (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park). MN (V).
Savanna Army Depot. IL (V), Skinner Landfill. OH (V),South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler
Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V). Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). MI (V),Tn County Landfill. IL (V).
Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill). MN (V),Cal West Metals, NM (VI); Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI);
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI); Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI): Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI). Mosley
Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI); Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). 29th &
Mend Groundwater Contamination. KS (V I I). Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (VII). Pester Refinery. KS (VII),
429
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Organi&VOCs (Continued)
Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VU!); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT
(VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII);
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4). CO
(VIII), Hassayampa Landfill. AZ (IX) : Jasco Chemical, CA (IX); Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE),
CA (IX); Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX); Purity Oil Sales. CA (LX); Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit
3). CA (IX). Westinghouse Electric Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex,
ID (X); Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X), McChord AFB (Wash
Rack/Treatment), WA (X); N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X); Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling
(Amendment), ID (X); Umanila Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X); US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab
(Operable Unit 2). ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle
Harbor, WA (X)
PAHs (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
PSC Resources. MA (I). Tibbetts Road, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Endicott Village Well Field,
NY (II), Facet Enterprises. NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Imperial
OiL/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II). industrial Latex, NJ (II). Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 1). NY (II); Ramapo Landfill, NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (III), MW Manufactunng. PA (III), U.S. Defense
General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1). VA (III); Agnco Chemical. FL (IV). Benfield Indusmes. NC (IV);
Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Cannelton Industries, MI (V),
Central Illinois Public Service. IL (V), Electrovo’ce. MI (V), H Brown Company. MI (V), Kohier Landfill. WI
(V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN (V). Reilly Tar &
Chemical (SL Louis Park). MN (V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V),Tar Lake, Ml (V), Torch Lake
(Operable Units I and 3), MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V); Cal West Metals, NM (VU. Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1).
LA (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI). Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amefldmeflt). TX
(Vi), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Pester Refinery, KS (VII), Brodenck
Wood Products, CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII): Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4). UT (VIII), Pacific
Coast Pipe Lines. CA (LX). Purity Oil Sales. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (IX).
Wyckofu/Eagle Harbor. WA CX)
PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls)
PSC Resources. MA (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Ellis Property. NJ (Ii), Endicoti Village Well Field.
NY (II). Facet Enrerpnses, NY (II): General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). imperial Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ (II), industrial Latex, NJ (II). Km-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable
Unit 7), NJ (II), Plansburgb Air Force Base (Operable Unit I), NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (Ill). Eastern
Diversified Metals, PA (III); Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III); Florida Steel, FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base. GA
(IV); USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL
(IV); Yellow Water Road Dump. FL (IV): Aisco Anaconda, OH (V), A ncafl Chemical Services. IN (V),
Buuerworth #2 Landfill, MI (V), Cannelton Industries, Ml (V); H.Browri Company. Ml (V), Muskego Sanitary
430
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
PCBs (Polychiorinated Biphenyls) (Continued)
Landfill, WI (V); Skinner Landfill, OH (V); South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN Cl); Tn County Landfill, IL
(V);Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (Vi); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services
(Operable Unit 2), LA (VI); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII); Westinghouse Electric
(Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X); Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment), II) (X)
PCE (TetrachloroethylenelPerchloroethylefle)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I): Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbetis Road. NH (I), Ellis Property, NJ (II). Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor
Phillips Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterprises, NY (H). Higgins Farm. NJ (II). Industrial Latex. NJ (II). Islip
Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II); Preferred Plating,
NY (II). Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II); Butz Landfill, PA (III). Commodore
Semiconductor Group, PA (Ill). Dublin Water Supply. PA (Ill), Fike Chemical, WV (III). MW Manufacturing.
PA (III), Raymark, PA (Ill). U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (Ill), JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1). SC (IV): Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV), Clare Water
Supply, Ml (V). Electrovoice, Ml (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), In County Landfill, IL (V), Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI); 29th & Mend Groundwater
Contamination, KS (VII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX).
Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX), Punry Oil Sales, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 3). CA (IX). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID CX)
Pesticides
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II). Evor Phillips Leasing. Ni (II): Industrial Latex. NJ (II). Plati.sburgh Air
Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II), Fike Chemical, WV (III), Lmdane Dump. PA (III). MW Manufacturing.
PA (lii), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA (Ill), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville. MD
(111). Agrlco Chemical. FL (IV). Benfield Industries. NC (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Geigy
Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV), Butterworth #2 Landfill. MI
(V),Cannehon Indusines, Ml (V). H Brown Company. Ml (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Savanna
Army Depot, IL (V), Skinner Landfill. OH (V), Spickler Landfill, Wi (V), Tn County Landfill, EL (V), Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI), Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (VII). Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Lawrence Livermore
National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA
( IX), NA.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field. WA (X)
Phenols
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). Industrial Latex, NJ (II), Ramapo Landfill. NY (II); Fike
Chemical. WV (III), Lmdane Dump. PA (III). MW Manufacturing, PA (UI); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment), FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V); Cannelton industries, MI (V), Central illinois
Public Service. IL (V).City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); H.Brown Company. MI (V); Kohler Landfill.
431
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD UST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Phenols (Continued)
WI (V); Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), New Brighton!Arden Hills, MN (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (St.
Louis Park), MN (V); Tar Lake, MI (V), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI); Oklahoma
Refining, OK (VI); Pester Refinery, KS (VII); Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VU!)
Radioactive Materials
Agnco Chemical, FL (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV); Denver Radium (Operable Unit
8), CO (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable
Unit 4), CO (VIII), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); US DOE Idaho National Engineering
Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X), US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID (X)
Solvents
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I); Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I);
Newport Naval Educauoaffraimag Center, RI (I); Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I); PSC
Resources, MA (I); Cosderi Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II); Ellis Property. NJ (II),
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterpnses. NY (II); General
Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II). Higgins Farm. NJ (II); linpenal OiliChampiofl Chemicals, NJ (II);
lndustrial Latex. NJ (II); Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II);
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II), Plattsburgh Air
Force Base (Operable Unit 1). NY (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II); Raznapo Landfill, NY (II). Robintech/NatlOnal
Pipe. NY (II), Rowe industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). Bucz Landfill. PA (III), Cbem-Solv, DE
(Ill). Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (III), Dublin Water Supply. PA (Iii). Fike Chemical, WV (III).
Lindane Dump. PA ( III), MW Manufacturing. PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III). Raymark. PA (III). Strasburg
Landfill, PA (III). U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I). VA (UI); U.S. Defense General
Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (III). USA Aberdeen, Mictiaeisville. MD (III), Westinghouse Elevator
Plant., PA (ill). Benfield industries. NC (IV). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel
Master, NC (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper lad. KY (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV),
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I). SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOPerabIe Unit 2). SC (IV),
USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV). USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation. NC
(IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pus (Amendment). FL (IV). American Chemical Services. IN (V), Bofors Nobel
(Amendment), MI (V). Butterworth #2 L.andfiul, Ml (V), Cannelton industries, Ml (V);Central Illinois Public
Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Clare Water Supply, Ml (V), ElectrovOiCe, MI (V),
ILBrown Company, Ml (V). Hagen Farm. WI (V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V).
MIDCO U (Amendment). IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); New BrightonJArdefl Hills, MN (V),
Peerless Plating, Ml (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Skinner Landfill, OH (V).South
Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN (V). Spickler Landfill, WI (V); Tar Lake, MI (V), Tn County Landfill. IL (V),
Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill). MN (V), Double Eagle Refinery. OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI); Mosley Road
Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI): Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI); Prewiti Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI); Pester
Refinery. KS (VII), Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot
432
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Solvents (Continued)
(Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Rocky Rats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII): Hassayampa Landfill,
AZ (IX); Jasco Chemical, CA (LX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); Pacific Coast
PipeLines, CA ( IX); Purity Oil Sales, CA (LX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX);
Westinghouse Eleciric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX): Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X); McChord AFB (Wash
RackiTreatmenO, WA (X), N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X); US DOE Idaho National Engineering
Lab (Operable Unit 2), ED (X)
TCE (Trichloroethylene)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I), Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I); PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbetis Road, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II),
Ellis Property, NJ (II); Endicoti Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II), Facet Enterprises,
NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (U),
Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley
Solvents & Chemical, NY (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II), Robintech/National Pipe. NY (II), Rowe Industries
Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Butz Landfill. PA (III). Chem-Solv. DE (Ill). Commodore Semiconductor
Group. PA (Ill). Dublin Water Supply, PA (III), MW Manufacturing, PA (III), Raymark, PA (III); Strasburg
Landfill. PA (Ill), Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (III): Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (TV), Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper lnd, KY
(IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I). SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Opernble Unit 2), SC
(IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6).
TN (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). American Chemical Services, IN (V),
Butterworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton Industries, Ml (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Clare
Water Supply. MI (V). Electrovoice, MI (V). Kohier Landfill. WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO
I] (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), New BnghtoniArden Hills, MN (V); Peerless
Plating, MI (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V). Tn County Landfill. IL (V). Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill),
MN (V), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI), 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination,
KS (VII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII), Rocky flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2).
CO (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII), Hassayainpa Landfill, AZ (IX), Jasco
Chemical, CA (IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX), Punt) Oil Sales, CA (IX),
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (LX). N A S Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X). US DOE
Idaho National Engrneenng Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X)
Toluene
Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Endicon Village Well Field. NY (II), Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II). Facet
Enterpnses. NY (U). Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (II), lslip Municipal
Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II). Rowe industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III), Strasburg
Landfill, PA (Ill), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA ( [ II), Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh
Plant), AL (IV), National Electric CoilJCooper Ind. KY (IV); Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV):
USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV);
Amencan Chemical Services, IN (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, Wi
433
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PRIMARY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETECTED
Toluene (Continued)
(V); Electrovoice, MI (V); H.Brown Company. MI (V); Hagen Farm, WI (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V); MIDCO
I (Amendment). IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V); Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V); Peerless Plating,
MI (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Spickler Landfill. WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V),
Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI); Oklahoma Refining.
OK (VI); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI); Pester Refinery, KS (VII); Brodenck Wood Products, CO
(VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII); Jasco Chemical, CA (LX); Pacific Coast Pipe
Lines, CA (LX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX); Eielson Air Force
Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X)
Xylenes
Tibbeits Road, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Endicott Village Well Field. NY (II); Facet
Enterpnses, NY (II), Higgins Farm. NJ (II); Imperial OiliChampion Chemicals, NJ (II); Industrial Latex. NJ (II),
Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (Ii), Naval Air Engineenog Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical,
NY (Ii). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II). Rainapo Landfill. NY (II). Robirnech/Natlonal
Pipe. NY (ii), Rowe industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II). Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III), Sirasburg
Landfill, PA (Ill), U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Urut I), VA (Ill), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh
Plant), AL. (IV), JF1) Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV) ; National Electric Coil/Cooper md, KY (IV), Potter’s
Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV): USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV); Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), American Chemical Services, EN (V). Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V),
Cannelton Industries. MI (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V),
Clare Water Supply, Ml (V), Electrovoice, MI (V);H.Brown Company, MI (V). Hagen Farm. WI (V); Kohler
Landfill. WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V). MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V), Muskego Sanitary
Landfill, WI (V), New Bnghton/Arden Hills. MN (V),PeerlesS Plating. Mi (V), Spickler Landfill. WI (V).Tai
Lake. Ml (V). Double Eagle Refinery. OK (Vi), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI). Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery.
NM (Vi). 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII), Pester Refinery, KS (VII). Brodenck Wood
Products. CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Opefable Unit 2). CO (VIII). Jasco Chemical. CA (IX). Punty
Oil Sales. CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX). Westinghouse Elecmc (Sunnyvale
Plant). CA (IX). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X). Elmendor! Air Force Base, AK (X)
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Air
Ramapo Landfill, NY (El). Strasburg Landfill, PA (III), H.Brown Company. Ml (V);Tri County Landfill, IL (V)
Debris
PSC Resources, MA (I), Tibbeus Road. NH (I); Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II). Facet EnterpnseS. NY (11);
General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II); Ii.dusirial Latex. NJ (II); Plausburgb Air Force Base
(Operable Unit 3). NY (II), Ramapo Landfill. NY (U). Abex Corp. VA (III) : Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA
(III); C & D Recycling. PA (III): Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (111); Rhinehait Tire Fire Dump. VA (lii),
434
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Debris (Continued)
Strasburg Landfill, PA (Ill), Tonolli, PA (III), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV): Ciba-Geigy
(Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Florida Steel, FL (TV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV);
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V); Cannelton industries,
MI (V); Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), H.Brown Company, MI
(V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V), Savanna Army Depot, IL (V). South
Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), Ml (V); Cal West Metals, NM (Vi);
Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Ref.aery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services
(Operable Unit I). LA (VI), Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill,
OK (VI), Prewiti Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium
(Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII). Hill Air Force Base, UT (yIn), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT
(VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (V III), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII),
Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX), iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX) ,
Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-PoulenclZoecon, CA ( IX); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID
(X). Joseph Forest Products, OR (X). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit
23), ID (X)
Ground Water
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I);
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI (1), Ous Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbetts Road. NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis Properly. NJ (II), Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterpnses,
NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II). Imperial Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical. NY (II). Ramapo Landfill. NY (II),
Robintecti/Nanonal Pipe, NY (II). Rowe industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Brown’s Battery
Breaking, PA (III), Butz Landfill. PA (III). Chem-Solv, DE (ill), Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (Ill).
Dublin Water Supply. PA (III). Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW Manufacturing. PA (III). Paoli Rail Yard, PA
(Ill), Tonolli. PA (III), Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (Ill). Benfield Industries, NC (IV). Camer Air
Conditioning, TN (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV),
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV), National Electric
Coil/Cooper hid, KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits,
NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOExOperable Unit 3), SC (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC
(IV), Whitebouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump. FL (IV), Alsco Anaconda.
OH (V), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Cannelton Indusmes, Pv l (V),Central Illinois Public Service. IL
(V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, Wi (V), Clare Water Supply, Ml (V), Elecirovoice, MI (V),H Brown
Company, Ml (V). Hagen Farm. WI (V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN
(V),MIDCO H (Amendment), IN (V), New Brighton/Arden Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating, Ml (V), Reilly Tar
& Chemical (lndian pohs Plant), IN (V).Reilly Tar & Chemical (Si Louis Park), MN (V), Skinner Landfill. OH
(V), South Andover (Operable Unit I)(Amendxnent), MN (V), Tar Lake, MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V),
Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN (V): Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI),
Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI). Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI);
435
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Ground Water (Continued)
29th & Mend Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII); Farmers’ Mutual Cooperanve, IA (VII); Brodenck Wood
Products. CO (V iii); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VU!); Rocky Fiats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII); Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII); Hassayampa Landfill. AZ
(IX); Jasco Chemical, CA (IX); Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines,
CA (IX); Rhone-PoulenclZoecon. CA (LX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX); Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X); Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK
(X), McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA (X); N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X): US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X)
Sediment (Creek/River/Stream)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I); PSC Resources, MA (I), Facet Enterprises, NY (II);
Industrial Latex, NJ (II). Kin-Buc L.andfiil, NJ (II); C & D Recycling, PA (III). Lindane Dump, PA (III); Paoli
Rail Yard, PA (III), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III), Tonolb, PA (III), Florida Steel, FL (IV); Marine Corp
Logistics Base, GA (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV). Aisco Anaconda, OH CV),
Cannelton Industries, Ml (V). Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), Clare Water Supply, Ml (V); H.Brown
Company, Ml (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary
Landfill, WI (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI),
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI),
Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA
(IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (LX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Joseph Forest Products.
OR (X). US DOE idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 5). It) (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
Sludge
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), lndusuial Latex, NJ (II); Tonolli, PA (Ill); Agnco Chemical,
FL (IV), Camer Air Conditioning. Th (IV). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel
Master, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOperable Unit I), SC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment). FL (IV), Bofors Nobel (Amendment). MI (V), Electrovoice, Ml (V), Spickler Landfill, WI CV),
Tar Lake. MI (V), Double Eagle Refinery. OK (VI). Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI), Gulf Coast
Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI), Prewitt
Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID (X)
Soil
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), PSC Resources, MA (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(II); Ellis Property, NJ (II); Facet Enterprises. NY (II); General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II),
lndusmal Latex, NJ (II); islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II); Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable
436
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Soil (Continued)
Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II),
Plansburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (II). Preferred Plating, NY (II); Ramapo Landfill, NY (II);
Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (III); Brown’s Batteiy Breaking, PA
(III): C & D Recycling, PA (III); Fike Chemical, WV (III); Lindane Dump, PA (III); Paoli Rail Yard, PA (Iii),
Raymark, PA (III), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III), Strasburg Landfill, PA (III); Tonolli, PA (Ill); U.S.
Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I). VA (III), USA Aberdeen. Michaelsville, MD (III), Agnco
Chemical, FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV); Benfield industries, NC (IV), Carrier Aix
Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV): Honda Steel, FL (IV), Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
(IV), Marme Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV), Standard Auto
Bumper, FL (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV); American Chemical Services, IN (V),
Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V); Butterworth #2 Landfill, M l (V); Cannelton Industries, MI (V), Central
Illinois Public Service, IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V),
Electrovoice, Ml (V), H Brown Company, MI (V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN
(V), MIDCO I (Amendment), iN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V),
Peerless Plating. MI (V), Savanna Army Depot, IL (V), Skinner Landfill, OH (V), South Andover (Operable
Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake. Ml (V); Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). Ml (V):
Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI); Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (VI). Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I),
LA (VI), Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI), Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI); Oklahoma
Refining, OK (VI). Prewrn Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI); 29th & Mend Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII);
Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII),
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Rocky Flats
Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Silver BOw Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII): Hassayampa Landfill.
AZ (LX). Iron Mountain Mine. CA (LX), Jasco Chemical. CA (LX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (IX), Purity Oil
Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-PoulencIZoecon, CA ( IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX).
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (LX). Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX). Bunker
Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base,
AK (X). Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McCbord AFB (Wash RackfFreatrnent), WA (X). Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment). ID (X). Umanila Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 23). ID (X)
Surface Water
PSC Resources. MA (I), Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (ii), Ramapo LandfiH, NY (II), Fike Chemical. WV (III),
Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (Ill). Tonolli, PA (III); Savannah River (USDOEXOperable Unit 1), SC (IV).
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN
(IV), Cannelton industries, Ml (V), H Brown Company, MI (V). Savanna Army Depot, IL (V),Tar Lake, MI
(V):Tri County Landfill, IL (V), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit
2), LA (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Rocky Rats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII),
437
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Surface Water (Continued)
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), iron Mountain Mine, CA ( IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical
Compie , ID (X)
PUBLIC HEALTh AND ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS
Direct Contact
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (0; Newport Naval EducationlTraimng Center, RI (I), Otis
Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I); PSC Resources, MA (I), Tibbetts Road, NH (I), Town
Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II); Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis
Property, NJ (II), Endicott Village Well Field, NY (Ii); Facet Enterprises. NY (II). General Motors/Central
Foundry Division. NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II); Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II): lslip Municipal
Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7). Ni (Ii);
Platisburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II): PlatLsburgh Au Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (Ii),
Preferred Plating, NY (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II). Abex Corp. VA (III); Brown’s
Battery Breaking, PA (III), Butz Landfill. PA (Ill); C & D Recycling, PA (III). Chem-Solv, DE (III),
Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (fli); Dublin Water Supply, PA (III), Eastern Diversified Metals, PA
(Ill), Fike Chemical, WV (III). Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III), Raymark, PA (HI), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA
(III), Strasburg Landfill, PA (III), Tonolli, PA (III), U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit I), VA
(III), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (Ill), Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (III);
Agnco Chemical, FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Camer Air Conditioning, TN (IV),
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV). Florida Steel. FL (IV); JFD Electronics/Channel Master. NC (IV);
Marine Corp Logisucs Base, GA (IV). Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper
md, KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV),
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). SC (IV), Standard Auto Bumper. FL (IV). USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), Alsco Anaconda, OH (V), American
Chemical Services, IN (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment). Ml (V), Bunerworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton
industries, Ml (V), Central Illinois Public Service. IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Clare Water
Supply, MI (V), Electrovoice. Ml (V), H Brown Company, Ml (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), Kohler Landfill, WI
(V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill. MN (V). MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI
(V), New Bngbton/Ardefl Hills. MN (V), Peerless Plating. M l (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant),
IN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V), Savanna Army Depot. IL (V), Skinner Landfill, OH
(V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN (V). Spickier Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake. MI (V), Torch Lake
(Operable Units 1 and 3). MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical
(Amendment), TX (VI), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI); Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI),
Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendmeflt), TX (Vi). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining.
OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI); 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination. KS (VII); Pester
Refinery, KS (VII); Broderick Wood Products, CO (V1fl), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII), Denver
Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII); Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII), idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII); Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII). Hassayampa Landfill, AZ
438
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
PUBLIC HEALTh AND ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS
Direct Contact (Conlinued)
(IX); iron Mountain Muie, CA (IX), Jasco Chemical, CA (DC), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE),
CA(LX); Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (DC);
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA ( IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX),
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X),
Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X); Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash Rackrfreatment), WA
(X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), Umaulla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X); US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID 00; US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit 5), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID CX), US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID (X), Wyckoif/Eagle Harbor. WA (X)
Public Exposure
Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (III), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X)
REMEDY SELECTION
ARAR Waiver
PSC Resources, MA (I), General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (11), Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY
(II), Robintech/National Pipe. NY (II). Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (fli), Ltndane Dump. PA (III), MW
Manufacturing. PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III). Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (III), Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits,
NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL ( IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), MIDCO I
(Amendment), IN (V), Tar Lake, M l (V), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII).
lion Mountain Mine, CA (DC), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (LX), Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X)
institutional Controls
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), PSC Resources, MA (I), Tibbetis Road, NH (I), Town
Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I), Cosderi Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Endicon Village Well Field, NY (II). Facet
Enterprises, NY (II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). industrial Latex, NJ (II) Islip
Municipal Sazutary Landfill, NY (U), Plaitsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit I), NY (Ii), Plattsburgh Air
Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (II). Ramapo Landfill, NY (II). Robintech/National Pipe, NY (II), Brown’s
Battery Breaking, PA (III), C & D Recycling, PA (III), Ctiem-SoIv, DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group,
PA (ill), Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW Manufacturing, PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III). Raymark. PA (III),
Tonolli. PA (Ill). U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1), VA (Ill), Westinghouse Elevator Plant,
PA (III), Agnco Chemical. FL (IV), Carner Air Conditioning, TN ( IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV),
Florida Steel, FL (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA ( IV), Milan
Army Ammunition Plant, TN ( IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV); Potter’s Septic Tank
Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOperabIe Unit 1), SC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable
Unit 2). SC (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
439
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
REMEDY SELECTION
Institutional Controls (Continued)
(Amendment). FL (IV); Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV); Aisco Anaconda, OH (V), American Chemical
Services. IN (V), Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V); Cannelton Industries, MI (V); Central Illinois Public Service,
IL (V); City Disposal Sarutary Landfill. WI (V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V); Columbus Old Municipal Landfill,
IN (V); Electrovoice, Ml (V), H.Brown Company. M l (V); Hagen Farm, WI (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V); La
Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V); MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V); Muskego
Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); New Bnghton/Ardefl Hills, MN (V); Spickler Landfill. WI (V); Tar Lake, MI (V); Tn
County Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfiil). MN (V); Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX
(VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1), LA (VI); Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment). TX
(VI); Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM
(VI), Pester Refinery, KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO
(VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9). CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 &
#3). UT (VIII), Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX). Jasco Chemical, CA
(IX); Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-PoulenctZOeCOfl, CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
(IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB
(Wash RackTrreatmeflt), WA (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 2), 11) (X). US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X). Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor. WA X)
interim Remedy
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I), Newport Naval EducationlTrainlng Center, RI (I), Otis
Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II). Naval Au Engineering Center
(Operable Unit 7). NJ (II), Fike Chemical, WV (III). U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit fl, VA
(III), U S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (III), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV).
Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV), National Elecinc Coil/Cooper md. KY ( IV), Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit I). SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOperable Unit 2). SC (IV); Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV), IJSDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (l v), USMC Camp
Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), New Brighton/Ardefl Hills, MN (V),
Reilly Tar & Chemicai (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V), Skinner Landfill. OH (V), Tar Lake. Ml (V), Gulf Coast
Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI). Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII). Rocky flats Plant (USDOEXOPCrab1e Unit 4). CO (VIII), Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII). Iron Mountain Mine. CA (IX). Eielsoo Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air
Force Base, AK (X). N A.S Wludbey Island - Ault Field. WA (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 2), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5). ID (X), US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit
23). ID CX)
No Action Remedy
Darling Hill Dump, VT (I); Revere Textile Prints, CT (I), Action Anodizing. Plating and Polishing, NY (II),
Biochnical Laboratones. NY (II), FAA Technical Center, NJ (II); Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit
5), NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 6). NJ (II); North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY (II).
Witco Chemical (Oakland Plant), NJ (II), Dixie Caverns County Landfill. VA (III); Route 940 Dram Dump, PA
(III), Suffolk City I.nndfill, VA (III). Chem-form, FL (IV); New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV);
440
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
REMEDY SELECTION
No Action Remedy (Continued)
USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 18), TN (IV); Wilson Concepts of Florida, FL ( IV); Woodbury
Chemical (Pnnceton Plant). FL (IV): Columbus Old Municipal Landfill. IN (V); Grand Traverse Overall Supply.
Ml (V), Metal Working Shop, Ml (V); Des Moines TCE. IA (VII); Hydro-Flex, KS (VII); Aircom (Drexier
Enterprise). ID (X); Fort Lewis (Landfill No. 5), WA (X); Mountain Home Air Force Base, II) (X), Pesticide
Lab - Yakima, WA (X)
O&M
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (1). Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I);
Newport Naval Educationlrraining Center, RI (I), Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbeits Road. NH (1), Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II). Ellis Property, NJ (Ii). Endicott Village Well Field. NY (II). Evor Phillips
Leasing. NJ (II); Facet Enterprises, NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm,
NJ (II), Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II), Indusuial Latex, NJ (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill,
NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air Engincenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II). Plausburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit I), NY (II), Plansburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 3), NY (II), Ramapo Landfill, NY (II). Robintech/National Pipe, NY (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater
Contamination, NY (II), Witco Chemical (Oakland Plant), NJ (II), Butz Landfill, PA (Ill), C & D Recycling, PA
(Ill), Chern-Solv, DE (111), Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (III); Dublin Water Supply, PA (III), Eastern
Diversified Metals. PA (III), Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW Manufacturing, PA (Ill), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (Iii),
Raymark, PA (IU), Rhinehari Tire Fire Dump, VA (Ill), Strasburg Landfill. PA (Ill), Tonolli. PA (Ill), U.S
Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (ill), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (Ill),
Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (Ill), Agrico Cherrucal, FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV),
Benfield Industries, NC ( IV), Chem-form, FL (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Flonda Steel, FL
(IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV). JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County
Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV) : Milan Army Ammunition Plant.. TN (IV),
National Electric Coil/Cooper lad, KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV), Potter’s Septic
Tank Service Pus. NC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV), Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV). USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pus (Amendment), FL (IV), Wilson Concepts of fonda, FL (IV), Woodbury Chemical (Princeton
Plant), FL (IV). Yellow Water Ro Dump. FL (IV), Alsco Anaconda, OH (V), American Chemical Services, IN
(V),Bofors Nobel (Amendment). Ml (V), Buiterworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V).Cannelcon Industries, Mi (V),
Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V),Claze Water Supply, Ml (V),
Electrovoice, M I (V),H.Brown Company, MI (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), Kohler Landfill. W i (V).La Grande
Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), MJDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego
Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); New Bnghton/Arden Hills, MN (V); Peerless Plating, MI (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical
(Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN (V), Savanna Army Depot. IL (V),
Skinner Landfill. OH (V); South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V);Tar Lake. Ml
(V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), Mi (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR
Landfill), MN (V),Cal West Metals, NM (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI), Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI); Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI),
Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI); 29th & Mead Groundwater
441
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
REMEDY SELECTION
O&M (Continued)
Contamination, KS (VII); Pester Refinery, KS (VII). Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Denver Radium
(Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust
#2 & #3), UT (VIII); Rocky Rats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII); Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area,
MT (VIII), Hassayalnpa Landfill, AZ (DC), Jasco Chemical, CA (DC); Lawrence Livermore National Lab
(USDOE), CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales. CA (IX), Rhone-Poulenc!ZoeCon, CA
(LX), Westinghouse Elecuic (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (LX); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID
(X), Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X). Joseph Forest Products, OR (X);
McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA (X); N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X). Pacific Hide &
Fur Recycling (Amendment). ID (X), Urnaidla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engmeenng Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X),
Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
ROD Amendment
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V), MIDCO I
(Amendment). IN (V). MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V); South Andover (Operable Unit I )(Amendmeflt), MN
(V). Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI). Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amefldlneflt), TX (VI). Pacific Hide
& Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X)
WATER SUPPLY
Alternate Water Supply
Tibbetts Road. NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (1), Ramapo Landfill. NY (II), Chem -SOlV. DE (Ill),
Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (Ill). Dublin Water Supply, PA (III). MW Manufacturing. PA (Iii),
Central illinois Public Service, EL (V), Skinner Landfill, OH (V). Bunker Hill Miiung and Metallurgical
Complex, ID (X)
Drinking Water Contaminants
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I), Tibbetts Road. NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I).
Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (ii), Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ (Ii ). Higgins Farm, NJ (II). Pasley Solvents &
Chemical. NY (II), Ramapo Landfill. NY (II ). Butz Landfill, PA (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA
(III), Dublin Water Supply. PA (III), Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III). Benfleld lndustnes. NC (IV).
Carrier Air Conditioning. TN (IV); Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV). Milan Army Ammunition Plant,
TN (IV). National Electric CoiL/Cooper hid, KY (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), USMC Camp
Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), Central Illinois
Public Service. IL (V), Clare Waler Supply. Mi (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant). IN (V),
Skinner Landfill. OH (V); South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V); Tn County Landfill. IL (V); Twin Cities
AF Reserve (SAR Landfill). MN (V); Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill. OK (Vi). Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI);
29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII), Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (Vii); Idaho Pole. MT
442
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
REMEDY SELECTION
Drinking Water Contaminants (Continued)
(VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII).
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII): Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX); Iron Mountain Mine.
CA (IX); Jasco Chemical. CA (IX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); Pacific Coast Pipe
Lines, CA (IX); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical
Complex, ID (X), N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field. WA (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 2). ID (X)
SITE-SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Floodplain
Darling Hill Dump, VT (I), PSC Resources. MA (I), Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II); Ellis Property, NJ (II),
Endicoit Village Well Field, NY (II), FAA Technical Center, NJ (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air
Engineering Center (Operable Unit 5). NJ (II). Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 6). NJ (II), Naval
Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7). NJ (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Abex
Corp. VA (Ill). Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (ill), Strasburg Landfill, PA (III), Camer Air Conditioning, TN
(IV), Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant), AL (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV). National Electric
Coil/Cooper md. KY (IV). Aisco Anaconda. OH (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), Ml (V), Bunerworth #2
Landfill, MI (V). Cannelton Industries. MI (V); Columbus Old Municipal Landfill, IN (V), H.Brown Company,
MI (V). Kohier Landfill. WI (V). Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V): Savanna Army Depot. IL (V), Twin Cities
AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN (V), Crystal Chemical (Amendment). TX (VI), Koppers (Texarkana
Plant)(Arnendment). TX (VI), Des Moines TCE. IA (VII), Hydro-Flex. KS (VII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Silver
Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), Rhone-PoulencfZoecon. CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical
Complex, ID (X)
Sole-Source Aquifer
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (1). Butz Landfill. PA (III), Chem-form, FL (TV), Wilson Concepts
of Florida. FL (IV), Woodbury Chemical (Princeton Plant), FL (IV). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X). US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID CX). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable
Unit 5). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23). ID (X)
Wetlands
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I),
Darling Hill Dump. VT (I). PSC Resources. MA (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I), Ellis Property, NJ
(II). Endicoti Village Well Field. NY (U). General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II). lmpenal
Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II). lndusmal Latex. NJ (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit 7). NJ (II), Rowe lndustries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II). Abex Corp. VA (III),
C & D Recycling. PA (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (III). MW Manufactunng, PA (III); USA
Aberdeen, Mich lsville. MD (III), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV): Alsco Anaconda. OH (V),
Amencan Chemical Services, IN (V). Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V); Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V),
Cannelton Industries, MI (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V), H Brown
443
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
SITE-SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Wetlands (Continued)
Company, Ml (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V); La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V); MIDCO I (Amendment), IN
(V): Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Savanna Army Depot, IL (V); South Andover (Operable Unit
I )(Amendinent), MN (V); South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V); Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). M i
(V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V); Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI); Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI);
Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI). Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2),
CO (VIII); Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII); Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (IX); Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Eielson Au Force Base, AK (X); Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X), N.A.S
Whidbey island - Ault Field, WA (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
STANDARDS/REGULATIONSFPERMITS/GU WAN CE
Hybrid/Alternate Closure
Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II)
Clean Air Act
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME (I); Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I): Tibbetts Road, NH (I). Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I), Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ
(II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY ( [ I), industrial Latex, NJ (II), islip Municipal Sanitary
Landfill. NY (II); Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II ); Plattsburgh Air Force Base
(Operable Unit I), NY (II). Plattsburgh Au Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II). Preferred Plating, NY (Ii).
Ramapo Landfill, NY (II). Abex Corp. VA (111). Butz Landfill. PA (III). C & D Recycling, PA (III), Chem-Solv,
DE (Ill). Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (III), Dublin Water Supply, PA (III), Fike Chemical, WV (Ill).
MW Manufacturing, PA (III). Raymark. PA (Ill). Tonolli, PA (III). USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (lii).
Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV), Benfield Industries. NC (IV) ; Carrier Air Conditioning. TN (IV),
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), Al. (IV), Florida Steel. FL (IV); Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV). JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base,
GA (IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV); Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pns, NC (IV), Savannah
River (USDOEXOperabIe Unit 3). SC (IV), Standard Auto Bumper, FL (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment). FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump. FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V).Cannelton
Industries. Ml (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V). City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Electrovoice,
Ml (V). H.Brown Company. Ml (V), Muskcgo Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V). Spickler
Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake. M i (V). Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3). MI (V).Tri County Landfill. IL (V);
Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Double Eagle Refinery, OK (Vi), Fouiih Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI), Gulf
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Pester Refinery. KS (VII).
444
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDSIREGULATIONSFPERMITSIGUIDANCE
Clean Air Act (Continued)
Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), Co (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT
(VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII): Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII); Portland Cement (Kiln Dust
#2 & #3), UT (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII), Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area,
MT (VIII), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales,
CA (IX); Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX); Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex.
ID (X): Joseph Forest Products. OR CX). Pacific Hide & Fur Recychng (Amendment), ID (X): US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
Clean Water Act
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I). Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I),
Newport Naval Educauonlrraining Center, RI (I). PSC Resources. MA (I). Tibbeits Road. NH (I). Town
Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I), Higgins Farm, NJ (II). Industrial Latex, NJ (II), Ishp Municipal Sanitary Landfill,
NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II). Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Plattsburgh Air
Force Base (Operable Unit 1). NY (II). Ramapo Landfill. NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (III). Brown’s Battery
Breaking, PA (III), Butz Landfill. PA (Ill). C & D Recycling. PA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (III), Commodore
Semiconductor Group, PA (III), Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III): MW Manufactunng, PA (III), Paoli Rail
Yard. PA (III), Raymark, PA (III), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (III), Agnco Chemical, FL (IV), Benfield
Industries. NC (IV), Camer Air Conditioning, TN ( IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV). Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV ), JFD Electronics/Channel Master. NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
(IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s Sepuc
Tank Service Pits. NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1). SC (IV). Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (l v), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3). SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV ), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), Alsco Anaconda, OH (V), American
Chemical Services, IN (V), Butterworth #2 Landfill. MI (V), Cannelton Industries, Ml (V), Central Illinois
Public Service. IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI CV), Clare Water Supply. Ml (V), Electrovoice. MI
(V),H Brown Company, Ml (V), Hageri Farm, WI (V), Kohier Landfill, Wi (V), MIDCO I (Amendment). IN
(V), MIDCO U (Amendment). IN (V). Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V). Peerless Plating, Ml (V). Reilly Tar
& Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V), Spickler Landfill,
Wi (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V). Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI). 29th & Mead Groundwater
Contamination. KS (VII), Pester Refinery, KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT
(VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII).
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOEXOperabIe Unit 2). CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO
(VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX), Lawrence Livermore National
Lab (USDOE), CA (LX), Punty Oil Sales, CA (IX). Rhone-PoulenclZoecon, CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 3), CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric
(Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base,
AK CX). N.AS Whidbey Island- Ault Field, WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X)
4.45
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDS/REGULATIONS/PERMITSIGUIDANCE
Water Quality Criteria
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME (I); Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I);
Newport Naval Education!rrairung Center, RI (I); Tibbetts Road, NH (I); Cannelton Industries, MI (V);
Electrovoice, MI (V), H.Brown Company. MI (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V); South Andover (Operable Unit 2).
MN (V); Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN (V); Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII); Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (IJSDOE), CA (IX); N.A.S. Whidbey Island -
Ault Field. WA (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
RCRA
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME (I); Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I);
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI (I); Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources. MA (I), Tibbects Road. NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II); Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ (II);
Facet Enterpnses. NY (II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II); Higgins Farm, NJ (II); lmpenal
Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (II): Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (Il); Kin-Buc
Landfill, NJ (II); Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (U). Preferred Plating, NY (II); Ramapo
Landfill, NY (II). Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II); Abex Corp. VA (III); Butz Landfill, PA
(III); C & D Recycling. PA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (UI); Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (III), Dublin
Water Supply, PA (III). Eastern Diversified Metals. PA (III); Fike Chemical. WV (III), MW Manufacturing, PA
(III), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III), Raymark, PA (III). Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III). Tonolli. PA (III), U.S
Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (III), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (III),
Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (Ill), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV); Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV),
Benfield industries, NC (IV). Carrier Air Conditic.ung, TN (IV). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Flonda
Steel. FL (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV); Madison
County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV). Marine Corp Logistics Base. GA (IV), Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN
(IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper led. KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s
Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operabie Unit I), SC (IV), Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). SC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV). Standard Auto
Bumper, FL (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment). FL (IV), Aisco Anaconda. OH (V), American Chemical Services, IN (V); Bofors Nobel
(Amendment). MI (V). Bunerworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton Industries, MI (V), Central Illinois Public
Service, IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Clare Water Supply. Ml (V). ElectrovOiCe. MI (V),
H.Brown Company. Ml (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V). MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment).
IN (V). Muskcgo Sanitary Landfill, WI (V): New BngbtonfArden Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V),
Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant). IN (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN (V); Savanna
Army Depot, IL (V): Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V). Cal West
Metals, NM (VI). Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI); Double Eagle Refinery. OK (VI), Fourth Street
Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI);
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver
Radium (Operable Unit 9). CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base. UT (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3). UT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant
446
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDSIREGULATIONSIPERMITS/GUIDANCE
RCRA (Continued)
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII). Silver Bow
CreekfBuue Area. MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX), Jasco Chemical, CA ( IX). Lawrence Livermore
National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX), Punty Oil Sales, CA (IX),
Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4), CA (IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base,
AK (X): Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X); Joseph Forest Products, OR (X). N.A.S Whidbey Island- Ault
Field, WA (X); Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab
(Operable Unit 23), ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
Closure Requirements
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), USA Aberdeen. Michaelsville, MD (III). Marine Corp
Logistics Base, GA (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV); Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV); Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V). City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI
(V), Electrovoice, Ml (V); MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Fourth Street Abandoned
Refinery, OK (VI); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9). CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII)
Clean Closure
Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II). Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III), Electrovoice. Ml (V). Fourth Street
Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII)
Landfill Closure
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), PSC Resources, MA (I). Endicon Village Well Field,
NY (II), lndustnai Latex, NJ (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill. NY (II), Strasburg Landfill. PA (III),
Tonolli, PA (III). USA Aberdeen. Michaelsville. MD (III), Agnco Chemical. FL (IV), Flonda Steel. FL (IV),
Bofors Nobel (Amendment). Ml (V), Bunerworth 2 Landfill, Ml (V), Cannelton Industries, MI (V), City
Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Electrovoice. Ml (V). H Brown Company. MI (V), MIDCO II (Amendment),
IN (V). Spickler Landfill. Wi (V), Tar Lake. Mi (V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Crystal Chemical
(Amendment), TX (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX). Purity Oil
Sales, CA (LX), Rhone-Poulenc/Z.oecon. CA (IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I).
Newport Naval EducauonfTraining Center, RI (I). Otis Air National GuardfCarnp Edwards, MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbens Road, NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I); Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis Property, NJ (II). Endicott VilLage Well Field. NY (II), Evor Phillips
Leasing, NJ (II), Facet Enterprises. NY (LI), General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (11), Higgins Farm,
NJ (II), Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II); islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II). Pasley Solvents &
Chemical. NY (II), Ramapo Landfill. NY (II). Robintech/National Pipe, NY (II); Rowe Indusmes Groundwater
Contamination. NY (II), Buiz Landfill, PA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (III); Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA
447
-------
SECTiON IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDS/REGULATIONS/PERMITS/CU IDANCE
Safe Drinking Water Act (Continued)
(III); Dublin Water Supply, PA (III); Lindane Dump, PA (III); MW Manufactunng, PA (Ill); Paoli Rail Yard,
PA (UI); Raymark, PA (III) , Tonolli, PA (III); Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III); Agrico Chemical, FL (IV);
Benfield Industries, NC (IV); Camer Air Conditioning. TN (IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV); Geigy
Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV); Madison County Sanitary
Landfill, FL (IV); Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN (IV); New Hanover County Airport Bum Pit, NC (IV);
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV); USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV); USMC
Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV); Yellow Water
Road Dump. FL (IV), Aisco Anaconda. OH (V); American Chemical Services. IN (V); Bunerworth #2 Landfill,
Ml (V). Cannelton industries. Ml (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill,
WI (V), Clare Water Supply. Ml (V), Electrovoice. MI (V), H.Brown Company. Ml (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V);
La Grande Sanitary Landfill. MN (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V);
Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), New BrightonlArdeo Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating. MI (V); Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Tar Lake. Ml (V); Tn County Landfill. IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve
(SAR Landfill), MN (V), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I). LA (VI): Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI). Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI): 29th & Mead
Groundwater Contamination, KS (VU). Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (VII). Pester Refinery. KS (VII);
Brodenck Wood Products. CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII).
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII): Rocky
Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII),
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII). Hassayampa Landfill. AZ ( IX). hon Mountain Mine, CA (LX); Jasco
Chemical, CA (LX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (DC), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (DC).
Rhone-PoulenctZ.oeCon. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (DC). Westinghouse Electric
(Sunnyvale Plant). CA (LX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X), Joseph Forest Products,
OR (X). McChord AFB (Wash RacklTreatment). WA (X), N A.S Whidbey Island- Ault Field, WA (X), US
DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X)
MCLs (Maximum Contaminant Limits)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I).
Newport Naval Education/Training Center. RI (1). Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I): PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbens Road. NH (1). Town GarageiRaduo Beacon, NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II). Endicou Village Well Field. NY (II). Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II), Facet
Enterprises, NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II), linpenal
Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Pasley Solvents & Chemical. NY
(II). RobintechlNational Pipe, NY (II). Rowe Industries Groundwater Contan’unation, NY (II), Butz Landfill, PA
(III). Chem-Solv. DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (ill). Dublin Water Supply, PA (Ill), Lindane
Dump, PA (III); MW Manufacturing. PA (III). Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III); Raymark. PA (III). Westinghouse
Elevator Plant, PA (III), Agnco Chemical. FL (IV); Benfield Industries, NC (IV); Camer Air Conditioning, TN
(IV): Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant). AL (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV). Madison County Sanitary Landfill. FL (IV), Milan Army Ammunition
Plant. TN (IV); New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit., NC (IV); USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable
Unit 6). TN (IV); USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment), FL (IV); Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV); Aisco Anaconda, OH (V), American Chemical
448
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STAN ARDS/REGULATIONS/PERMITS/GUIDANCE
MCLS (Continued)
Services, IN (V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V); H.Brown Company, MI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V);
MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), New BnghtoniArden Hills, MN (V); Peerless Plating, MI (V), Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V), Tar Lake, MI (V); Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit 1), LA (VI), Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI); Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI),
Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), 29th & Mend Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII); Farmers’ Mutual
Cooperative, IA (VII); Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Umt 8). CO (VIII),
Idaho Pole. MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable
Unit 4). UT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII), Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII); Hassayampa Landfill, AZ
(IX), Iron Mountain Mine. CA (DC), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX); Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA
(IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX). Rhone-PoulencfZoecon. CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale
Plant), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), McChord AFB (Wash
Rack/Treatment), WA (X). N.A.S Whidbey Island. Ault Field, WA (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering
Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X)
MCLGs
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I); Newport Naval Educationlfraining Center, RI (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbens Road, NH (I), Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ
(II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II), Butz Landfill, PA (III), Chern-Solv. DE (III), MW
Manufacturing. PA (III). Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III). Agrico Chemical, FL (IV), Carrier Air
Conditioning. TN (IV). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN (IV), New
Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV). Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil
Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), New Bnghton/Arden Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V), Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Tar Lake, MI (V),Tn County Landfill, IL (V). Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Opcrable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII). Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII). Hassayampa Landfill. AZ (IX). Iron Mountain Mine. CA (LX). Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). N A S Whidhey Island - Ault Field, WA (X)
State Standards/Regulations
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I). Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I).
Newport Naval EducauonITraining Center, RI (I), Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbens Road. NH (I). Town Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I); Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ
(II), Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II); Ellis Property. NJ (II). Endicott Village Well Field. NY (II). Evor Phillips
Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterprises. NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). Higgins Farm,
NJ (II). imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II), industrial Latex, NJ (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill.
NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II). Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable
Unit 3), NY (II), Ramapo Landfill, NY (Ii), RobintechlNational Pipe, NY (ii); Rowe Industries Groundwater
Contamnmanon. NY (U), Abex Corp. VA (HI). Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (Ill); Bucz Landfill. PA (III); C &
D Recycling, PA (III); Cbem-Solv, DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (III). Dublin Water Supply.
449
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDS/REGULATIONSIPERMITS/GUWANCE
State Standards/Regulations (Continued)
PA (III); Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III): Fike Chemical, WV (III); Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW
Manufacturing, PA (III); Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III); Raymark, PA (Ifl); Rhineharl Tire Fire Dump, VA (III),
Strasburg Landfill, PA (III); Tonolh, PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (Ill);
USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MI) (III); Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III): Agrico Chemical. FL (IV),
Alabama Army Aminurution Plant, AL (IV); Benfield Industries, NC (IV): Carrier Air Conditioning. TN (IV),
Honda Steel, FL ( IV); Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV): JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV),
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV); Milan Army Ammunition
Plant, TN (IV); National Electric Coil/Cooper md, KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV);
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV), Savannah
River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV). Standard Auto
Bumper, FL (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN (IV). USMC Camp Lejeune Military
Reservation, NC (IV), Wtutehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV);
Alsco Anaconda, OH (V), Amencan Chemical Services, IN (V); Bofors Nobel (Amendment), Ml (V);
Bunerworth #2 Landfill. MI (V): Cannelton Industries, MI (V), Central Illinois Public Service. IL (V); City
Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Clare Water Supply, MI (V). Electrovoice. Ml (V). H Brown Company, MI
(V), Hagen Farm. WI (V). Kobler Landfill, WI (V). La Grande Sanitary Landfill. MN (V). Muskego Sanitary
Landfill, WI (V), New Brighton/Arden Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating. MI (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical
(Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN (V); Savanna Army DepoL IL (V),
South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable
Units I and 3), Ml (V), Tn County Landfill. IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN (V), Double
Eagle Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable
Unit 2), LA (VI). Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill. OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI I, Prewitt Abandoned
Refinery, NM (VI), 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII), Pester Refinery. KS (VII). Brodenck
Wood Products. CO (VIII). Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII). Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9).
CO (VIII). Hill Air Force Base. UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4). UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln
Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Silver Bow Creek/Butte
Area, MT (VIII), Hassayainpa Landfill. AZ (IX), iron Mountain Mine. CA (DO. Jasco Chemical, CA (IX).
Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales, CA
(IX). Rhone-Poulenc/ZOeCOfl. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (IX) Sacramento Army
Depot (Operable Unit 4). CA (LX). Westinghouse Electnc (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX) Bunker Hill Mining a d
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base. AK (X), Elrnendorf Air Force Base, AK (X). Joseph
Forest Products. OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment), WA (X). N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field,
WA (X). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment). ID (X), Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons). OR (X); US
DOE Idaho National Engioeenng Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 22), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID (X).
WyckofflEagle Harbor, WA (X)
450
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
STANDARDSIREGuLATL0NSIPERMITSIGUII)ANCE
Toxic Substances Control Act
PSC Resources, MA (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II), EIhs Property, NJ (II); Facet Enterprises, NY (II);
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II) ; Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II), industrial Latex,
NJ (II); Krn-Buc Landfill, NJ (II), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III) ; Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV);
Flonda Steel, FL (IV); Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV); American
Chemical Services, IN (V), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (LX), Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X)
Public Health Advisory
None
State Guidance
Madison County Sanitary Landfill. FL (IV)
State Permit
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Peerless Plating.
Ml (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V),29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination. KS (VII)
TESTINGIPILOT STUDIES
Leachability Tests
PSC Resources. MA (I), Tonolli. PA (Ill), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV), Flonda Steel, FL (IV),
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Cannelton Industries, Ml (V),Electrovotce, MI (V).Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V), Spickier Landfill. WI (V). Oklahoma Refining, OK (Vi), Prewiti
Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable
Unit 3). UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3),
UT (VIII). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID CX)
Treatability Studies
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I),
Newport Naval Education/Training Center. RI (I). PSC Resources. MA (I). Tibbetts Road, NH (I), Evor Phillips
Leasing. NJ (II), imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II); industrial Latex, NJ (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary
Landfill, NY (II), Abex Corp, VA (III), Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (III), C & D Recycling. PA (III), Eastern
Diversified Metals, PA (III), Raymark. PA (III), Tonolli, PA (III), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV), Camer Air
Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant), AL (IV); Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN (IV), New
Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3). SC (IV); USMC Camp
Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV). American Chemical Services, IN (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment). Ml
(V); Cannelton Industries, M l (V), Central illinois Public Service, IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI
451
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TESTING/PILOT STUDIES
Treatability Studies (Continued)
(V); Electrovoice, MI (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V); Peerless Plating, MI
(V),ReiIIy Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V) : South Andover (Operable Unit I)(Arnendinent). MN
(V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V); Tar Lake. MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), MI (V), Gulf Coast
Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1), LA (VI); Prewrn Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI); Broclerick Wood Products,
CO (VIII); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO
(VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII); Punty Oil Sales, CA (IX);
Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (IX): Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4), CA (DC), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (LX). Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base. AK (X); Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X). US
DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engtneenng Lab
(Operable Unit 22), ID (X). Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
TECHNOLOGY
Aeration
Higgins Farm. NJ (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Benfield Industries. NC (IV), H.Brown
Company. Ml (V), Prewiti Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). Pester Refinery. KS (VII)
Air Monitoring
Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II) . Endicon Village Well Field, NY (II). General Motors/Central Foundry
Division. NY (II). industrial Latex. NJ (II). lslip Municipal Sanitary Landfill. NY (II). North Sea Municipal
Landfill, NY (II). Ramapo Landfill. NY (Il). Abex Corp. VA (Ill). C & D Recycling. PA (III). Fike Chemical,
WV (III). Strasburg Landfill. PA (ill). Tonolli, PA (III), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV). National
Electric CoiiJCooper md, KY (IV), American Chemical Services. IN (V), Savanna Army Depot. EL (V). Gull
Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI). Prewiti Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI), 29th & Mead
Groundwater Contamination. KS (VII). Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII),
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII),
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (LX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X),
US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X)
Air Stripping
Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II). Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II). Ellis Property. NJ (II). Endicott Village
Well Field, NY (U). Evor Phillips Laasing. NJ (II). Facet Entcrpnses. NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry
Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm. NJ (II ). Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley
Solvents & Chemical. NY ( [ I). Robunecb/Nauonal Pipe. NY (II). Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination.
NY (II). Chem-Solv. DE (UI), Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (UI); Dublin Water Supply. PA (III);
Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW Manufacturing. PA (III); Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (Ill). Carrier Au
Conditioning. Th (IV); JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV);
National Electric Coil/Cooper lad, KY (IV). New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Poner’s Septic
Tank Service Pits, NC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV); USDCE Oak Ridge
452
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Air Stripping (Continued)
Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN ( IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV); Electrovoice,
Ml(V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Peerless
Plating, Ml (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), 29th &
Mend Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII); Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (LX); Lawrence Livermore National Lab
(USDOE), CA (DC); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX), Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X),
Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X), N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X)
Biodegradation/Land Application
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Benfield Industries, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment), FL (IV), Reilly Tar & Chemical (indianapolis Plant), IN (V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2),
MN (V), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Pester Refinery, KS (VII).
Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Jasco Chemical, CA (DC), Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), McChord AFB (Wash RackfFreatment), WA
CX); Umaulla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X)
Capping
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), PSC Resources, MA (1), Endicoti Village Well Field,
NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II),
Plansburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1). NY (II), Ramapo Landfill, NY (II). Lindane Dump, PA (lii).
Raymark. PA (In). Strasburg Landfill, PA (HI), Tonoili, PA (Ill), U.S Defense General Supply Center
(Operable Unit 5), VA (Ill), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (Ill), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV), florida Steel,
FL (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), Marine Corp
Logistics Base, GA (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV), Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (l v), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), Ml (V). Butterwoith #2 Landfill, MI (V),
Cannelton Industries, Ml (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Clare Water Supply, Ml (V).
Elecirovoice, Ml (V),H Brown Company, MI (V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill. MN
(V),MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V)
Spickler Landfill, WI (V),Tar Lake, MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), Ml (V), In County Landfill,
IL (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services
(Operable Unit I), LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI), Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill. OK (VI). Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Denver Radium
(Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ
(IX), Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-PoulenclZoecon, CA (IX), Westinghouse
Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (DC), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Umatilla Army
Depot (Lagoons), OR (X), US DOE idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X), WyckofflEagle
Hali)or, WA CX)
453
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued).
TECHNOLOGY
Carbon Adsorption (GAC)
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I); PSC Resources, MA (I); Tibbens Road, NH (I); Dover
Municipal Well 4, NJ (U); Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II); General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II);
Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II); Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II); Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II); Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II); Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA
(III); Dublin Water Supply, PA (III); Fike Chemical, WV ( I II); MW Manufacturing, PA (Ill); Paoli Rail Yard,
PA (III); Raymark, PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (III); Westinghouse
Elevator Plant, PA (III); Benfleld Industries, NC (IV); Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (IV); Geigy Chemical
(Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV); JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV); Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL
(IV); Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN (IV); National Electric Coil/Cooper hid, KY (IV); USDOE Oak Ridge
Reservation (Operable Unit 6), TN (IV); USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV); Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV); Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV); Central illinois Public Service, IL
(V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V); Electrovoice, Ml (V); H.Brown Company, Ml (V); Hagen Farm. WI (V);
MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V); Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); New
Brighton/Arden Hills, MN (V); Peerless Plating, Ml (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V);
Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park). MN (V); Tar Lake, MI (V); Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment),
TX (VI); Oklahoma Refming, OK (VI); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII); Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1). UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII); Rocky Flats
Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII); Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX); Jasco Chemical, CA (IX);
Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX); Purity Oil Sales, CA
(LX); Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (LX); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX );
Elxnendorf Air Force Base, AK (X); N.A.S. Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X); US DOE ldaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X); Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
I kapnntumin9fiflfl
PSC Resources, MA (I); Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II); Abex Corp. VA (III); C & D Recycling, PA (III);
PaoIi Rail Yard, PA (III); Tonolli, PA (Ill); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), Al ( IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits
(Amendment), FL (IV); American Chemical Services, IN (V); H.Brown Company, MI (V); Cal West Metals,
NM (VI); Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X); Joseph Forest Products, OR (X); Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling
(Amendment), ID (X); US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID (X)
Dredging
PSC Resources, MA (I); Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II); Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III); Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV); Cannelton Industries, MI (V);Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit
I), LA (VI); Purity Oil Sales, CA.(IX); Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
454
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Excavation
PSC Resources, MA (I); Ellis Property, NJ (II); Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (H); Facet Enteipnses, NY (II);
General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (II); Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (U); Preferred
Plating, NY (II); Rowe industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (III); Brown’s Battery
Breaking, PA (Ill); C & D Recycling, PA (III); Fike Chemical, WV (III), MW Manufacturing. PA (UI), Paoli
Rail Yard, PA (III), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (UI), Strasburg Landfill, PA (ill), Tonolli, PA (III). Agnco
Chemical, FL (IV), Benfield Industries, NC (IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV); Flonda Steel, FL (IV),
Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Marine Corp Logistics
Base, GA (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC
(IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV); Standard Auto Bumper, FL (IV), Whitehouse Waste
Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V),
Cannelton Industries, MI (V); Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), Electrovoice, MI (V), MIDCO I
(Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V): Peerless Plating. MI (V), Savanna Army Depot, IL
(V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2), MN (V), Tar Lake, Ml (V); Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), MI
(V), Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI), Double
Eagle Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable
Unit 1), LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI), Koppers (Texarkana
Plant)(Amendinent), TX (VI). Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Brodenck
Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), liT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (LX), hon Mountain Mine, CA (IX); Jasco Chemical,
CA (LX), Punty Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-Poulenclzoecon, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit
4), CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (LX), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB
(Wash Rack/Treatment). WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), Umatilla Army Depot
(Lagoons), OR (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X), US DOE Idaho
National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 23). ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
Filling
PSC Resources, MA (I), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II), Fike
Chemical. WV (ill), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump. VA (III). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Geigy
Chemical (Aberdcen Plant), NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Standard Auto Bumper. FL
(IV), Central fllinois Public Service, EL CV), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI). Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8).
CO (VIII). Hill Air Force Base, UT (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT
(VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII), Silver Bow CreekIButte Area, MT (VIII); Punty Oil
Sales, CA (DC); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX). Joseph Forest Products, OR (X). McChord
AFB (Wash Rack!freamient), WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X)
455
-------
SEC TION!V
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Ground Water Monitoring
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (1); Bnmswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I);
Darling Hill Dump, Vr (I). Newport Naval EducanonlFrazning Center. RI (I); Otis Air National Guard/Camp
Edwards, MA (I); PSC Resources, MA (I); Revere Textile Prints, CT (I); Tibbetis Road, NH (I); Town
Garage/Radio Beacon, NH (I); Action Axicxhuing. Plating and Polishing. NY (II); Cosden Chemical Coatings. Ni
(II). Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (U), Ellis Property. NJ (II); Endicott Village Well Field, NY (U); Evor Phillips
Leasing, NJ (11); Facet Enterprises, NY (LI); General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II); Higgins Farm.
NJ (II); Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals, NJ (II); Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II); KinBuc Landfill,
NJ (I L), North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY (II); Pas)ey Solvents & Chemical, NY (II). Plansburgh Air Force
Base (Operable Unit I). NY (II). Plattsburgb Air F0Tce Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (U); Raniapo Landfill, NY
(U); RobtntechINauonal Pipe, NY (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Witco Chemical
(Oakland Plant), NJ (II). Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (Ill), Butz Landfill, PA (Ill); C & D Recycling, PA
(III), Chem-Solv, DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (ill); Dublin Water Supply, PA (III); Lmdane
Dump, PA (III). MW Manufacturing. PA (III), Paoh Rail Yard, PA (III); Route 940 Drum Dump, PA (lii);
Suasburg Landfill, PA (111). Suffolk City Landfill. VA (UI). Tonolli, PA (III). Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA
(Ill). Agnco Chemical. FL (TV). Benfield Industries. NC (IV), Camer Air Conditioning, TN (IV); Chem-form.
FL ( IV), Florida Steel, FL (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV); .TFD Electronics/Channel Master,
NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill. FL (IV); Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Milan Army
Ammunition Plant, TN (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper md. KY (LV); New Hanover County Airport Bum
Pit. NC (TV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOperahie Unit I). SC (IV),
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). SC (IV), Savannah River (IJSDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV);
Standard Auto Bumper, FL (IV); USMC Camp L.ejeune Military Reservation. NC (IV), Whitebouse Waste Oil
Pits (Amendment). FL (IV). Wilson Concepts of Florida. FL (IV); Woodbury Chemical (Princeton Plant). FL
( IV). Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), Alsco Anaconda. OH (V), Amencail Chemical Services. IN (V),
Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V), Cannelcon Industries, Ml (V), Central Illinois Public ServLce, IL (V), City
Disposal Sanitary L..andfill, WI (V), Clare Water Supply. Ml (V), Columbus Old Municipal Landfill, IN (V).
Electrovoice, Ml (V), Grand Traverse Overall Supply, M l (V), H.Brown Company, Ml (V); Hagen Farm, WI
CV). La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V). MIDCO 1 (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V).
Muskego Sanitary Landfill. Wi (V) New BnghtonlArden Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating, Ml (V), Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V), Skinner Landfill. OH
(V), South Andover (Operable Unit l)(AmendmenO. MN (V), Spickier Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, Ml (V), Tn
Courny Landfill, IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill), MN (V), Cal West Metals. NM (VI), Double
Eagle Refinery. OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI), Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill. OK (VI). Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Prewiti Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), 29th & Mead
Groundwater Cocitarninauon, KS (Vii), Des Moines TCE. IA (VII), Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (VII),
Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable
Unit 9). CO (VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense
Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII); Hassayamnpa Landfill, AZ (IX)
Jasco Chemical, CA ( IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA
(IX), Purity Oil Sales. CA (LX). Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (LX); Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA
(LX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X); Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Elmendorf Air
Force Base, AK (X); Fort Lewis (Landfill No. 5), WA CX); Joseph Forest Products, OR IX). McChord AFB
(Wash Rack/Treatment). WA CX); N.A.S Whidbey Island- Ault Field, WA CX); Pesticide Lab - Yakima. WA
(X), US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X). Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA CX)
456
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Ground Water Treatment (Continued)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I); Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I):
Newport Naval Educauonflraimng Center, RI (1), Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards, MA (I); PSC
Resources. MA (I); Tibbetts Road, NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II): Dover Municipal Well 4. NJ (II):
Ellis Property, NJ (II); Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (Ii). Facet Enterprises, NY (II), General Motors/Central
Foundry Division. NY (II). Higgins Farm, NJ (II); Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals. NJ (II), Islip Municipal
Sanitary L.andfill, NY (II), Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Pasley Solvents &
Chemical, NY (II). Ramapo Landfill, NY (II), Robintech/National Pipe, NY (II); Rowe Industries Groundwater
Contamination, NY (II), Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (III): Butz Landfill. PA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (ill),
Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (ill). Dublin Water Supply, PA (UI), Lindane Dump, PA (III), MW
Manufacturing. PA (UI), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (III), Tonolli, PA (Ill), Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III),
Benfield Industries, NC (IV), Carrier Au Conditioning, TN (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant). NC (IV),
JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV). Madison County Sanitaiy Landfill, FL (IV), Milan Army Ammunition
Plant, TN (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper Ind, KY (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV);
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOEXOperable Unit 3). SC (IV), USMC Camp
Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), Yellow Water Road
Dump. FL (IV), American Chemical Services. IN (V). Central Illinois Public Service. IL (V). City Disposal
Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Clare Water Supply, MI (V), Electrovoice, Ml (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V);
MIDCO I I (Amendment). IN (V), New BnghtoniArden Hills, MN (V); Peerless Plating, MI (V), Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN (V); Tar Lake, MI (V), Tn
County Landfill, IL (V), Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (Vi), Prewiti
Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII), Brodenck Wood Products,
CO (VIII). Idaho Pole. MT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot
(Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII). Rocky flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Silver Bow Creek/Butte
Area. MT (VIII). Hassayampa Landfill. AZ (LX). Jasco Chemical. CA ( IX). Lawrence Livermore National Lab
(USDOE). CA (LX). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (LX). Rhone-Poulenc/Z.oecon. CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric
(Sunnyvale Plant). CA (LX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X), Eielson Air Force Base.
AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base. AK (X), N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field. WA CX). US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X)
Encineration!I’hermal Destruction
Ellis Property. NJ (II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Industrial Latex. NJ (II). Fike
Chemical, WV (UI). Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy
(Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV). Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military
Reservation, NC (IV). American Chemical Services. IN (V),Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V). Savanna
Army Depot. IL (V). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1). LA (VI), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable
Unit I), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit
4), UT (VIII), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX).
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA (IX), Eielson Air Force Base, AK CX). Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment). ID (X), US DOE ldaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID (X)
457
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Leachate Collection.flreatinent
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); Ramapo Landfill. NY (II); Lindane Dump, PA (III); Scrasburg Landfill, PA
(III); Tonolli, PA (III); Bofors Nobel (Amendment). MI (V); Kohier Landfill, WI (V); Muskego Sanitary
Landfill, WI CV); Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V); Tn County Landfill, IL (V); Bunker Hill Mining
and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X)
Levees
None
Offsite Discharge
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I); Brunswick Naval Au Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I);
Newport Naval Education/Training Center, RI (1), PSC Resources, MA (I), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II);
Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (Ill): Commodore
Semiconductor Group, PA (III), Camer Air Conditioning. TN (IV) : JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV);
Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV). Savannah River
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Cannelton
Industries, Ml (V); Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), Electrovoice, MI CV), Hagen Farm, WI CV). New
Bnghton/Arden Hills. MN (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (St
Louis Park). MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tn County Landfill, IL CV), 29th & Mead Groundwater
Contamination, KS (VII). Pester Refinery, KS (VII). Idaho Pole, MT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Jasco Chemical. CA (IX). Elmendorf Au Force Base. AK (X)
Offsite Disposal
PSC Resources. MA (I). Tibbens Road. NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (H), Ellis Property. NJ (II), Evor
Phillips Leasing. NJ (II). Facet Enterprises. NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins
Farm, NJ (II). Impenal OiliChampion Chemicals. NJ (11). industrial Latex, NJ (H). Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (ii).
Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical. NY (II). Preferred
Plating. NY (ii), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). Abex Corp VA (III): Brown’s Battery
Breaking. PA (Ill). Butz Landfill. PA (III). C & D Recycling. PA (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA
(Ill). Eastern Diversified Metals. PA (III). Fike Chemical. WV (III). Lindane Dump. PA (III), MW
Manufacturing. PA (III), Paoli Rail Yard. PA (III). Rhinehafl Tire Fire Dump, VA (HI), Tonolli, PA (III). U.S.
Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (Iii). Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV),
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base.
GA (IV). Milan Army Ammunition Plant, TN (IV). Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV). Standard Auto
Bumper, FL (IV); USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV), Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV);
American Chemical Services, IN (V), Bunerworth #2 Landfill, MI CV), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V);
Clare Water Supply. MI (V), Electrovoice, MI (V); H.Brown Company. MI (V), Hagen Farm. WI (V); New
Bngbton/Arden Hills, MN (V). Peerless Plating. Ml (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V),
South Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), MI (V). Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI); Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Ainefldmetit), TX
(VI). Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). Pester Refinery, KS (VII); Brodenick Wood Products. CO (VIII);
458
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Offsite Disposal (Continued)
Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII); Portland
Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX); Purity Oil Sales, CA ( IX); Sacramento Army
Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (DC); Westinghouse Electric
(Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X); Eielson Air Force Base,
AK (X), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X); Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash
RackTfreatrnent), WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), II) (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), ID
(X), Wyckoff/E.agle Harbor, WA (X)
OlTsite Treatment
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Urn! 2), ME (I), Newport Naval Educationlfraimng Center, RI (I);
Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II), Ellis Property, NJ (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II),
Ramapo Landfill, NY (II), Rowe Industries Groundwater Contaimnation. NY (II): Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA
(III), Chem-Solv. DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor Group, PA (III), Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III),
Fike Chemical, WV (III), Tonolli, PA (III), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (Ill).
Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pii.s, NC (IV), USMC Camp Lejeune
Military Reservation, NC ( IV); Cannelton Industries, MI (V), Clare Water Supply, MI (V), Electrovoice, MI (V),
New Brighton/Arden Hills, MN (V), Peerless Plating, MI (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park), MN (V),
Tn County Landfill, IL (V). Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII), Idaho
Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII): Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3),
UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2).
CO (VIII), Iron Mountain Mine. CA (IX), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3),
CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA ( IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant). CA
(IX), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X). McChord AFB (Wash Rackfrreatment), WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur
Recycling (Amendment), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2). ID (X). US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23). ID (X)
Onsite Containment
Brunswick Naval Au Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I). Endicott Village Well Field. NY (II). General
Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (II),
Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit I), NY (U), Platt.sburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II),
Ramapo Landfill, NY (II), C & D Recycling. PA (III), Lindane Dump, PA (III), Raymark. PA (III). Strasburg
Landfill, PA (III), Tonolli, PA (UI), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (III), USA
Aberdeen, Mich lsville, MD (III), Agrico Chemical, FL (IV); Ciba-Geigy (McIntosh Plant), AL (IV), Honda
Steel, FL (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC
(IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V),Bofors Nobel (Amendment), M l (V); Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI
(V), Cannelton Industries, MI (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Clare Water Supply, Ml (V); Kohier
Landfill, WI (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Tar Lake, MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3),
MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services
(Operable Unit 1), LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI); Mosley Road Sanitary
459
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Onsite Containment (Continued)
Landfill, OK (VI); Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII); Hill Air Force
Base, UT (VIII); Idaho Pole. MT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII); Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Hassayainpa Landfill. AZ (IX); Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX); Purity Oil Sales,
CA (IX); Rhone-Poulenc/ZoecOn, CA ( IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX). Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X); Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X): Umatilla Army Depot
(Lagoons). OR (X); US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5). ID (X); WyckoffiEagle Harbor.
WA (X)
Onsite Discharge
Otis Air National Guard/Camp E4iwards. MA (I). Tibbetts Road. NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II):
Ellis Property. NJ (II). Endicoti Village Well Field, NY (II). Evor Phillips Leasing. NJ (II); Facet Enterprises.
NY (II); General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II); imperial Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ (II), Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill. NY (II), Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II);
RobintechlNationai Pipe. NY (II): Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (III). Butz Landfill. PA (III); Chem-SoIv. DE
(III). Commodore Semiconductor Group. PA (UI), MW Manufacturing. PA (III); Rhmehart Tire Fire Dump. VA
(III). Strasburg Landfill. PA (III), TonolLi. PA (III); Westinghouse Elevator Plant. PA (III): Benfleld Industries,
NC (IV), Carrier Air Conditioning. TN ( IV). . TD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County
Sanitary Landfill. FL (IV). Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV). National Electric Coil/Cooper md, KY
(IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV). Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). SC (IV).
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 3). SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN
(IV); USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation. NC (IV). Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV):
Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), Alsco Anacond OH (V). American Chemical Services, IN (V); Cannelton
industries, MI (V), Central Illinois Public Service, IL (V), City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, Wi (V), Clare Water
Supply. MI (V), H.Brown Company. Ml (V). Hagen Farm. WI (V), Kohier Landfill, WI (V), MIDCO I
(Amendment), IN (V); M [ DCO 11 (Amendment). IN (V), Muskego Sazutary Landfill, WI (V) Peerless Plating.
Ml (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant). IN (V). Spickler Landfill, WI (V),Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI). Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI),
Idaho Pole, MT (VIII). Hassayaznpa Landfill. AZ (IX). Iron Mountain Mine. CA ( IX). Lawrence Livermore
National Lab (USDOE). CA (DC). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (LX). Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant),
CA (IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base. AK (X): N.A S
Wtudbey Island- Ault Field. WA (X). US DOE idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID 00,
WyckofffEagle Harbor. WA (X)
Onsite Disposal
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), Newport Naval EducationTfrainiflg Center, RI (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I): Cosden Chemical Coatings. NJ (II), Endacott Village Well Field, NY (II); General
Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II), Ishp Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II ). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II);
Plausburgh Au Force Base (Operable Unit 1), NY (II). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3). NY (II), C
& D Recycling. PA (III); Lindane Dump. PA (III ). Raymark. PA (III); Suasburg Landfill, PA (UI); Tonolli. PA
(III); U.S. Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5). VA (Ill); USA Aberdeen. MichaelsVille, MD (III) :
kgnco Chemical, FL (IV). Alabama Army Ammunition Plant. AL (IV); Benfield industries. NC (IV): Carrier
460
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Onsite Disposal (Continued)
Air Conditioning, TN (IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV); florida Steel, FL (IV), JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary Landfill, FL (IV); Marine Corp Logistics Base,
GA (IV); Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (IV),
Savannah River (USDOE)(Operabie Unit 2). SC (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV);
Amencan Chemical Services, IN (V), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V), Butterworth #2 Landfill, MI (V);
Cannelton Industries, Ml (V), Ciare Water Supply, Ml (V), Electrovoice, M l (V), H.Brown Company, Ml (V);
Kohler Landfill. WI (V); La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II
(Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary L.andfihl, WI (V), Peerless Plating, MI (V), Savanna Army Depot, IL
(V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, MI (V), Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3), Ml (V), T n County
Landfill, IL. (V), Ca] West Metals, NM (VI), Crystal Chemical (Amendment), TX (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum
Services (Operable Unit I), LA (VI), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2), LA (VI). Mosley Road
Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining, OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI), Denver
Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9), CO (VIII), Hill Air Force Base, UT
(VIII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1), UT (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Rocky Fiats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII); Silver Bow
Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX): Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX), Lawrence
Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (LX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines, CA (IX); Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX);
Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (LX), Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Eielson Air Force Base,
AK (X), McChord AFB (Wash RackTI’reaiment), WA (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X),
Urnatilla Army Depot (Lagoons). OR (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X),
US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22). ID (X), US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 23), ID (X). Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor. WA (X)
Onsite Treatment
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I), ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I),
Newport Naval EducauonTl’raining Center. RI (I). Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards. MA (I), PSC
Resources, MA (I), Tibbetis Road. NH (I). Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II), Dover Municipal Well 4, NJ (II),
Ellis Property. NJ (II), Endicoit Village Well Field, NY (II), Evor Phillips Leasing, NJ (II). Facet Enterpnses.
NY (II). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II), Impenal Oil/Champion
Chemicals, NJ (II). Industrial Latex, NJ (II), lslip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II), Naval Air Engineering
Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II), Robintech/Natjonai Pipe, NY (II),
Rowe lndustries Groundwater Contamination. NY (II). Abex Corp. VA (III), Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA
(III), Butz Landfill, PA (III), C & D Recycling, PA (III), Chem-Solv, DE (III), Commodore Semiconductor
Group, PA (III), Dublin Water Supply, PA (III). Eastern Diversified Metals, PA (III), MW Manufacturing, PA
(Ill), Paoli Rail Yard, PA (Ill), Raymark, PA (III). Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III), Strasburg Landfill, PA
(III), Tonolli, PA (III), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (III); Westinghouse Elevator
Plant, PA (III), Agnco Chemical. FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Benfield lndustnec, NC
(IV), Carrier Air Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV), Florida Steel. FL (IV); Geigy
Chemical (Aberdeen Plant), NC (IV); JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Madison County Sanitary
Landfill, FL (IV), Milan Army Ammunition Plant. TN (IV), National Electric Coil/Cooper hid, KY (IV); New
Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV), Savannah River
461
-------
SECTiON IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD UST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Onsite Treatment (Continued)
(USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV); Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), SC (IV); Savannah River
(IJSDOE)(Operable Unit 3), SC (IV), USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). Th (IV);USMC Camp
Lejeune Military Reservation, NC (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV); Yellow Water Road
Dump, FL (IV); American Chemical Services. IN (V): Cannelton Industries, M l (V); Central flhnois Public
Service, IL (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V); Clare Water Supply, MI (V); Elecuovoice. MI (V);
H Brown Company. MI (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), Kohler Landfill, WI (V); MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V);
MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Peerless Plating. MI (V). Reilly Tar &
Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V); Savanna Army Depot, IL (V). South Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN
(V); Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, Ml (V). Tn County Landfill. IL (V); Cal West Metals, NM (VI);
Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services
(Operable Unit I). LA (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (VI), Koppers (Texarkana
Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI); Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Prewitt Abandoned Refinery. NM (VI). Pester
Refinery. KS (VII); Brodenck Wood Products. CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8). CO (VIII); Idaho
Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I), UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3),
UT (VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII). Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT
(VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4),
CO (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, MT (VIII), Hassayampa Landfill, AZ ( IX). Iron Mountain Mine. CA
(IX), Jasco Chemical, CA (IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA (IX). Pacific Coast Pipe Lines.
CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales, CA (LX), Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon. CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit
3). CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4). CA (IX): Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical
Complex, ID (X). Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X). Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X), McChord AFB (Wash
RacklTreatmerit), WA (X). N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field, WA (X). Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling
(Amendment). ID (X). Umatilla Army Depot (Lagc ns). OR (X). US DOE Idaho Nauonal Eogineenng Lab
(Operable Unit 2). II) (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5). ID (X). US DOE Idaho
National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID (X). US DOE Idaho National Engineenrig Lab (Operable Unit
23). ID (X). Wyckofu/Eagle Harbor. WA (X)
Plume Management
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1). ME (I). Newport Naval EducationlFraining Center, RI (1). MW
Manufacturing. PA (III). Westinghouse Elevator Plant, PA (III), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits. NC (IV).
Savannah River (USDOE)(Opcrable Unit 3). SC (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV) :
MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V). MIDCO II (Amendment). IN (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant).
IN (V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park). MN (V), Tar Lake. MI (V), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), 29th
& Mend Groundwater Contarrunalion. KS (VII). Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative. IA (VII), Jasco Chemical. CA
(IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX); Rhone-Poulenc/ZOeCOn. CA (IX), N A.S Whidbey
island - Ault Field. WA (X)
4.62
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (I); Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2), ME (I),
Newport Naval Education!rraining Center, RI (1), Endicoti Village Well Field, NY (II), Ramapo Landfill, NY
(II), Abex Corp. VA (UI), Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (Hi); Chem-Solv, DE (ill). Commodore Semiconductor
Group, PA (Ill), Benfield Industries, NC (IV), Carrier Air Conditionmg, TN (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen
Plant), NC (IV); JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit, NC (IV),
USMC Camp Lejeune Militazy Reservation, NC (IV), Cannelton industries, MI (V). Electrovoice, Ml (V); Reilly
Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), keiIly Tar & Chemical (St. Louis Park), MN (V), Spickler
Landfill, WI (V); Tn County Landfill, IL (V), Pester Refinery, KS (VII), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Rocky Flats
PLant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII), Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (X)
Relocation
Abex Corp. VA (III), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV). Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Arnendment), TX
(VI), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X)
Slurry Wall
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II),
Agrico Chemical. FL (IV), Punty Oil Sales, CA (IX), Rhone-Poulencfzoecon, CA (LX)
Soil WashinglFlushing
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7). NJ (II). Pasley Solvents & Chemical. NY (Ii), Benfield
Industries, NC ( IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV),
Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Idaho Pole. MT (VIII), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4). CA (IX)
Solidification)Stabilization
PSC Resources, MA (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (II), Ellis Property. NJ (II), Facet Enterpnses. NY (II).
Preferred Plating. NY (II), Abex Corp. VA (Ill). Brown’s Battery Breaking. PA (III), C & D Recycling. PA
(III). Fike Chemical, WV (ill). Paoli Rail Yard, PA (ill), Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump, VA (III). Tonolli. PA (III),
Agnco Chemical. FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV),
Flonda Steel, FL (IV), JFD Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV). Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV),
Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pus. NC (IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit I), SC (IV). Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits (Amendment). FL (IV), Electrovoice, MI (V), H Brown Company. MI (V). MIDCO I
(Amendment), IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V), Savanna Army Depot, IL
(V), Spickler Landfill, Wi (V),Tar Lake, Ml (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI). Double Eagle Refinery, OK (VI),
Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery. OK (VI). Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I) LA (VI),
Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Broderick Wood Products, CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO
(VIII), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII),
Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4). UT (VIII), Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII); Rocky
Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII), Rhone-Poulenc Zoecon, CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot
(Operable Unit 4), CA (IX), Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X), Joseph Forest Products,
463
-------
SECTiON IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Soildification/StabllizatiOfl (Continued)
OR (X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment). ID (X), US DOE Idaho Nauonal Engineering Lab
(Operable Unit 22), ID CX); Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor. WA CX)
Solvent Extraction
Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV); Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX)
Surface Water Diversion/Collection
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (I). General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (11), Ishp
Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (II), Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit I).
NY (II). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 3), NY (II), Raznapo Landfill. NY (II). Fike Chemical. WV
(Ill), USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville. MD (Ill). Florida Steel, FL (IV), Tar Lake, Ml (V), Tn County Landfill. IL
(V), Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2). LA (Vi); Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI). Rocky Flats Plant
(USDOE)(Operable Unit 4). CO (VIII). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIID, Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX).
Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex. ID (X)
Surface Water Monitoring
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit I). ME (I). Darling Hill Dump, VT (1). PSC Resources. MA (I):
Tibbetts Road. NH (I), General Motors/Central Foundry Division. NY (II), Higgins Farm, NJ (II). Kin-Buc
Landfill, NJ (II). Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1). NY (II). Ramapo Landfill. NY (II) : C & D
Recycling. PA (III), Lindane Dump. PA (Ill). Whitebouse Waste Oil Pus (Amendment). FL (IV). Butterwoith #2
Landfill. Ml (V). Cannelton Industries. Ml (V), Central illinois Public Service. IL (V). H.Brown Company. Ml
(V), South Andover (Operable Unit 2). MN (V). Tn County Landfill. IL (V), Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR
Landfill). MN (V).Pester Refinery. KS (Vii). Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII). Bunker Hill Mining and
Metallurgical Complex. ID (X)
Surface Water Treatment
PSC Resources. MA (I), General MotorsiCentral Foundry Division. NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill, NJ (II). Rhinehait
Tire Fire Dump. VA ( [ II). Savannah River (USDOE)(OPerable Unit I). SC (l v). Savannah River
(USDOE)(OPC1able Unit 2). SC (IV ). USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6). TN (IV). H.BroWfl
Company. Ml (V). Savanna Army Depot. IL (V).Tar Lake. MI (V),Tri County LandftlJ, IL (V). Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (VI), Rocky flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4). CO (VIII),
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII). lion Mountain Mine, CA (IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical
Complex. 1D (X)
464
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Temporary Storage
Abex Corp, VA (III); Fike Chemical, WV (III), Florida Steel, FL (IV), Bofors Nobel (Amendment), MI (V);
Brodenck Wood Products, CO (VIII); Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VIII); Idaho Pole, MT (VIII),
Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2), CO (VIII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO
(VIII), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX); ELinendorf Air Force Base, AK (X), Pacific Hide
& Fur Recycling (Amendment). ID (X); US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID (X),
US DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5), ID (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
Treatment Technology
Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1), ME (I), Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 2). ME (I),
PSC Resources, MA (I). Tibbetts Road, NH (I), Cosden Chemical Coatings, NJ (Ii), Ellis Property, NJ (II);
Facet Enterpnses, NY (II), General Motors/Central Foundry Division, NY (II), Industrial Latex, NJ (II), Naval
Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II); Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II); Preferred Plating, NY
(II); Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination, NY (II); Abex Corp, VA (III), Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA
(III), C & D Recycling, PA (ill), Fike Chemical, WV (Ill), Paoii Rail Yard, PA (fli), Raymark, PA (III).
Rhinehart Tue Fire Dump, VA (III), TonolLi, PA (III), U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5),
VA (III). Agnco Chemical, FL (IV), Alabama Army Ammunition Plant, AL (IV). Benfleld Industries, NC (IV),
Camer Air Conditioning, TN (IV), Ciba-Geigy (Mclntosh Plant), AL (IV), Florida Steel, FL (IV), JFD
Electronics/Channel Master, NC (IV), Marine Corp Logistics Base, GA (IV), Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits,
NC ( IV), Savannah River (USDOE)(Operable Unit 1), SC (TV), USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation, NC
(IV), Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL (IV), American Chemical Services, IN (V), Central IlLinois
Public Service, IL (V),City Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), Clare Water Supply, MI (V). Electrovoice, Ml
IV), H Brown Company, MI (V), MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V), MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V), Muskego
Sanitary Landfill, WI (V), Peerless Plating. Ml (V), Savanna Army Depot, EL (V). South Andover (Operable
Unit 2), MN (V), Spickler Landfill, WI (V), Tar Lake, Ml (V), Cal West Metals, NM (VI), Double Eagle
Refinery, OK (Vi), Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery, OK (VI); Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit I),
LA (VI), Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Amendment), TX (VI), Oklahoma Refining. OK (Vt), Prewitt Abandoned
Refinery, NM (VI), 29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination. KS (VII), Pester Refinery. KS (VII), Broderick
Wood Products. CO (VIII), Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8), CO (VII]), Idaho Pole, MT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit I). UT (VIII). Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3). UT (VIII), Ogden
Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4), UT (VIII). Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3), UT (VIII), Rocky Flats
Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII). Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 4), CO (VIII),
Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX). Jasco Chemical, CA (l x), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE). CA
( LX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines. CA (IX). Purity Oil Sales, CA (LX), Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (LX),
Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3). CA (IX), Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4), CA (IX),
Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale Plant), CA (IX). Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X),
Eielson Air Force Base, AK (X), Joseph Forest Products, OR (X), McChord AFB (Wash RackTFreatmenO, WA
(X), Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment), ID (X), Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons), OR (X), US DOE
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 2), ID 00. US DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable
Unit 5). ID (X), US DOE idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Unit 22), ID (X), US DOE Idaho National
Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23), II) (X), Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor, WA (X)
465
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
TECHNOLOGY
Vacuum Extraction
Tibbetis Road, NH (I); Pasley Solvents & Chemical. NY (II); Raymark, PA (III); U.S. Defense General Supply
Center (Operable Unit 5), VA (III); Camer Au Conditioning, TN (IV); Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant), AL (IV);
Amencan Chemical Services. IN (V); City Disposal Sanitary Landfill, WI (V); Clare Water Supply, Ml (V),
Electrovoice, MI CV); MIDCO I (Amendment). IN (V); MIDCO II (Amendment), IN (V); Muskego Sanitary
Landfill, WI (V); Peerless Plating, MI (V). Tn County Landfill, IL (V); Prewitt Abandoned Refinery, NM (VI);
29th & Mead Groundwater Contamination, KS (VII); Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE)(Operable Unit 2). CO (VIII);
Hassayampa Landfill, AZ (IX), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE), CA (IX), Pacific Coast Pipe Lines,
CA (IX), Purity Oil Sales, CA (IX). Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3), CA (IX). Etelson Air Force
Base, AK (X)
Venting
Endzcott Village Well Field, NY (II), Strasburg Landfill, PA (III); USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville, MD (III); City
Disposal Sanitary Landfill. WI (V), La Grande Sanitary Landfill, MN (V), Muskego Sanitary Landfill, WI (V)
Volatilization/Soil Aeration
None
Vitrification
None
MISCELLANEOUS
Municipally-Owned Site
Hassayainpa Landfill, AZ (IX)
Woodlands
None
HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT
ACL (Alternate Concentration Limits)
Bunerworth #2 Landfill, Ml (V)
466
-------
SECTION IV
RECORD OF DECISION FY 1992 KEYWORD LIST INDEX (Continued)
MISCELLANEOUS
Background Levels
Action Anodizing, Plating and Polishing, NY (II); Pasley Solvents & Chemical, NY (II); Brown’s Battery
Breaking, PA (Ill); Butz Landfill. PA (III); Rhinehart Tue Fire Dump, VA (ill), South Andover (Operable Unit
l)(Amendment), MN (V), Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill, OK (VI), Rocky Flats Plant (USDOEXOperable Unit
2), CO (VIII); hon Mountain Mine, CA (IX), Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (LX); Joseph Forest Products, OR (X);
McChord AFB (Wash Rack!Treaunent), WA (X)
Deferred Decision
Naval Air Engineenng Center (Operable Unit 7), NJ (II), Preferred Plating, NY (II), Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh
Plant), AL (IV), Amencan Chemical Services. IN (V), Hagen Farm, WI (V), Reilly Tar & Chemical
(Indianapolis Plant), IN (V), Okiahoma Refining. OK (VI), Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3), UT (VIII);
Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area. MT (VIII), Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon, CA (IX), Westinghouse Electric (Sunnyvale
Plant), CA (LX). Bunicer Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex, ID (X)
Initial Remedial Measure (IRM)
None
Contingent Remedy
Town Garage/Radio Beacon. NH (I). Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill, NY (II). Kin-Buc Landfill. NJ (II),
Ramapo Landfill. NY (II), Robintech/Naijonal Pipe. NY (II). Brown’s Battery Breaking, PA (Ill). Chem-Solv.
DE (III), MW Manufactunng. PA (III). Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant). AL (IV), Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen
Plant), NC (IV ), New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit. NC (IV). Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits, NC (IV).
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment), FL ( IV). Yellow Water Road Dump, FL (IV), Columbus Old
Municipal Landfill. IN (V). Electrovoice, Ml (V), MIDCO I (Amendment), IN (V). MIDCO II (Amendment), IN
(‘V). Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park). MN (V). Tn County Landfill. IL (V), Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill. OK (VI), Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative, IA (VII). Rbone-Poulenc!Zoecon, CA (IX)
4.67
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992
REGION . SifE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
1 Auburn Road Landfill NH 09/17/86
1 AuburnRoad Landfill N I- I 09/29/89
I Ba ird&McGu ire MA 09/30/86
I Baird & McGuire MA 09/14/89
I Baird&McGuire MA 09/27/90
I Beacon Heights Landfill CT 09/23/85
I Beacon Heights LandiilI CT 09/28/90
I Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit 1) ME 06/16/92
1 Brunswick Naval Air Station (Operable Unit z) ME 06/16/92
1 Cannon Engineering MA 03/31/88
I Charles George Reclamation Trust Landfill MA 12/29/83
I Charles George Reclamation Trust Landfill MA 07/11/85
I Charles George Reclamation Trust Landfill MA 09/29/88
I Charles George Reclamation Trust Landfill MA 09/29/88
I Coaldey Landfill NH 06/28/90
I Darling Hill Dump VT 06/30/92
I Davis Liqwd Waste RI 09/29/87
I Dover Municipal Landfill NH 09/10/91
1 Groveland Wells MA 09/30/88
I Groveland Wells MA 09/30/91
I Hocomonco Pond MA 09/30/85
I Industn-plex MA 09/30/86
I Iron Horse Park MA 09/15/88
I Iron Horse Park MA 06/27/91
I Kearsarge Metallurgical NH 09/28/90
I Keefe Environmental Services NH 11/15/83
I Keefe Environmental Services NH 03/21/88
I Kellogg-Deenng Well Field CT 09/25/86
I Kellogg-Deering Well Field CT 09/29/89
I Landfill & Resource Recovery RI 09/29/88
I Laurel Park CT 06/30/88
I McKin ME 07/15/83
I McKin ME 07/22/85
I Mottolo Pig Farm NH 03/ 29 /91
1 New Bedford MA 04/06/90
1 Newport Naval Education /Trammg Center RI 09/29/92
I Norwood PCBs MA 09/29/89
Nyariza Chemical Waste Dump MA 09/04/85
Nyanza Chemical Waste Dump MA 09/23/91
1 O’Connor ME 09/27/89
I Old Springfield Landfill VT 09/22/88
I Old Springfield Landfill VT 09/29/90
Otis Air National Guard/Camp Edwards MA 05/20/92
1 Ottati & Goss/Kuigston Steel Drum NH 01/16/87
I Picillo Farm RI 09/30/85
469
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
1 Picillo Farm (Amendment) RI 03/03/87
1 Puiette’s Salvage Yard ME 05/30/89
I Plymouth Harbor/Cannon Engineering MA 09/30/85
1 PSC Resources MA 09/15/92
1 Re-Solve MA 07/01/83
1 Re-Solve MA 09/24/87
I Revere Textile Prints cr 09/30/92
I Rose Disposal Pit MA 09/23/88
I Saco Tannery Waste Pits ME 09/27/89
1 Savage Muruapal Water Supply NH 09/27/91
1 Stlresim Chemical MA 09/19/91
I South Municipal Water Supply Well NI-I 09/27/89
I Stanuna Mills RI 09/28/90
I Sullivan’s Ledge MA 06/29/89
i Sullivan’s Ledge MA 09/27/91
i Sylvester’s NH 07/29/82
1 Sylvester’s NH 09/22/83
I Tibbetts Road NH 09/29/92
I TinkhamGarage NI-I 09/30/86
I Town Garage/Radio Beacon NH 09/30/92
I Union Chemical ME 12/27/90
1 W.R Grace (Acton Plant) MA 09/29/89
I Wells G&H MA 09/14/89
1 Western Sand & Gravel RI 09/28/84
1 Western Sand & Gravel RI 04/16/91
I Winthrop Landfill ME 11/22/85
I Yaworsk iWasteLagoon Cr 09/29/88
Subtotal 72
2 Action Anodizing., Plating., and Polishing NY 06/30/92
2 American Thermostat NY 01/07/88
2 American Thermostat NY 06/29/90
2 AO Polymer NJ 06/28/91
2 Applied Environmental Services NY 06/24/91
2 Asbestos Dump NJ 09/30/88
2 Asbestos Dump NJ 09/27/91
2 Beachwood/Berkeley Wells NJ 06/30/88
2 BEC Trucking NY 09/28/89
2 Biochnical Laboratories NY 09/30/92
2 Bog Creek Farm NJ 09/30/85
2 Bog Creek Farm NJ 06/28/89
2 Brewster Weilhield NY 09/30/86
2 Brewster Wellfield NY 09/29/88
2 Bridgeport Rental & Oil Service NJ 12/31/84
2 BurntFlyBog NJ 11/16/83
2 Burnt F ly Bog NJ 09/29/88
470
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
2 Byron Barrel & Drum NY 09/29/89
2 C&JDisposal NY 03/29/91
2 Caldwell Trucking NJ 09/25/86
2 Caidwell Trucking NJ 09/28/89
2 Chemical Control NJ 09/20/83
2 Chemical Control NJ 09/23/87
2 Chemical Insecticide NJ 09/28/89
2 Chemical Leaman Tank Lines NJ 09/28/90
2 Chemsol NJ 09/20/91
2 Ciba-Geigy NJ 04/24/89
2 Cinnaminson Ground Water Contamination NJ 09/28/90
2 Circuitron NY 03/29/91
2 Claremont Polychemical NY 09/22/89
2 Claremont Polychemical NY 09/28/90
2 Clothier Disposal NY 12/28/88
2 Colesville Municipal Landfill NY 03/29/91
2 Combe Fill North Landfill NJ 09/29/86
2 Combe Fill South Landfill NJ 09/29/86
2 Conklin Dumps NY 03/29/91
2 Cooper Road NJ 09/30/87
2 Cosden Chemical Coatings NJ 09/30/92
2 Curcio Scrap Metal NJ 06/28/91
2 D’Iinperio Property NJ 03/27/85
2 DeRewal Chemical NJ 09/29/89
2 Diamond Alkali NJ 09/30/87
2 Dover Municipal Well 4 NJ 09/30/92
2 Ellis Property NJ 09/30/92
2 Endicott Village Well Field NY 09/25/87
2 Endicott Village Well Field NY 03/29/91
2 Endicott Village Well Field NY 09/30/92
2 Evor Phillips Leasing NJ 09/30/92
2 Ewan Property NJ 09/29/88
2 Ewan Property NJ 09/29/89
2 FAA Technical Center NJ 09/26/89
2 FAA Technical Center NJ 09/28/90
2 FAA Technical Center NJ 09/30/92
2 Facet Enterprises NY 09/04/92
2 Fibers Public Supply Wells PR 09/30/91
2 Florence Land Recontouring Landfill NJ 06/27/86
2 Forest Glen Subdivision NY 12/29/89
2 Fort D i x Landfill NJ 09/24/91
2 Fnednian Property NJ 04/30/85
2 Frontera Creek PR 09/30/91
2 Fulton Terminals NY 09/29/89
2 Garden State Cleaners NJ 09/26/91
2 GE Wiring Devices PR 09/30/88
471
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SifE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
2 GE-Moreau NY 07/13/87
2 GEMS Landfill NJ 09/27/85
2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division NY 03/31/92
2 General Motors/Central Foundry Division - NY 12/17/90
2 Genzale Plating NY 03/29/91
2 Glen Ridge Radium NJ 06/30/89
2 Glen Ridge Radium NJ 06/01/90
2 Global Landfill NJ 09/11/91
2 Goose Farm NJ 09/27/85
2 Haviland Complex NY 09/30/87
2 Helen Kramer Landfill NJ 09/27/85
2 Hertel Landhll NY 09/27/91
2 Higgins Farm NJ 09/24/90
2 Higgins Farm NJ 09/30/92
2 Hooker - 102nd Street NY 09/26/90
2 Hooker - Hyde Park NY 11/26/85
2 Hooker Cheinical/Ruco Polymer NY 09/28/90
2 Hudson River PCB NY 09/25/84
2 Imperial Oil/Champion Cher ucals NJ 09/26/90
2 Imperial Oil/Champion Chemicals NJ 09/30/92
2 Industrial Latex NJ 09/30/92
2 Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill NY 09/30/92
2 Juncos Landfill PR 09/24/91
2 Katonah Municipal Well NY 09/25/87
2 Kentucky Avenue Weilfield NY 09/30/ 86
2 Kentucky Avenue Weilfield NY 09/28/90
2 Kui-Buc Landfill NJ 09/30/88
2 Kin-Buc Landfill NJ 09/28/92
2 Kingof Prussia NJ 09/28/90
2 Krysowaty Farm N Il 06/20/84
2 Lang Property NJ 09/29/86
2 LipariLaridhll NJ 08/03/82
2 Lipari Landfill NJ 09/30/85
2 Lipari Landfill NJ 07/11/88
2 LonePineLandfill NJ 09/28/84
2 Lone Pine Landfill NJ 09/28/90
2 Love Canal NY 05/06/85
2 Love Canal NY 10/26/87
2 Love Canal (93rd Street) NY 09/26/88
2 Love Canal (93rd Street)(Amendnient) NY 05/15/91
2 Ludlow Sand & Gravel NY 09/30/88
2 M&TDeLisaLandf i ll NJ 09/20/90
2 Mannheun Avenue Dump NJ 09/27/90
2 Marathon Battery NY 09/30/86
2 Marathon Battery NY 09/30/88
2 Marathon Battery NY 09/29/89
472
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
2 Mattiace Petrochemicals NY 09/27/90
2 Mattiace Petrochemicals NY 06/27/91
2 Metaltec/Aerosystems NJ 06/30/86
2 Metaltec/Aerosystenis NJ 09/27/90
2 Montdairf West Orange Radium NJ 06/30/89
2 Montdairf West Orange Radium NJ 06/01/90
2 Montgomery Township Housing Development NJ 09/29/87
2 Montgomery Township Housing Development NJ 06/30/88
2 Myers Property NJ 09/28/90
2 Nascolite NJ 03/31/88
2 Nascolite N) 06/28/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 1) NJ 02/04/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 2) NJ 02/04/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 3) NJ 09/30/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 4) NJ 09/30/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 5) NJ 01 /03/92
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 6) NJ 12/31/91
2 Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 7) NJ 03/16/92
2 NLlndustr ies NJ 09/27/91
2 North Sea Municipal Landfill NY 09/29/89
2 North Sea Municipal Landfill NY 09/28/92
2 Old Bethpage Landfill NY 03/17/88
2 Olean Weilhield NY 09/24/85
2 Pasley Solvents & Chemical NY 04/24/92
2 Pepe Field N) 09/29/89
2 Picatinny Arsenal NJ 09/28/89
2 PijakFarrn NJ 09/30/84
2 Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Unit 1) NY 09/30/92
2 Plattsburgh Air Force Base (Operable Urut 3) NY 09/30/92
2 Pollution Abatement Services NY 06/06/84
2 Pomona Oaks Well Contamination NJ 09/26/90
2 Port Washington Landfill NY 09/30/89
2 Preferred Plating NY 09/22/89
2 Preferred Plating NY 09/28/92
2 Pnce Landfill #1 NJ 09/20/83
2 Price Landfill #1 N) 09/29/86
2 Radium Chemical NY 06/21/90
2 Ramapo Landfill NY 03/31/92
2 Reich Farms NJ 09/30/88
2 Renora N) 09/29/87
2 Ringwood Mines/Landfill NJ 09/29/88
2 Robintech/National Pipe NY 03/31/92
2 Rockaway Borough Welifield NJ 09/29/86
2 Rockaway Borough Wellfield NJ 09/30/91
2 Rocky Hill Municipal Well NJ 06/30/88
2 Roebling Steel NJ 03/29/90
473
-------
_________________________ SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
2 Roebling Steel NJ 09/26/91
2 Rowe Industries Groundwater Contamination NY 09/30/92
2 Sarney Farm NY 09/27/90
2 Sayreville Landfill N I 09/28/90
2 Scientific Chemical Processing NJ 09/14/90
2 Sealand Restoration NY 09/28/90
2 Sharkey Landfill NJ 09/29/86
2 Sinclair Refinery NY 09/30/85
2 Sinclair Refinery NY 09/30/91
2 SMS Instruments NY 09/29/89
2 Solvent Savers NY 09/28/90
2 South Brunswick Landfill NJ 09/30/87
2 South Jersey Clothing NJ 09/26/91
2 Spence Farm NJ 09/30/84
2 Suffern Village Well Field NY 09/25/87
2 Swope Oil & Chemical NJ 09/27/85
2 SwopeOil&ChetmCa l NJ 09/27/91
2 Syncon Resins NJ 09/29/86
2 Syosset Landfill NY 09/27/90
2 TabernacleDrumDUmp NJ 06/30/88
2 Upjohn Facility PR 09/30/88
2 Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill NJ 09/30/91
2 Vega Alta Public Supply Wells PR 09/29/87
2 Vestal Water Supply 1-1 NY 06/27/86
2 Vestal Water Supply 1-1 NY 09/27/90
2 Vineland Chemical NJ 09/28/89
2 Vineland State School NJ 09/30/89
2 Volney Municipal Landfill NY 07/31/87
2 Waldick Aerospace Devices NJ 09/29/87
2 Waldick Aerospace Devices NJ 03/29/91
2 Warwick Landfill NY 06/27/91
2 White Cherrucal NJ 09/26/91
2 Wide Beach Development NY
2 Williams Property NJ 09/29/87
2 Witco Chenucal (Oakland Plant) NJ 09/28/92
2 Woodland Township Route 532 NJ 05/16/90
2 Woodland Township Route 72 NJ 05/16/90
2 York Oil NY 02/09/88
Subtotal 193
3 Abex VA 09/29/92
3 Alladui Plating PA 09/27/88
3 Ambler Asbestos Piles PA 09/30/88
3 Ambler Asbestos Piles PA 09/29/89
3 ArmyCreekLafldfihl DE 09/30/86
3 Army Creek Landfill DE 06/29/90
474
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
3 Arrowhead Associates/Scovill VA 09/30/91
3 AVCO Lycom ing-Wilhamsport Division PA 06/28/91
3 Avtex Fibers VA 09/30/88
3 Avtex Fibers VA 09/28/90
3 Bally Ground Water Contamination PA 06/30/89
3 Bendix Flight System Division PA 09/30/88
3 BerksSandPit PA 09/29/88
3 Blosenski Landfill PA 09/29/86
3 Brod.head Creek PA 03/29/91
3 Brown’s Battery Breaking PA 09/28/90
3 Brown’s Battery Breaking PA 07/02/92
3 Bruin Lagoon PA 06/02/82
3 Bruin Lagoon PA 09/29/86
3 Butz Landfill PA 09/28/90
3 Butz Landfill PA 06/30/92
3 C&D Recycling PA 09/30/92
3 C & R Battery VA 03/30/90
3 Chem-Solv DE 03/31/92
3 Clusman Creek VA 09/30/86
3 Chisman Creek VA 03/31/88
3 Coker’s Sanitation Service Landfill DE 09/28/90
3 Commodore Semiconductor Group PA 09/29/92
3 Craig Farm Drum PA 09/29/89
3 Croydon TCE Spill PA 12/28/88
3 Croydon TCE Spill PA 06/29/90
3 Czyo-Chern PA 09/29/89
3 Cryo-Chern PA 09/28/90
3 Cryo-Chem PA 09/30/91
3 Delaware City PVC DE 09/30/86
3 Delaware Sand & Gravel DE C)4/22/88
3 Delta Quames/Stotler Landfill PA 03/29/91
3 Dixie Caverns County Landfill VA 09/30/91
3 Dixie Caverns County Landfill VA 09/28/92
3 Dorney Road PA 09/29/88
3 Dorney Road PA 09/30/91
3 Douglassville Disposal PA 09/27/85
3 Douglassville Disposal PA 06/24/88
3 Douglassville Disposal PA 06/30/89
3 Dover Air Force Base DE 09/28/90
3 Drake Chemical (Phase I) PA 09/30/84
3 Drake Chemical (Phase H) PA 05/13/86
3 Drake Chemical (Phase Ill) PA 09/29/88
3 Dublin Water Supply PA 12/30/91
3 East Mt Zion PA 06/29/90
3 Eastern Diversified Metals PA 03/29/91
3 Eastern Diversified Metals PA 07/02/92
475
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
3 Enterprise Avenue PA 05/10/84
3 Pike Chemical WV 09/29/88
3 Fike Chemical WV 09/28/90
3 Pike Cherrucal WV 03/31/92
3 First Piedmont Quarry 719 VA 06/28/91
3 Fischer& Porter PA 05/04/84
3 Greenwood Chemical VA 12/29/89
3 Greenwood Chemical VA 12/31/90
3 Halby Chemical DE 06/28/91
3 Harvey-Knott Drum DE 09/30/85
3 Havertown p p PA 09/29/89
3 Havertown PCP PA 09/30/91
3 Hebelka Auto Salvage Yard PA 03/31/89
3 Hebelka Auto Salvage Yard PA 09/30/91
3 Heleva Landfill PA 03/22/85
3 Heleva Landfill (Amendment) PA 09/30/91
3 Hellertown Manufacturing PA 09/30/91
3 Henderson Road PA 06/30/88
3 Henderson Road PA 09/29/89
3 Hranica Landfill PA 06/29/90
3 Industrial Drive PA 09/29/86
3 industrial Drive PA 03/29/91
3 Kane & Lombard Street Drums MD 09/30/87
3 Keystone Sanitation Landfill PA 09/30/90
3 Kimberton PA 09/30/88
3 Kimberton PA 06/30/89
3 L.A Clarke& Sons VA 03/31/88
3 Lackawanna Refuse PA 03/22/85
3 Lansdowne Radiation PA 08/02/85
3 Lansdowne Radiation PA 09/22/86
3 Leetown Pesticide WV 03/31/86
3 Lehigh Electnc & Engineeruig PA 02/11/83
3 Limestone Road MD 09/30/86
3 Lindane Dump PA 03/31/92
3 Lord Shope Landfill PA 06/29/90
3 Matthews Electro Plating VA 06/02/83
3 McAdoo Associates PA 06/05/84
3 McAdoo Associates PA 06/28/85
3 McAdoo Associates PA 09/30/91
3 Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers MD 12/31/90
3 Middletown Air Field PA 12/31/87
3 Middletown Air Field PA 12/17/90
3 M.iddletown Road Dump MD 03/17/86
3 Millcreek Dump PA 05/07/86
3 Modem Sanitation Landfill PA 06/28/91
3 Moyers Landfill PA 09/30/85
476
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION S TE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
3 MW Manufacturing PA 03/31/89
3 MW Manufacturing PA 06/29/90
3 MW Manufacturing PA 06/30/92
3 NCR, Millsboro DE 08/12/91
3 New Castle Spill DE 09/28/89
3 New Castle Steel Plant DE 03/31/88
3 Old City of York Landfill PA 09/30/91
3 Ordnance Works Disposal Areas WV 03/31/88
3 Ordnance Works Disposal Areas (Amendment) WV 09/29/89
3 Osborne Landfill PA 09/28/90
3 Palmerton Zinc Pile PA 09/04/87
3 Palmerton Zinc Pile PA 06/29/88
3 Paoli Rail Yard PA 07/21/92
3 Presque Isle PA 09/30/87
3 Publicker/Cuyahoga Wrecking Plant PA 06/30/89
3 Publicker/Cuyahoga Wrecking Plant PA 06/28/91
3 Raymark PA 09/28/90
3 Raymark PA 12/30/91
3 Reeser’s Landfill PA 03/30/89
3 Resin Disposal PA 06/28/91
3 Rhmehart Tire Fire Dump VA 06/30/88
3 Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump VA 09/29/92
3 Route 940 Drum Dump PA 09/28/92
3 Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds VA 06/30/87
3 Sand Gravel & Stone MD 09/30/85
3 Sand Gravel & Stone MD 09/28/90
3 Saunders Supply VA 09/30/91
3 Sealand Limited DE 09/30/91
3 Southern Maryland Wood Treating MD 06/29/88
3 Strasburg Landfill PA 06/29/89
3 Strasburg Landfill PA 06/28/91
3 Strasburg Landfill PA 03/31/92
3 Suffolk City Landfill VA 09/30/92
3 Taylor Borough Dump PA 06/28/85
3 Taylor Borough Dump PA 03/17/86
3 Tonolh PA 09/30/92
3 Tybouts Corner Landf L I I DE 03/06/86
3 Tyson Dump #1 PA 12/21/84
3 Tyson Dump l (Amendment) PA 03/31/88
3 Tyson Dump #1 PA 09/30/88
3 TysonDump#1 PA 09/28/90
3 U.S Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 1) VA 05/15/92
3 US Defense General Supply Center (Operable Unit 5) VA 03/25/92
3 USTitaruum VA 11/21/89
3 USA Aberdeen - Edgewood MD 09/27/91
3 USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville MD 09/27/91
477
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
3 USA Aberdeen, Michaelsville MD 06/30/92
3 USA Letterkenny - PDO PA 08/02/91
3 USA Letterkenny Southeast Area PA 08/02/91
3 Voortman Farm PA 06/30/88
3 Wade (ABM) PA 08/30/84
3 Walsh Landfill PA 06/29/90
3 West Virginia Ordnance WV 03/27/87
3 West Virginia Ordnance WV 09/30/88
3 Westinghouse Elevator Plant PA 06/30/92
3 Westline PA 07/03/86
3 Westhne PA 06/29/88
3 Westline (Amendment) PA 03/30/90
3 Whitmoyer Laboratories PA 06/30/89
3 Whitmoyer Laboratories (Operable Unit 2) PA 12/17/90
3 Whitmoyer Laboratories (Operable Unit 3) PA 12/31/90
3 Wildcat Landfill DE 06/29/88
3 Wildcat Landfill DE 11/28/88
3 William Dick Lagoons PA 06/28/91
Subtotal 162
4 A L Taylor (Valley of Drums) KY 06/18/86
4 Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps NC 06/30/89
4 Aberdeen Pesticide Dumps (Amendment) NC 09/30/91
4 Agnco Chemical FL 09/29/92
4 Auco KY 06/24/88
4 Alabama Army Ammurution Plant AL 12/31/91
4 Alpha Chemical FL 05/18/88
4 American Creosote Works (Jackson Plant) TN 01/05/89
4 American Creosote Works (Pensacola) FL 09/30/85
4 American Creosote Works (Pensacola) FL 09/28/89
4 Amnicola Dump TN 03/30/89
4 Arlington Blending & Packaging TN 06/28/91
4 B F Goodnch KY 06/24/88
4 Benfield Industries NC 07/31/92
4 Brown Wood Preserving FL 04/08/88
4 Bypass 601 Groundwater Contamination NC 08/31/90
4 Cabot/Koppers FL 09/27/90
4 Cape Fear Wood Preserving NC 06/30/89
4 Carolawn SC 09/27/89
4 Carolina Transformer NC 08/29/91
4 CarrierAirConditiOrung TN 09/03/92
4 Celanese/Shelby Fibers Operations NC 03/23/88
4 Celanese/Shelby Fibers Operations NC 03/28/89
4 Charles Macon Lagoon & Drum Storage NC 09/30/ 91
4 Chein-Form FL 09/22/92
4 Chemtromcs NC 04/05/88
478
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
4 Chemtrorucs (Amendment) NC 04/26/89
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant) AL 09/28/89
4 CIba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant) AL 09/30/91
4 Ciba-Geigy (Mcintosh Plant) AL 07/14/92
4 City Industries FL 03/29/90
4 Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving FL 09/25/86
4 Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving (Amendment) FL 09/26/90
4 Davie Landfill FL 09/30/85
4 Distler Brickyard KY 08/19/86
4 Distler Farm KY 08/19/86
4 Dubose Oil Products FL 03/29/90
4 Flonda Steel FL 06/30/92
4 Flowood MS 09/30/ 88
4 Gallaway Pits TN 09/26/86
4 Geiger(C&MOil) SC 06/01/87
4 Geigy Chemical (Aberdeen Plant) NC 08/27/92
4 Gold Coast Oil FL 09/11/ 87
4 GoldenStripSepticTank SC 09/12/91
4 Hams/Palm Bay Facility FL 06/28/90
4 Hercules 009 Landfill GA 06/27/91
4 Hipps Road Landhll FL 09/03/86
4 Hipps Road Landfill (Amendment) FL 09/21/90
4 HollingsworthSolderless FL 04/10/86
4 Howe Valley Landfill KY 09/28/90
4 independent Nail SC 09 /28/87
4 Independent Nail SC 08/30/88
4 Interstate Lead (ILCO) AL 09/30/91
4 Jadco-Hughes NC 09/27/90
4 JFD Electronics/Channel Master NC 09/10/92
4 Kassouf-Kimerhng Battery Disposal FL 03/31/89
4 Kassouf-Kimerhng Battery Disposal FL 03/30/90
4 LeesLane Landfill KY 09/25/86
4 Lewisburg Dump TN 09/19/90
4 Madison County Sanitary Landfill FL 09/28/92
4 Mallory Capacitor TN 08/29/91
4 Marine Corps Logistics Base GA 08/14/92
4 Maxey Flats Nuclear Disposal KY 09/30/91
4 Medley Farms Drum Dump SC 05/29/91
4 Miazru Drum FL 09/13/82
4 MianuDrum FL 09/16/85
4 Milan Army Ammunition Plant TN 09/30/92
4 Monsanto (Augusta Plant) GA 12/07/90
4 Mowbray Engineering AL 09/25/86
4 Munisport Landfill FL 07/26/90
4 National Electnc Coil/Cooper industries KY 09/30/92
4 National Starch & Chemical NC 09/30/88
479
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
4 National Starch & Chemical NC 09/28/90
4 New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit NC 09/29/92
4 NewportDump KY 03/27/87
4 Newsom Brothers/Old Reichhold Chemicals MS 09/18/89
4 North Hollywood Dump TN 09/13/90
4 NW 58th Street Landfill FL 09/21/87
4 Palmetto Wood Preserving SC 09/30/87
4 Parraxnore Surplus FL 09/15/87
4 Peppers Steel & Alloys FL 03/12/86
4 Perdido Groundwater Contamination AL 09/30/88
4 Petroleum Products FL 10/05/90
4 Pickettville Road Landfill FL 09/28/90
4 Pioneer Sand FL 09/26/86
4 Potter’s Septic Tank Service Pits NC 08/05/92
4 Powersville Landfill GA 09/30/87
4 Sangamo Dump/Twelve -Mile/HartWell PCB SC 12/19/90
4 Sapp Battery Salvage FL 09/26/86
4 Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 1) SC 06/29/92
4 Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2) SC 06/29/92
4 Savannah River (USDOE) (Operable Unit 3) SC 06/29/92
4 Schuylkill Metal FL 09/28/90
4 SCRDI Bluff Road SC 09/12/90
4 SCRDI Dixiana SC 09/26/86
4 Sherwood Medical industries FL 03/27/91
4 Sixty-second Street Dump FL 06/27/90
4 Smith’s Farm Brooks KY 09/29/89
4 Smith’s Farm Brooks (Amendment) KY 09/30/91
4 Sodyeco NC 09/24/87
4 Standard Auto Bumper FL 09/28/92
4 Stauffer Chemical (LeMoyne Plant) AL 09/27/89
4 Stauffer Chemical Cold Creek (Bucks Plant) AL 09/27/89
4 Sydney Mine Sludge Ponds FL 09/29/89
4 Tower Chemical FL 07/09/87
4 Tn-City lndustnal Disposal KY 08/28/91
4 Tn-City Oil Conservationist FL 09/21/87
4 USA Anrustori Army Depot AL 09/26/91
4 USAF Robins Air Force Base GA 06/25/91
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 2) TN 06/28/9 1
4 IJSDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 3) TN 09/19/91
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 4) TN 09/19/91
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 6) TN 09/30/92
4 USDOE Oak Ridge Reservation (Operable Unit 18) TN 09/30/92
4 USMC Camp Lejeune Military Reservation NC 09/23/92
4 Varsol Spill FL 03/29/85
4 Velsicol Chemical Hardeman County TN 06/27/91
4 Wamchem SC 06/30/88
480
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
4 Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits FL 05/30/85
4 WIutehouse Waste Oil Pits (Amendment) FL 06/16/92
4 Wilson Concepts of Florida FL 09/22/92
4 Woodbuiy Chemical (Princeton Plant) FL 06/25/92
4 Wngley Charcoal TN 09/30/91
4 Yellow Water Road FL 09/28/90
4 Yellow Water Road Dump FL 06/30/92
4 Zellwood Groundwater Contamination FL 12/17/87
4 Zellwood Groundwater Contamination (Amendment) FL 03/01/90
Subtotal 127
5 A&FMaterialsReclauning IL 11/23/83
5 A&FMaterialsReclaimmg IL 06/14/85
5 A & F Materials Reclaiming IL 08/14/86
5 Acme Solvent Reclaiming IL 09/27/85
5 Acme Solvent Reclaiming IL 12/31/90
5 Adrian Municipal Well Field MN 09/29/89
5 Algoma Municipal Landfill Wi 09/29/90
5 Allied Chemical & Ironton Coke OH 09/29/88
5 Allied Chemical & Ironton Coke OH 12/28/90
5 Alsco Anaconda OH 09/08/89
5 Alsco Anaconda OH 09/30/92
5 American Chemical Services IN 09/30/92
5 Anderson Development Ml 09/28/90
5 Anderson Development (Amendment) Ml 09/30/91
5 Arcanum Iron & Metal OH 09/26/86
5 Arrowhead Refinery MN 09/30/86
5 Auto Ion Chemicals Ml 09/27/89
5 Belvidere Municipal Landfill #1 IL 06/29/88
5 Berlin&Farro MI 02/29/84
5 Berhn&Farro MI 09/30/91
5 Better Brite Plating Chrome & Zinc Wi 06/28/91
5 Big D Campground OH 09/29/89
5 Bolors Nobel MI 09/17/90
5 Bofors Nobel (Amendment) MI 07/22/92
5 Bower’s Landfill OH 03/31/89
5 Buckeye Reclamation OH 08/19/91
5 Burlington Northern (Brainerd/Ba.xter) MN 06/04/86
5 Burrows Sanitation MI 09/30/86
5 Butterworth #2 Landfill Ml 09/29/92
5 ByronSalvageYard IL 03/13/85
5 Byron Salvage Yard IL 09/23/86
5 Byron Salvage Yard IL 06/30/89
5 Cannelton industries Ml 09/30/92
5 Carter Industrials MI 09/18/91
5 Cemetery Dump MI 09/11/85
481
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SifE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
5 Cemetery Dump MI 09/29/89
5 Central Illinois Public Service IL 09/30/92
5 Charlevoix Municipal Well Field MI 06/12/84
5 Charlevoix Municipal Well Field MI 09/30/85
5 Chexn-Central Ml 09/30/91
5 Chem-Dyne OH 07/05/85
5 City Disposal Sanitary Landfill WI 09/28/92
5 Clare Water Supply Ml 08/30/90
5 ClareWaterSupply MI 09/16/92
5 Cliff/Dow Dump MI 09/27/89
5 Columbus Old Municipal Landfill IN 03/31/92
5 Conrail Railyard Elkhart IN 06/28/91
5 Coshocton City Landfill OH 06/17/88
5 Cross Brothers Pail Recycling (Pembroke) IL 03/25/85
5 Cross Brothers Pail Recycling (Pembroke) IL 09/28/89
5 Dakhue Sanitary Landfill MN 06/28/91
5 Eau Claire Municipal Well Field WI 06/10/85
5 Eau Claire Municipal Well Field WI 03/31/88
5 EH Schilling Landfill OH 09/29/89
5 Electrovoice MI 06/23/92
5 Enviro-Chem IN 09/25/87
5 Enviro-Chem (Northside Sanitary Landfill) (Amendment) IN 06/07/91
5 Fadrowski Drum Disposal WI 06/10/91
5 Fields Brook OH 09/30/86
5 Fisher Cab IN 08/07/90
5 FMC (Fndley) MN 09/30/87
5 Folkertsma Refuse Ml 06/28/91
5 Forest Waste Products Ml 02/29/84
5 Forest Waste Products MI 06/30/86
5 Forest Waste Products MI 03/31 / 88
5 Fort WayneReduction IN 08/26/88
5 Fuitz Landfill OH 09/30/91
5 G&HLandfiU MI 12/21/90
5 Grand Traverse Overall Supply Ml 02/03/92
5 H Brown Company Ml 09/30/92
5 Hagen Farm WI 09/17/90
5 Hagen Farm WI 09/30/92
5 Hedblum Industries MI 09/29/89
5 Hunts Disposal WI 09/29/90
5 IMC Terre Haute East Plant IN 06/22/88
5 Industrial Excess Landfill OH 09/30/87
5 Industrial Excess Landfill OH 07/17/89
5 lonia City Landfill MI 09/29/89
5 Janesville Ash Beds WI 12/29/89
5 Janesville Old Landfill WI 12/29/89
5 Johns Manville IL 06/30/87
482
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
5 K&LLandfi l l MI 09/28/90
5 Kentwood Landfill MI 03/29/91
5 Kohler Landfill WI 03/30/92
5 Koppers (Texarkana Plant) IL 06/30/89
5 Kummer Sanitaiy Landfill MN 06/12/85
5 Kummer Sanitary Landfill MN 09/30/88
5 Kummer Sanitary Landfill MN 09/29/90
5 Kysor Industrial MI 09/29/89
5 La Grande Sanitary Landfill MN 09/30/92
5 LakeSandyjo/M&MLandfill IN 09/26/86
5 LaSalle Electrical Utilities IL 08/29/86
5 LaSalle Electrical Utilities IL 03/30/88
5 Laskirt/Poplar Oil OH 08/09/84
5 Laskin/Poplar Oil OH 09/30/87
5 Laskin/Poplar Oil OH 06/29/89
5 LeHillierMankato MN 09/27/85
5 Lemberger Landfill WI 09/23/91
5 Lemberger Transport & Recyding WI 09/23/91
5 Liquid Disposal Ml 09/30/87
5 Long Prame Ground Water Contamination MN 06/27/88
5 MacGillis & Gibbs/Bell Lumber & Pole MN 09/30/91
5 Main Street Well Field IN 08/02/85
5 Main Street Well Field IN 03/29/91
5 Marion (Bragg) Landfill IN 09/30/87
5 Mason County Landfill Ml 09/28/88
5 Master Disposal Service Landfill WI 09/26/90
5 Metal Working Shop Ml 06/30/92
5 Metamora Landfill MI 09/30/86
5 Metamora Landfill MI 09/28/90
5 Miami County Incinerator OH 06/30/89
5 Michigan Disposal Service (Cork St Landfill) Ml 09/30/91
5 Mid-State Disposal Landfill Wi 09/30/88
5 MIDCOI IN 06/30/89
5 MIDCOI(Amendment) IN 04/13/92
5 MJDCOII IN 06/30/89
5 MIDCO II (Amendment) IN 04/13/92
5 Morris Arsenic Dump MN 08/07/85
5 Moss-American Kerr-McGee Oil Wi 09/27/90
5 Motor Wheel MI 09/30/91
5 Muskego Sanitary Landfill Wi 06/12/92
5 National Presto Industries Wi 08/01/90
5 National Presto Industries WI 09/30/91
5 Naval industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant MN 09/28/90
5 New Brighton/Arden Hills MN 08/11/89
5 New Brighton/Arden Hills MN 09/30/92
5 New Brighton/Arden Hills #1 MN 06/24/83
483
-------
_________________________ SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
5 New Brighton/Arden Hills #2 MN 09/19/83
5 New Bnghton/Arden Hills #3 MN 08/02/84
5 New Brighton/Arden Hills #4 MN 06/30/86
5 New Bnghton/Arden Hills #5 MN 03/31/87
5 New Brightori/Arden Hills #6 (TCAAP) MN 09/25/87
5 New Bnghton/Arden Hills (TCAAP) (Amendment) MN 08/11/89
5 New Lyme Landfill OH 09/27/85
5 Ninth Avenue Dump IN 09/20/88
5 Ninth Avenue Dump IN 06/30/89
5 NL Industries Taracorp Lead Smelt IL 03/30/90
5 NL Taracorp Golden Auto MN 09/29/88
5 Northern Engraving WI 09/28/87
5 Northernaire Plating MI 09/11/85
5 Northernaire Plating MI 09/29/89
5 Northside Sanitary Landfill (Enviro-Chem) IN 09/25/87
5 Northside Sanitary Landfill (Enviro-Chem)(Amendifleflt) IN 07/31/91
5 Novaco industries MI 06/27/86
5 Novaco Industries (Amendment) MI 09 /05/91
5 Oak Grove Sanitary Landfill MN 09/30/88
5 Oak Grove Sanitary Landfill MN 12/21/90
5 Oconomowoc Electroplating WI 09/20/90
5 Old Mill OH 08/07/85
5 Onalaska Municipal Landfill WI 08/14/90
5 Organic Chemicals MI 09/30/91
5 Ossuteke Groundwater Contamination MI 06/28/91
5 Ott/Story/Cordova Chemical Ml 09/29/89
5 Ott/Story/Cordova Chemical MI 09/29/90
5 Outboard Marine IL 05/15/84
5 Outboard Marine (Amendment) IL 03/31/89
5 Pagel’s Pit IL 06/28/91
5 Peerless Plating Ml 09/21/92
5 Peterson Sand & Gravel IL 09/14/88
5 Pine Bend Sanitary Landfill MN 09/30/91
5 Poer Farm IN 09/29/88
5 Pristine OH 12/31/87
5 Pristine (Amendment) OH 03/30/90
5 Rasmussen’s Dump Ml 03/28/9]
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (Indianapolis Plant) [ N 06/30/92
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park) MN 09/30/92
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park) MN 06/06/84
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park) MN 05/30/86
5 Reilly Tar & Chemical (St Louis Park) MN 09/28/90
5 RepubhcSteelQuaiTy OH 09/30/88
5 Rose Township (Amendment) Ml 01/18/89
5 Rose Township Dump MI 09/30/87
5 Sangamo Dump/Crab Orchard NWR (USD01) IL 03/30/90
484
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
5 Sangamo Dump/Crab Orchard NWR (USD01) IL 08/01/90
5 Savanna Army Depot IL 03/31/92
5 Schm.alz Dump WI 08/13/85
5 Schmalz Dump WI 09/30/87
5 SE Rockford Groundwater Contamination IL 06/14/91
5 Seymour Recycling IN 09/30/86
5 Seymour Recycling IN 09/25/87
5 SkmnerLandf ill OH 09/30/92
5 South Andover MN 03/30/88
5 South Andover (Operable Unit 1) (Amendment) MN 06/09/92
5 SouthAndover(OperableUnit2) MN 12/24/91
5 South Macomb Disposal #9, 9A MI 08/13/91
5 Spiclder Landfill WI 06/03/92
5 Spiegelberg Landfill Ml 09/30/86
5 Spiegelberg Landfill MI 06/29/90
5 Springfield Township Dump MI 09/29/90
5 St Louis River MN 09/28/90
5 Stoughton City Landfill WI 09/30/91
5 Sturgis Municipal Wells MI 09/30/91
5 Summit National Liquid Disposal Service OH 06/30/88
5 Summit National Liquid Disposal Service (Amendment) OH 11/02/90
5 Tar Lake MI 09/29/92
5 ThermoChent MI 09/30/91
5 Torch Lake (Operable Units I and 3) MI 09/30/92
5 Tn County Landfill IL 09/30/92
5 Tn-State Plating IN 03/30/90
5 Twin Cities AF Reserve (SAR Landfill) MN 03/31/92
5 U S Aviex MI 09/07/88
5 UnionScrapironMetal MN 03/30/90
5 UnitedScrapLead OH 09/30/88
5 UruversityofMinnesota(Rosemount Research Center) MN 06/11/90
5 Velsicol Chemical IL 09/30/88
5 Verona Well Field Ml 05/01/84
5 Verona Well Field MI 08/12/85
5 Verona Well Field MI 06/28/91
5 Waite Park Wells MN 09/28/89
5 WashingtonCounty Landfill MN 11/15/90
5 Waste Disposal Engineering MN 12/31/87
5 Wauconda Sand & Gravel IL 09/30/85
5 Wauconda Sand & Gravel IL 03/31/89
5 Wausau Groundwater Contamination WI 12/23/88
5 Wausau Groundwater Contamination WI 09/29/89
5 Wayne Waste Oil IN 03/30/90
5 Wedzeb Enterprises IN 06/30/89
5 Wheeler Pit WI 09/28/90
5 Whitehall Municipal Wells MI 09/29/89
485
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
5 Windom Municipal Dump MN 09/29/89
5 Zanesville Well Field OH 09/30/91
Subtotal 221
6 Arkwood AR 09/28/90
6 AT & SF (Clovis) NM 09/23/88
6 Bailey Waste Disposal TX 06/28/88
6 Bayou Bonfouca LA 08/15/85
6 Bayou Bonfouca LA 03/31/87
6 Bayou Sorrel LA 11/14/86
6 Bia-Ecology Systems TX 06/06/84
6 Bno Refinery TX 03/31/88
6 Cal West Metals NM 09/29/92
6 Cecil Lindsey AR 04/23/86
6 CimarronMirung NM 09/21/90
6 Cunarron Mining NM 09/06/91
6 Cleve Reber LA 03/31/87
6 Compass Industries (Avery Dnve) OK 09/29/87
6 Crystal Chemical TX 09/27/90
6 Crystal Chemical (Amendment) TX 06/16/92
6 Crystal City Airport TX 09/29/87
6 Dixie Oil Processors TX 03/31/88
6 Double Eagle Refinery OK 09/28/92
6 Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery OK 09/28/92
6 French, Linuted TX 03/24/88
6 Geneva Industries/Fuhrmann Energy TX 09/18/86
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 1) LA 09/30/92
6 Gulf Coast Vacuum Services (Operable Unit 2) LA 09/30/92
6 Gurley Pit AR 10/06/86
6 Gurley Pit AR 09/26/88
6 Hardage/Criner OK 11/14/86
6 Hardage/Cnner (Amendment) OK 11/22/89
6 Harris (Farley Street) TX 09/27/8
6 Highlands Acid Pit TX 06/25/84
6 Highlands Acid Pit TX 06/26/87
6 Homestake Mining NM 09/27/89
6 Industrial Waste Control AR 06/28/88
6 Jacksonville Municipal Landfill AR 09/27/90
6 Koppers (Texarkana Plant) TX 09/23/88
6 Koppers (Texarkana Plant)(Arnendment) TX 03/04/92
6 Mid-South Wood Products AR 11/14/86
6 Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill OK 06/29/92
6 MOTCO TX 03/15/85
6 MOTCO TX 09/27/89
6 North Cavalcade Street TX 06/28/88
6 Odessa Chromium #1 TX 09/08/86
486
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
6 Odessa Chromium #1 TX 03/18/88
6 Odessa Chromium (Andrews Highway) #2 TX 09/08/86
6 Odessa Chromium (Andrews Highway) #2 TX 03/18/88
6 Oklahoma Refining OK 06/09/92
6 OldlngerOilRehnery LA 09/25/84
6 Old Midland Products AR 03/24/88
6 Pagano Salvage NM 09/27/90
6 Pesses Chemical TX 12/22/88
6 Petro-Chemical (Turtle Bayou) TX 03/27/87
6 Petro-Chenucal (Turtle Bayou) TX 09/06/91
6 Prewitt Abandoned Reflneiy NM 09/30/92
6 Rogers Road Municipal Landfill AR 09/27/90
6 Sand Spnngs Petrochemical Complex OK 09/29/87
6 Sand Springs Petrochemical Complex OK 06/28/88
6 Shendan Disposal Services TX 12/29/88
6 Sheridan Disposal Services TX 09/27/89
6 Sikes Disposal Pits TX 09/18/86
6 Sol Lynn/Industrial Transformers TX 03/25/88
6 Sol Lynn/Industrial Transformers TX 09/23/88
6 South Cavalcade Street TX 09/26/88
6 South Valley (Edmunds) NM 06/28/88
6 South Valley (Edmunds) NM 03/30/89
6 South Valley (PL83) MM 09/30/88
6 South Valley (SJ6) NM 03/22/85
6 South Valley (SJ6) NM 09/30/88
6 Stewco TX 09/16/88
6 Tar Creek (Ottawa County) OK 06/06/84
6 Tenth Street Dump/Junkyard OK 09/27/90
6 Texarkana Wood Preserving TX 09/25/90
6 Tinker AFB (Soldier Creek/Bldg 3001) OK 08/16/90
6 Tnangle Chemical TX 06/11/85
6 United Creosoting TX 09/30/86
6 United Creosoting TX 09/29/89
6 United Nuclear MM 09/30/88
6 Vertac AR 09/27/90
Subtotal 77
7 29th and Mead Groundwater Contamination KS 09/29/92
7 Aidex Corp IA 08/24/83
7 Aidex Corp IA 09/’30/84
7 ArkansasCityDump KS 09/29/88
7 Arkansas City Dump KS 09/19/89
7 Big River Sand KS 06/28/88
7 Chemplexi LA 09/27/89
7 Cherokee County KS 12/21/87
7 Cherokee County KS 09/18/89
487
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
7 Conservation Chemical MO 09/30/87
7 Deere, John Duboque IA 09/29/88
7 DesMoinesTCE IA 07/21/86
7 Des Moines TCE IA 09/18/92
7 Doepke Disposal Holliday KS 09/21/89
7 El DuPont De Nemours (County Rd X23) IA 05/28/91
7 Ellisvile Area MO 07/10/85
7 Ell.isville Area MO 09/29/86
7 Ellisvi lle Area MO 09/30/91
7 Ellisville Area (Amendment) MO 09/30/91
7 Fairfield Coal Gasification Plant IA 09/21/90
7 Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative IA 09/29/92
7 Findett MO 12/28/88
7 Fulbright Landfill MO 09/30/88
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination NE 09/28/88
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination NE 09/26/89
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination (East Industrial) NE 09/28/90
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination (FAR-MAR-CO) NE 09/28/90
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination (Operable Unit 1) NE 09/30/91
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination (Operable Units 10 and 2) NE 09/30/91
7 Hastings Groundwater Contamination/Far-Mar-Co NE 09/30/88
7 Hydro-Flex KS 03/09/92
7 John Deere (Otturnwa Works Landfill) IA 09/23/91
7 Johns Sludge Pond KS 09/22/89
7 Kern-Pest Laboratones MO 09/29/89
7 Kern-Pest Laboratories MO 12/31/90
7 Lee Chemical MO 03/21/91
7 Lehigh Portland Cement IA 06/28/91
7 Lindsay Manufactunng NE 09/28/90
7 Mid-AmencaTanrung LA 09/24/91
7 Midwest Manufacturing/North Farm IA 09/30/88
7 Midwest Manufacturing/North Farm IA 09/27/90
7 Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek MO 09/29/88
7 Minker/Stout/Rornaule Creek (Romaine Portion) MO 09/28/87
7 Muiker/Stout/Romaine Creek (Stout Portion) MO 09/28/87
7 Missoun Electric Works MO 09/28/90
7 Northwestern States Portland Cement IA 06/26/90
7 People’s Natural Gas LA 09/16/91
7 Pester Refinery KS 09/30/92
7 Shaw Avenue Dump IA 09/26/91
7 Shenandoah Stables MO 07/28/88
7 Shenandoah Stables MO 09/28/90
7 Solid State Circuits MO 09/27/89
7 Syntex Facility (Verona) MO 05/05/88
7 Tunes Beach MO 01/13/84
7 Times Beach MO 09/29/88
488
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
7 Todtz, Lawrence Farm IA 11/04/88
7 Vogel Paint & Wax IA 09/20/89
7 Waverly Groundwater Contamination NE 09/26/90
7 Weldon Spring Quarry/Plant/Pits (USDOE) MO 09/28/90
7 Wheeling Disposal Service MO 09/27/90
7 White Farm Equipment Dump IA 09/28/90
Subtotal 61
8 Anaconda Smelter MT 10/02/87
8 Anaconda Smelter MT 09/23/91
8 Arsenic Trioxide ND 09/26/86
8 Baxter/Union Pacific Tie Treating WY 09/26/86
8 Brodenck Wood Products CO 06/30/88
8 Brodenck Wood Products CO 03/24/92
8 Brodenck Wood Products (Amendment) CO 09/24/91
8 Burlington Northern (Somers Plant) MT 09/27/89
8 California Gulch CO 03/29/88
8 Central City-Clear Creek CO 09/30/87
8 Central City-Clear Creek CO 03/31/88
8 Central City-Clear Creek CO 09/30/91
8 Chemical Sales (Operable Unit 1) CO 06/27/91
8 Chemical Sales (Operable Unit 2) CO 06/27/91
8 Chemical Sales (Operable Unit 3) CO 06/27/91
8 Denver Radium (Operable Unit 8) CO 01/28/92
8 Denver Radium (Operable Unit 9) CO 12/23/91
8 Denver Radium I CO 09/29/87
8 Denver Radium II CO 09/29/87
8 Denver Radium Ill CO 09/29/87
8 Denver Radium/Card Property CO 06/30/87
8 Denver Radium/Open Space CO 09/29/87
8 Denver Radium/ROBCO CO 09/30/86
8 Denver Radium/Streets CO 03/24/86
8 East Helena MT 11/22/89
8 Hill Air Force Base UT 09/30/91
8 Hill Air Force Base UT 09/25/92
8 Idaho Pole MT 09/28/92
8 Libby Ground Water Contamination MT 09/26/86
8 Libby Ground Water Contamination MT 12/30/88
8 Marshall Landfill CO 09/26/86
8 Martin Marietta, Denver Aerospace CO 09/24/90
8 Mtlltown Reservoir Sediments MT 04/14/84
8 Milltown Reservoir Sediments MT 08/07/85
8 Monticello Mill Tailings (DOE) UT 08/22/90
8 Monticello Radioactively Contaminated Properties UT 09/29/89
8 Mystery Bridge at Highway 20 WY 09/24/90
8 Ogden Defense Depot liT 09/27/90
489
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODS) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982- FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SifE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 1) LIT 06126/92
8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 3) LIT 09128/92
8 Ogden Defense Depot (Operable Unit 4) UT 09/28/92
8 Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3) UT 07/19/90
8 Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3) LIT 03/31/92
8 Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) CO 01/05/90
8 Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) CO 01/25/91
8 Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 2) CO 09/01/92
8 Rocky Flats Plant (USDOE) (Operable Unit 4) CO 04/06/92
8 RockyMountainArSenal CO 06/04/87
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 16) CO 02/26/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 17) CO 05/14/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 18) CO 02/26/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 19) CO 02/26/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 20) CO 03/20/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 21) CO 06/06/91
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 22) CO 05/03/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 23) CO 05/03/90
8 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (Operable Unit 26) CO 09/05/91
8 Sand Creek industrial CO 09/29/89
8 Sand Creek industrial CO 09/28/90
8 Sharon Steel (Madvale Tailings) UT 09/24/90
8 Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area MT 09/28/90
8 Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area MT 06/30/92
8 Smuggler Mountain CO 09/26/86
8 Wasatch Chemical (Lot 6) UT 03/29/91
8 Whitewood Creek SD 03/30/90
8 Woodbwy Chemical CO 07/19/85
8 Woodbury Chemical CO 0 /29/89
Subtotal 67
9 Advanced Micro Devices #915 CA 08/26/91
9 Advanced Micro Devices CA 09/11/91
9 Applied Matenals CA 09/28/90
9 Atlas Asbestos Mine CA 07/19 /89
9 Atlas Asbestos Mine CA 02/14/91
9 Beckman Instruments (Porterville) CA 09/26/89
9 Castle Air Force Base CA 08/12/ 91
9 Celtor Chemical Works CA 10/04/83
9 Celtor Chemical Works CA 09/30/85
9 Coalinga Asbestos Mine CA 07/19/89
9 CoaLinga Asbestos Mine CA 09/21/90
9 Coast Wood Preserving CA 09/29/89
9 CTSPnntex CA 06/28/91
9 Del Norte Pesticides Storage CA 09/30/85
9 Fairchild Semiconductor (South San Jose) CA 03/20/89
490
-------
SECTiON V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
9 Fairchild Semiconductor/Mt. View CA 06/09/89
9 Fairchild Semiconductor/Mt View CA 06/30/89
9 Raytheon CA 06/09/89
9 Firestone Tire (Salinas Plant) CA 09/13/89
9 FMC (Fresno Plant) CA 06/28/91
9 Hassayampa Landfill AZ 08/06/92
9 IBM (San Jose Plant) CA 12/15/ 88
9 Indian Bend Wash Area AZ 09/21/88
9 Indian Bend Wash Area (Operable Units 1,4,5, and 6) AZ 09/12/91
9 intel (Mountain View Plant) CA 06/09/89
9 Intel (Santa Clara Ill) CA 09/20/90
9 Intersil CA 09/27/90
9 IronMountainMine CA 10/03/86
9 IronMountainMine CA 09/30/92
9 JHBaxter CA 09/27/90
9 Jasco Chemical CA 09/30/92
9 Jibboom Junkyard CA 05/09/85
9 Koppers (Oroville Plant) CA 09/13/89
9 Lawrence Livermore National Lab (USDOE) CA 08/05/92
9 Lorentz Barrel & Drum CA 09/25/88
9 Louisiana Pacific CA 09/28/90
9 McColl CA 04/11/84
9 Mesa Area Ground Water Contairunation AZ 09/27/91
9 MGM Brakes CA 09/29/88
9 Micro Storage/Intel Magnetics CA 08/26/91
9 Monolithic Memones CA 09/11/91
9 Motorola (52nd Street Plant) AZ 09/30/88
9 Mountain View Mobile Homes AZ 06/02/83
9 National Semiconductor CA 09/11/91
9 Nineteenth Avenue Landfill AZ 09/29/89
9 Operating Industries Landfill #1 CA 07/31/87
9 OperatinglndustriesLandfill#2 CA 11/16/87
9 Operating industries Landfill 3 CA 09/30/88
9 Operating industries Landfill (Amendment) CA 09/28/90
9 Ordot Landfill GU 09/28/88
9 Pacific Coast Pipeline CA 03/31/92
9 Phoenix - Goodyear Airport Area AZ 09/26/89
9 Phoemx-GoodyearA irportArea AZ 09/29/87
9 Punty Oil Sales CA 09/26/89
9 PurityOilSales CA 09/30/92
9 Rhone-Poulenc/Zoecon CA 03/04/92
9 Sacramento Army Depot CA 09/29/89
9 Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 3) CA 12/09/91
9 Sacramento Army Depot (Operable Unit 4) CA 09/30/92
9 San Fernando Valley (Area 1) CA 09/24/87
9 San Fernando Valley (Area 1) CA 06/30/89
491
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
9 SanGabrielValley(Area l) CA 05/11/84
9 San Gabnel Valley (Area 1) CA 09/30/87
9 San Gabnel Valley (Area 1) CA 09/29/88
9 San Gabnel Valley (Area 2) CA 09/29/88
9 San Gabnel Valley (Area 4) CA 09/29/88
9 Selxna Treating CA 09/24/88
9 Signetics CA 09/11/91
9 Sola Optical USA CA 09/27/91
9 Solvent Service CA 09/27/90
9 South Bay Asbestos Area CA 09/29/88
9 South Bay Asbestos Area CA 09/29/89
9 South Bay Asbestos Area (Amendment) CA 06/26/91
9 Spectra-Physics (Teledyne Semiconductor) CA 03/22/91
9 Stnngfellow CA 07/22/83
9 Stringfellow CA 07/17/84
9 Stnngfellow CA 06/25/87
9 Stringfe llow CA 09/30/90
9 Synertek (Building #1) CA 06/28/91
9 Taputimu Farm AS 12/27/83
9 Teledyne Semiconductor (Spectra Physics) CA 03/22/91
9 TRW Microwave, MC (Building 825) CA 09/11/91
9 Tucson international Airport Area AZ 08/22/88
9 Valley Wood Preserving CA 09/27/91
9 Van Waters& Rogers CA 09/11/91
9 Watkins Johnson (Stewart Division) CA 06/29/90
9 Westinghouse Electnc (Sunnyvale Plant) CA 10/16/91
Subtotal 87
10 Amencan Lake Gardens (McChord - Area D) WA 09/19/91
10 Arrcom (Drexier Enterpnse) ID 06/30/92
10 Bangor Naval Submarine Base WA 09/19/91
10 Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Submarine Base) WA 12/10/91
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex ID 08/30/91
10 Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex ID 09/22/92
10 Colbert LandfiU WA 09/29/87
10 Commencement Bay - Nearshore/Tideflats WA 12/30/87
10 Commencement Bay - Nearshore/Tideflats WA 09/30/89
10 Commencement Bay - Nearshore/Tideflats (Operable Unit 7) WA 12/31/90
10 Commencement Bay - South Tacoma Channel WA 03/18/83
10 Commencement Bay- South Tacoma Channel WA 05/03/85
10 Commencement Bay - South Tacoma Channel WA 03/31/88
10 Eielson Air Force Base AK 09/29/92
10 Elmendorf Air Force Base AK 09/01/92
10 FMC Yakima Pit WA 09/14/90
10 Fort Lewis (Landfill No 5) WA 07/10/92
10 Fort Lewis Logistic Center WA 09/25/90
492
-------
SECTION V
LIST OF RECORDS OF DECISION (RODs) SIGNED
TO DATE FY 1982 - FY 1992 (Continued)
REGION SITE NAME STATE SIGN DATE
10 Frontier Hard Chrome WA 12/30/87
10 Frontier Hard Chrome WA 07/05/88
10 Gould OR 03/31/88
10 Joseph Forest Products OR 09/30/92
10 Martin Marietta Aluminum OR 09/29/88
10 McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment) WA 09/28/92
10 Mountain Home Air Force Base ID 06/16/92
10 N.A.S Whidbey Island - Ault Field WA 04/21/92
10 Northside Landfill WA 09/30/89
10 Northwest Transformer - Mission Pole WA 09/15/89
10 Northwest Transformer - Mission Pole (Amendment) WA 09/30/91
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling ID 06/28/88
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling (Amendment) II) 04/29/92
10 Pesticide Lab - Yakima WA 09/30/92
10 PondersComer/Lakewood WA 06/01/84
10 Ponders Comer/Lakewood WA 09/30/85
10 QueenCityFarms WA 10/24/85
10 Silver Mountain Mine WA 03/27/90
10 Teledyne Wah Chang Albany (TWCA) OR 12/28/89
10 Toftdahl Drum WA 09/30/86
10 Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons) OR 09/25/92
10 Union Pacific Railroad Yard ID 09/10/91
10 United Chrome Products OR 09/12/86
10 U S DOE Idaho National Engineenng Lab (Operable Urut 2) ID 09/28/92
10 U.s DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 5) ID 12/05/91
10 U.s DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 22) ID 09/30/92
10 U S DOE Idaho National Engineering Lab (Operable Unit 23) ID 06/02/92
10 Western Processing WA 08/05/84
10 Western Processing WA 09/25/85
10 Western Processing (Amendment) WA 09/04/86
10 Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor WA 09/29/92
10 Yakima Plating WA 09/30/91
Subtotal 50
Total 1,117
493
-------
SECTiON Vi
LIST OF ROD AMENDMENTS AND EXPLANATIONS
OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES
LIST OF AMENDMENTS
FISCAL AMENDMENT ORIGINAL ROD
YEAR REGION srr NAME, STATE SIGN DATE SIGN DATE
FY86 8 Woodbury Chemical, CO 09/30/86 07/19/85
10 Western Processing, WA 09/04/86 09/25/85
FY87 1 PicilloFarrn,RI 03/03/87 09/30/85
10 Lakewood (Ponders Corner), WA 11/14/86 09/30/85
FY88 3 TysonDump ,PA 03/31/88 12/21/84
FY89 1 TinkhamsGarage ,NH 03/10/89 09/30/86
3 Ordnance WorksDisposa l 09/29/89 03/31/88
Areas, WV
4 Chemtrorucs,NC 04/26/89 04/05/88
5 NewBnghtonfArdenHills ,MN 08/11/89 06/30/86
5 Outboard Marine, IL 03/31/89 05/15/84
5 RoseTownship,MI 01/18/89 09/30/87
FY90 3 Westline, PA 03/30/90 07/03/86
4 Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving, FL 09/26/90 09/25/86
4 Hipps Road Landfill, FL 09/21/90 09/03/86
4 Zeliwood Groundwater 03/01/90 12/15/87
Contamination, FL
5 Pnstine,OH 03/30/90 12/31/87
6 Hardage/Cnner , OK 11/22/89 11/14/86
9 Operating Industnes,CA 09/28/90 11/16/87
FY91 2 LoveCanal(93rdStreetLNY 05/15/91 09/26/88
3 Heleva Landfill, PA 09/30/91 03/22/85
4 Aberdeen Pesticide 09/30/91 06/30/89
Dumps, NC
4 Smith’s Farm Brooks, KY 09/30/91 09/29/89
5 Anderson Development Co , MI 09/30/91 09/28/90
5 Eriviro-Chem Corp. IN 06/07/91 09/25/87
5 Northside Landfill, IN 07/03/91 09/25/87
5 Novaco Industries, MI 09/05/91 06/27/86
5 Summit National Liquid 11/02/90 06/30/88
Disposal Service, OH
7 Ellisville Area (Operable Unit 2), MO 09/30/91 09/26/86
8 Brodenck Wood Products 09/24/91 06/30/88
(Operable Unit 1), CO
9 South Bay Asbestos Area (Operable 06/26/91 09/29/88
Unit 1), CA
10 Northwest Transformer 09/30/91 09/15/89
(Mission Pole), WA
495
-------
SECTION VI
LIST OF ROD AMENDMENTS AND EXPLANATIONS
OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (Continued)
LIST OF AMENDMENTS (Continued)
FISCAL AMENDMENT ORIGINAL ROD
YEAR REGION SITE NAME, STATE SIGN DATE SIGN DATE
FY92 4 Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL 06/16/92 05/05/85
5 Bofors Nobel, MI 07/22/92 09/17/90
5 MIDCO I, IN 04/13/92 06/30/89
5 MIDCOU,IN 04/13/92 06/30/89
5 South Andover (Operable Unit 1), MN 06/09/92 03/30/88
6 Crystal Chemical, TX 06/16/92 09127/90
6 Koppers (Texarkana Plant), TX 03/04/92 09/23/88
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling, ID 04/29/92 06/28/88
Amendments are those changes which fundamentally alter the overall remedy in the ROD The lead agency
may determine that the significant change fundamentally alters the overall remedy in the ROD, and thus
requires an amendment to the ROD This type of alteration would represent a complete change in the
hazardous waste management approach documented in the ROD For examples the lead agency decides,
based on pilot-scale tests, that bioremediation is no longer a feasible technology for this site instead, the lead
agency determines that thermal destruction and partial containment should be selected The lead agency will
have to amend the ROD by undertaking the public participation and documentation procedures specified in
Section 117 of CERCLA. it should be noted that pre-SARA (10/17/86) RODS that are amended will be subject
to the statutory requirements of Section 121 of CERCL.A (i.e, the clean-up standards)
496
-------
SECTION VI
ROD AMENDMENTS AND EXPLANATIONS
OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (Continued)
LIST OF APPROVED EXPLANATiONS OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (ESDs)
FISCAL ESD ORIGINAL ROD
YEAR REGION SITE NAME, STATE SIGN DATE SIGN DATE
FY89 2 Love Canal, NY 06/01/89 10/26/87
2 Sinclair Refinery, NY 01/26/89 09/30/85
2 UpjohnFacihty ,PR 04/C4189 09/30/88
2 Vega Alta Public Supply Wells, PR 03/22/89 09/29/87
4 Distler Farm and Bnckyard, KY 10/26/88 08/19/86
FY90 1 Keefe Environmental Services, NH 06/08/90 03/21/88
1 McKin,ME 09/12/90 07/22/85
I Rose Disposal Pit, MA 11/17/89 09/23/88
1 Sylvester’s, NH 07/10/90 09/22/83
3 Aladdin Plating, PA 05/07/90 09/27/88
3 Rally Groundwater 01/18/90 06/30/89
Contamination, PA
3 Delaware City PVC Plant, DE 09/18/91 09/30/86
3 Strasburg Landfill, PA 01 /03/90 06/29/89
3 U.S Titaruum ,VA 09/26/90 11/21/89
5 Wedzeb Enterprises, IN 08/24/90 06/30/89
6 Bayou Bonfouca, LA 02/05/90 03/31/87
10 Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling, ID 09/26/90 06/28/88
FY91 I Coakley Landfill, NH 03/22/91 06/28/90
3 LetterkennyArmyDepotSE ,PA 08/02/91 06/28/91
5 BurrowsSaiutationLandfill,M1 05/15/91 09/30/86
5 University of Minnesota (Rosemont 08/20/91 06/29/90
Center), MN
8 SilverBowCreek/ButteArea,M7 06/24/91 09/28/90
9 Beckman Instruments 03/06/91 09/26/89
(Porterville), CA
9 Koppers (Oroville Plant), CA 01/29/91 09/28/89
9 Phoenix-Goodyear 01/24/91 09/26/89
(Airport), AZ
9 SanFernando Valley 11/21/90 06/30/89
(Area 1), CA
10 Commencement Bay/Nearshore 11/01/91 12/30/87
Tideflats/Takoma Tar Pits, WA
FY92 I Hocomonco Pond, MA 07/22/92 09/30/85
5 Dakhue Sanitary Landhll, MN 4/28/92 06/28/91
5 Ninth Avenue E)ump, [ N 10/23/91 09/20/88
5 Summit National, OH 03/23/92 06/30/88
7 El Dupont DeNemours (County 05/11/92 05/28/91
Road x23), 1A
497
-------
SECTiON VI
ROD AMENDMENTS AND EXPLANATIONS
OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (Continued)
UST OF APPROVED EXPLANATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (ESDs) (Continued)
FISCAL ESD ORIGINAL ROD.
YEAR REGION SITE NAME, STATE SIGN DATE SIGN DATE
7 Shaw Avenue Dump, IA 03/24/92 09/26/91
8 Arsenic Trioxide, ND 09/25/92 09/26/86
10 Lakewood (Ponders Corner), WA 09/15/92 09/30/85
10 United Chrome Products, OR 12/20/91 09/12/86
10 FMCYakimaPit,WA 04/21/93 09/14/90
An ESD (statutory requirement of Section 117(c) of CERCLA) is a significant change to a component of a ROD.
It identifies the changes to a ROD and why they are being made. Significant changes usually take place during
RD/RA and negotiations with the PRPs. An ESD should be issued concurrently with the consent decree. The
lead agency could determine, e.g., that 30 percent more soil should be treated, raising the cost of the remedy
from $5 to 7 million dollars.
498
-------
SECTION VII
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTIONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL
SOURCE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
Treatment technologies fdr source material are grouped based on the primaly functions for which they are
generally used. destruction/detoxification, separation/recovery, munobilization, and other The specific
technologies listed are those identified in the RODS.
I. DESTRUCTION/DETOXIFICATION
A. Bioremediation
Biological treatments use microorganisms to degrade primarily low to moderate levels of orgaruc contaminants
in aqueous waste streams and soil Biological treatments include
• In Situ Biorernediation - uses natural populations or seeded bacteria to biodegrade organic compounds
The biological process may be accelerated by introducing nutrients and oxygen This process is often
used in conjunction with a ground water pumping and reinjection system to circulate nutrients and
oxygen through a contaminated aquifer and associated contaminated soil
• Solid/Slurry Phase or Ex Situ Bioremediation - involves cominglmg excavated organic-contaminated
soil, sludge, or sediments, with bioactive microorganisms in a mobile batch reactor or an rn-ground
reactor Waste is mixed with water to create a slurry composition, and the slurry is mixed to maximize
treatment of organic contaminants Upon completion of the process, the slurry is dewatered and the
treated soil is disposed of
B. Chemical Destruction/Detoxification
Chemical destruction/detoxification processes alter the hazardous substances to produce a by-product
residue that is less hazardous than the ongutal waste and may be easier to remove from the waste stream
Chemical destruction/detoxthcatiori processes include
• Chemical Reduction/Oxidation ( redox ) - is a destruction process that changes the chemical nature of the
nature of the contaminants
• Dechlorination - is a destruction process in which chlorine is chemically removed from chlorinated
organic compounds This process converts the more toxic compounds ‘nto less toxic, water soluble
products The transformation of contaminants within the soil produces compounds that are more readily
removed from the sod
C. Thermal Destruction
Thermal destruction technologies use heat to destroy or detoxify hazardous substances, encompassing such
technologies as incineration. pyrolysis. and wet air oxidation Specific incineration types include rotary kiln,
liquid injection, flu.idized-bed, arid infrared treatment
• Incineration - is a controlled flame combustion process in which organics are destroyed producing carbon
dioxide, water, and other compounds
• Pyrolvsis - is a decomposition process in which orgarucs are thermally decomposed into their individual
elements, in an oxygen deficient atmosphere
499
-------
SECTION VI I
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTIONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL (Continued)
• Wet Air Oxidation - is a process that involves adding high pressure and temperature to a water solution
or suspension to destroy organics
IL SEPARATION/RECOVERY
A. Chemical/Physical Extraction
Chemical/Physical Extraction is a transfer/separation process in which contaminants are dissociated from
the matrix either through a chemical or a physical process and are dissolved in a liquid or gaseous phase
which may require further treatment Chemical/physical extraction processes indude.
• In Situ Flushing - is an in-ground extraction process that uses a flushing agent, e.g., water to extract
contaminants The process has been used to flush soil, waste and groundwater.
• In Situ Vacuum/Soil Vapor Extraction - is an in-ground process that involves extraction of VOCs from
soil using a vacuum or forced air. This process is generally used with other technologies since it transfers
contaminants from the soil to air and water waste to capture and treat the off-gases, streams
• Soil Washing - is a water-based process for mechanically scrubbing soils ex situ to remove undesirable
contaminants The process removes contaminants from soils in one of two ways by dissolving or
suspending them in the wash solution (which is later treated by conventional wastewater treatment
methods) or by concentrating them into a smaller volume of soil through simple particle size separation
techniques (similar to those used in sand and gravel operations)
B. Thermal Desorption
Thermal Desorption uses heat to extract volatile organics from the media and may be followed by other
treatments to collect and/or destroy contaminants Thermal desorption processes nc)ude
• Ec Situ Thermal Desorption - is a physical transfer process that uses air, heat, and mechanical agitation
to change volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil into a gas stream, where the contanunailts are then
further treated
• In Situ Thermal Desorption - involves the injection of steam or hot air into soil to volatilize VOCs VOCs
nse to the surface where they are condensed or trapped on activated carbon Other techniques may
include radio frequency heating
III. IMMOBILIZATION
The term “immobilization” is used to mean any of the technologies which limit the solubility or mobility of
contaminants The term “fixation’S has also been used as a synonym for immobilization Technology types
which fall within the realm of immobilization include.
• Solidification/Stabilization - involves the addition and mixing of rnatenals that limit the solubility or
mobility of the waste constituents, and results in a monolithic structure
• Sorbent Solidification - involves the addition and mixing of materials that limit the mobility of the waste
constituents through sorption
500
-------
SECTION VII —
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTiONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL (Continued)
Stabilization - involves the addition and mixing of materials that limit the solubility or mobility of the
waste constituents even though the physical characteristics of the waste may not be changed
IV. OTHER
In Situ Vitrification (ISV ) - is a thermochemical treatment process that destroys, removes, or immobilizes
hazardous wastes by electrically melting the waste media (e.g., soil) which upon cooling creates an extremely
stable glass-like solid. ISV can be used to treat soil and sludge contaminated with radioactive, inorganic, or
organic wastes or mixtures of these contaminants.
GROUND WATER TECHNOLOGIES
Treatment technologies for ground water are grouped based on the categories commonly used in the waste
water treatment industry, chemical/physical treatment, biological, and other. The specific technologies
listed are those identified in the RODS
I. CHEMICAL/PHYSICAL
• Activated Alumina - is an adsorption process that is used to remove dissolved inorganic constituents
such as arsenic, fluoride, and selenium As contaminated ground water contacts activated alumina,
inorgarucs become physically/chemically attached (i e, adsorbed) to the alumina surface Activated
alun’una is a highly porous, granular form of aluminum oxide
• Aeration - is a gas-liquid rnass-transferprocess that is used for adding oxygen during biological treatment
processes, or for air stripping VOCs from wastewaters
• Air Sparging - involves injecting gas into the aquifer to attach to volatile contaminants as it percolates up
through the ground water, and is captured with a vapor extraction system
• Air Stripping ( Desorption ) - is a physical process that involves bringing ground water into close contact
with air, thereby causing VOCs in the Liquid phase to transfer to the gas phase For ground water, this
generally is accomplished by injecting water into an air stream Exhaust air may have to be treated (e.g,
using carbon adsorption) to remove VOCs before discharge to the atmosphere
• Carbon Adsorption - is a physiocherrucal process that involves using activated carbon as a sorbent to
primarily removesolubleorganics from airand water Ascontaminated ground watercontactsactivated
carbon, organic molecules become physically/chemically attached (i.e ,adsorbed) to the carbon surface
There are two basic types of activated carbon based on the size of the carbon particles granular and
powdered
• Chemical Treatment - involves chemical reduction-oxidation (redox) reactions in which the oxidation
state of at least one reactant is raised while that of another is lowered Redox reactions can detoxify and
enhance biodegradability or adsorption (oxidation), or reduce solubility (reduction)
• Filtration - is a physical process that involves forcing contaminated ground water through a porous
granular-media filter (e g. sand, anthracite) to remove suspended particles Several mechanisms are
involved in filtering suspended particles from ground water, including straining, flocculation, and
sedimentation.
501
-------
SECTION VII
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTiONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL (Continued)
• flocculation - is a chenucal/physical process that involves agitating chemically treated water to enhance
precipitation and induce coagulation Fine suspended particles formed during precipitation collide
during gentle mixing, and agglomerate into larger heavier particles or flocs and settle out Flocculating
agents such as alum,. lime, iron salts, and orgaruc flocculating agents are added to reduce natural
repelling surface charges on particles, and physical agitation is used for the formation of large flocs
• Granular Activated Carbon - is carbon prepared by heating various types of woods and coal to dnve off
hydrocarbons but with insufficient air to sustain combustion. The resulting char is activated by exposure
to an oxidizing gas at high temperatures The carbon particles generally are used in carbon adsorption
processes (see above)
• Ion Exchange - is a reversible process whereby toxic ions (i.e., anions and cations) in solution are
exchanged with less harmful, similarly charged ions electrostatically attached to a solid synthetic resin
material The toxic ions have a stronger affinity to the resin, and will replace the original ions that were
placed on the resin before treatment Once the available exchange sites on the resin are filled, the resin
can be regenerated
• Neutrahzation (pH Adjustment ) - is a chemical process that involves adding an acid (e g , sulfuric acid)
or base (e g , lime) to adjust the pH Neutralization may be used as a pretreatment before biological or
chenucal treatment
• Precipitation - is a physiochenucal process that involves transforming a contaminant from solution into
a solid phase Precipitation for ground water remediation is used primarily for the removal of heavy
metals using such precipitating chemicals as lime, alum, or iron salts Chenucal precipitation is followed
frequently by flocculation to enhance settling of solid particles for subsequent removal by filtration or
sedimentation Physical precipitation, including cooling, heating or altering the solvent concentration,
also can be used to alter solubilities and precipitate contaminants
• Reverse Osmosis - is a physical separation process involving membrane filtration Sufficient pressure
is applied to a concentrated solution to force the water from the solution to flow through a semi-
permeable membrane but selectively prevents impurities from passing through the membrane,
concentrations of impurities build up on the pressure induced side of the membrane Reverse osmosis
is generally limited to polishing low flow streams contairung highly toxic contaminants, and is especially
effective for high molecular weight organics and ions
• Sedimentation - is the removal of suspended solids from wastewaters by the gravitational settling of
partides heavier than water Sedimentation may be used in ground water treatment after biological
treatment or precipitation/flocculation to remove biomass or precipitants
• UV Peroxidation - is a chemical oxidation process that uses hydrogen peroxide in the presence of a
catalyst to generate hydroxyl radicals that react with organics and reduced compounds to yield carbon
dioxide, water, salts, simple organic acids, and/or sulfates thereby reducing the toxicity and organic
content of wastewaters The application of ultraviolet (UV) light to the waste treatment (photolysi ) to
enhance/induce chemical transformations can be used in conjunction with peroxidation A major
advantage of UV application is that specific bonds can be targeted by selecting the appropriate frequency
of the light source.
502
-------
SECTION VII
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTIONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL (Continued)
IL BIOLOGICAL
Ex Situ Bioremediation - is a batch process that uses bacteria to degrade organic matter aerobically or
anaerobically. Aerobic bioremediation involves the conversion of organics to carbon dioxide, water, and
new bacteria cells Anaerobic bioremediation generally involves the conversion of organics to carbon
dioxide and methane gas in the absence of molecular oxygen. There are several biological treatment
processes, including conventional activated sludge systems and fixed film systems (e.g., trickling filter,
biotower).
In Situ Bioremediation - is an in situ process that uses natural populations or seeded bacteria in an aquifer
to transform organic contaminants (e.g., petroleum hydrocarbons) into less hazardous compounds
thereby reducing the concentration of hazardous substances The biological process generally involves
the aerobic oxidation of organic compounds by bacteria, which produce water, carbon dioxide, and new
biornass as products. In situ biological treatment generally is accomplished via a ground water pumping
and reinjection system and is often limited by the ability to provide additional oxygen and nutrients to
the bacteria
IlL OTHER
• Publicly Owned Treatment Works ( POTW ) - encompasses any device or system used in the treatment
(including recycling and reclamation) of municipal or industnal wastes of a liquid nature, that is owned
by a State or municipality, including sewers, pipes, or other conveyances if they convey wastewater to
a facility providing treatment
SOURCE AND GROUND WATER OTHER ACTIONS
Ground Waten
• Alternate Water Supply - involves either constructing a new water line from an existing water system,
or drilling a new water supply well(s) in an uncontaminated area, then connecting the residential systems
to the new line or well(s) This term also includes providing bottled water to residents, usually
temporanly, until construction of a new, more permanent water supply system is completed
• Natural Attenuation - involves allowing natural, physical, chemical and biological processes to degrade
contaminants and lower contamination concentrations over time until cleanup levels are met
Source Control.
• Capping - involves the construction of a protective cover over a landfill or other area containing wastes
or contamination The objectives of capping include (1) prevention of surface exposure of the wastes,
thereby preventing air and surface water contamination and the risk of direct contact with humans or the
environment, (2) reduction or elimination of infiltration of rainwater or other precipitation into the waste,
thereby reducing the volume of leachate that is generated
• Flaring - is a combustion reaction that thermally oxidizes (burns) flammable gaseous substances into
products that generally include ash, carbon dioxide and other gases, water vapor and heat through
exposure to open flame Supplementary fuels may be needed to sustain continuous combustion Flares
are commonly used during landfill closures to dispose of vented and landfill gases, or in remedial
503
-------
SECTION VII
DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND OTHER
ACTIONS FOR SOURCE AND GROUND WATER CONTROL (Continued)
treatment technologies producing simple hydrocarbon emissions Although flares provide sufficient
destruction capabthties for conventional hydrocarbon emissions (methane, landfill gas), environmental
destruction efficiencies for many gaseous total organic hydrocarbon (TOC) compounds are generally too
stringent to be met by flaring
Slurry Wall - involves digging a deep trench and backfill.ing the trench with “slurry” — a wet mixture of
soil and bentonite clay or similar material that swells when wetted The slurry mixture expands in the
trench, creating a relatively impermeable wall that inhibits the lateral flow of ground water The
effectiveness of a slurry wall in controlling lateral flow can be greatly enhanced if the bottom of the well
is keyed into a naturally occurring horizontal flow barrier beneath the site, such as a clay layer, or other
relatively impermeable hydrogeologic unit.
• Venting - is often used in landfills to allow any gases generated by the buried decomposing wastes to be
collected and removed, either for treatment or for release into the atmosphere Venting prevents the
dangerous buildup of potentially explosive gases within the landfill; excess gas accumulation can also
damage the integrity of the final cover/cap In older landfills without liners, if the gases cannot escape
through venting, they may migrate out through the subsurface and come out in nearby wells, basements,
and streams
504
-------
SECTION VIII
LIST OF SUPERFUND ACRONYMS
AA - Assistant Administrator
AASWER - Assistant Administrator Solid Waste Emergency Response (OSWER)
ACL - Alternate Contaminant Level
ADP - Automated Data Processing
AER - Appropnate Extent Remedy
ALT - Alternate
AM - Action Memorandum
AO - Administrative Order
AOA - Advice of Allowance
AOC - Administrative Order on Consent
APR - Approved
AR - Administrative Record
ARARs - Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
ARCS - Alternate Remedial Contracting Strategy
ATSDR - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
AUIC - Alternate Treatment Technology information Center
BDAT - Best Demonstrated Available Treatment Technology
CA - Cooperative Agreement
CAA - Clean Air Act
CD - Consent Decree
CDC - Centers for Disease Control
CE!’? - Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program
CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
CERCLIS - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation. and Liability
Information System
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
CLP - Contract Laboratory Program
CO - Contracting Officer
CORA - Cost of Remedial Action
CPCA - Core Program Cooperative Agreement
CR? - Community Relations Plan
CWA - Clean Water Act
DNAPLs - Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liqwds
DOC - Department of Commerce
DOD - Department of Defense
DOE Department of Energy
DO! - Department of interior
DOJ - Department of Justice
DOL - Department of Labor
DOS - Department of State
DOT - Department of Transportation
DPO - Deputy Project Officer
EA - Endangerment Assessment
EADS - Environmental Assessment Data System
EDD - Enforcement Decision Document
EMIS - Enforcement Management Information System
EMSL-LV - Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas
EO - Executive Order
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
505
-------
SECTION VIII
LIST OF SUPERFUND ACRONYMS (Continued)
ERA - Expedited Response Action
ERCS - Emergency Response Cleanup Services
ERD - Emergency Response Division
ERT - Emergency Response Team
ESD - Explanation of Significant Differences
EW - Expert Witness
FE - Federal Enforcement
FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIT - Field Investigation Team
FNSI - Finding of No Significant Impact
FOJA - Freedom of Information Act
FR - Federal Register
FR? - Funding Recommendations Package
FS - Feasibility Study
FWPCA - Federal Water Pollution Control Act
FY - Fiscal Year
HI-IS - (Department of) Health and Human Services
HI - Hazard Index
HQ - EPA Headquarters
HRS - Hazard Ranking System
HSCD - Hazardous Site Control Division
HSED - Hazardous Site Evaluation Division
lAG - Interagency Agreement
IFMS - Integrated Financial Management System
IMC - Information Management Coordinator
IPL - Interim Prionty List
- Immediate Removal
IRM - Initial Remedial Measure
IRP - Installation Restoration Program (DOD)
LOE - Level of Effort
MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level (or background)
MCLG - Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
MEP - Maximum Extent Possible
MOU - Memorandum of Understanding
MSCA - Multi-Site Cooperative Agreement
NAAQS - National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAI’L - Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
NBAR - Non-Binding Allocation of Responsibility
NCC - National Computer Center
NCLP - National Contract Laboratory Program
NCP - National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
NDD - Negotiation Decision Document
NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act
NESHAP - National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutant
NFRAP - No Further Remedial Action Planned
NIOSH - National institute of Occupational Safety and Health
NOAA - National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration
NOTIS - 103(c) Notifications
NPDES - National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System
506
-------
SECTION VIII —
UST OF SUPERFUND ACRONYMS (Continued)
NPL - National Priorities List
NRC - National Response Center
NRT - National Response Team
O&M - Operations and Maintenance
O&M/LTR - Operations and Maintenance/Long Term Response
OERR - Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
OGC - Office of General Counsel (EPA)
OIG - Office of the Inspector General (EPA)
0MB - Office of Management and Budget
OPM - Office of Program Management (EPA /OERR)
ORC - Office of Regional Counsel (EPA)
ORD - Office of Research and Development
OSC - On-Scene Coordinator
OSHA - Occupational Safety and Health Administration
0 5W - Office of Solid Waste
OSWER - Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OU - Operable Unit
OWPE - Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
PA - Preliminary Assessment
PCBs - Polychionnated Biphenyls
PCMD - Procurement and Contracts Management Division
P0 - Project Officer (HQ)
POTW - Publidy Owned Treatment Works
PR - Planned Removal
PR - Procurement Request
PR? - Potentially Responsible Party
PTS - Project Tracking System
QA/QC - Quality Assurance/Quality Control
RA - Remedial Action
RCRA - Resource Conservation Recovery Act of 1976
RD - Remedial Design
RFP - Request for Proposals
RI - Remedial Investigation
RI/FS - Remedial lnvestigation/Feasibthty Study
ROD - Record of Decision
RP - Responsible Party
RPM - Regional Project Manager
RP0 - Regional Project Manager
RQ Risk Quotient
RTP Research Triangle Park
SACM - Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model
SARA - Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SCAP - Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan
SDWA - Safe Dnnking Water Act
SI - Site Investigation
SMOA - State Memorandum of Agreement
SOW - Statement of Work
SPO - State Project Officer
SRO - Superfund Revitalization Office
507
-------
SECTION VIII
LIST OF SUPERFUND ACRONYMS (Continued)
SSC - State Superfund Contract
STARS - Strategic Targeted Activities for Results System (formerly SPSS)
START - Superfund Technology Assistance Response Team
TAG - Technical Assistance Grants
TAP - Treatability Assistance Program
TAT - Technical Assistance Team
TBD - Toxicological Data Base
TCLP - Toxicity Charactensitic Leaching Procedure
TSCA - Toxic Substances Control Act
USACE - United States Army Corps of Engineers
USCG - United States Coast Guard
USDA - United States Department of Agnculture
USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS - U.S Geological Survey
VOCs - Volatile Organic Compounds
WA - Work Assignment
508
------- |