ROD ANNUAL REPORT
FY 1987
EPA
JULY 1988
HAZARDOUS SITE CONTROL DIVISION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
ROD ANNUAL REPORT
FY 1987
EPA
JULY 1988
HAZARDOUS SITE CONTROL DIVISION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
I.
II.
III.
Iv.
V.
FY 1987 ROD ANNUAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGES
1—8
1—97
1—26
1—55
1—40
SECTIONS
Introduction
Records of Decision Abstracts
Records of Decision Summary Table:
Records of Decision Summary Table:
Records of Decision Key Word List:
FY 1987
FY 1982—1986
FY 1982—1987
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
I
-------
ENTRODUCT EON
Congress enacted the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) on October 17, 1986, which added new
requirements and special emphasis to the remedial program.
Seventy—five Record of Decision (ROD) documents, highlighting
these SARA statutory findings, were signed during FY 1987.
Forty—four of these RODs addressed final source control
measures. The other thirty—one addressed temporary storage
(8), ground water action only (16), and no furtheF action (7).
Exhibit 1 provides a quantitative summary of Fl 1987 remedy
selections by site lead, while Exhibit 5 provides Regional
remedy selection totals. Following the movement in FY 1986 to
delegate ROD approval authority to the Regions, 97% of all
FY 1987 RODs were approved in the Regions.
SARA Section 121 mandates the selection of a remedial
action that is protective of human health and the environment,
attains 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, SARA Section 121 provides a
preference for treatment which permanently and significantly
reduces the volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous wastes.
In accordance with these requirements, 61% of final source
control RODs (27/44) in FY 1987 emriloyed treatment. This is a
16% increase over Fl 1986. Non—treatment was selected for 17
sites where treatment was riot practical when balanced against
other selection criteria. Thermal destruction/incineration was
the most frequently selected treatment, occurring in 13 RODs
with solidification as the second most often selected treatment
(7 RODs). Exhibit 2 graphically depicts the types and
frequency of treatment technologies selected in FY 1987, while
Exhibit 3 lists the type of technology selected by site name,
State, and Region. In addition, Exhibit 4 lists those RODs
between FY 1982—86 that selected treatment technologies.
-------
As a reference document, the FY 1987 ROD Annual Report is
designed to provide the Regions, Headquarters and the public
with summary information on FY 1987 RODs. It consists of the
following sections:
• Introduction — highligh-ts----specific accomplishments in
the ROD process.
• ROD Abstracts — describes site conditions, key
contaminants, selected remedial actions, specific
performance standards and goals, institutional
controls and site—specific key words for each FY 1987
ROD.
FY 1987 ROD Summary Table — summarizes operable Unit,
media and associated contaminants, waste volume,
selected remedial actions, specific cleanup goals, and
capital and operation and maintenance costs for each
FY 1987 ROD.
• FY 1982—1986 ROD Summary Table — summarizes operable
unit, media and associated contaminants, waste volume,
selected remedial actions, specific cleanup goals, and
capital and operation and maintenance costs for each
FY 1982—1986 ROD.
• ROD Keyword List — provides major keyword categories
and their subcategories for all RODs approved to
date. A key word list index located at the beginning
of this section provides an overview of all categories
and subcategories within the list.
-------
Exhibit 1
FY 1987 ROD SUMMARY
PROGRAM ENFORCEMENT TOTAL
TOTAL RODs COMPLETED 47 28 75
FINAL SOURCE CONTROL RODs 26 18 44
TOTAL RODS EMPLOYING SOURCE TREATMENT 18 9 27
SELECTED REMEDY*
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 22 10 32
INCINERATION/THERMAL 10 3 13
SOUDIF1CATION 5 2 7
STABILIZATION/NEUTRALIZATION 0 2 2
VOLATiLIZATION/AERATION 2 1 3
SOIL WASHING/FLUSHING 2 0 2
BIODEGRADATiON/LAND APPLICATION 0 1 1
OThER 3 1 4
CONTAINMENT 17 18 35
ONSITE CONTAINMENT 8 16 24
TEMPORARY STORAGE 8 0 8
OFFSITE DISPOSAL 1 2 3
GROUNDWATER 27 18 45
PUMP AND TREATMENT 18 14 32
ALTERNATE WATER SUPPLY 9 4 13
NO FURTHER ACTiON 4 3 7
FY 1987 ROD REMEDY COSTS**
0 • S2M 2 S5M 5 - SlaM 10 - 520M 20 • 550M 550+
FEDERAL 10 11 6 3 2 1
STATE 8 2 2 0 3 0
ENFORCEMENT 7 8 4 3 2b* 1
TOTAL 25 21 12 6 7 2
* More than one remedy may be associated with a site
Includes some present worth costs
Includes a combined remedial cost for the Envirochem, IN and Northside, IN
sites, which are both represented in one ROD
-------
Exhibit 2
Summary of FY 1987 ROD Sites Selecting Treatment
Technologies as Components of Source Control Remedies
VOLATILIZATION!,
AERATION
(3)
STABILIZATiON!
NEUTRALIZATION
(2)
NUMBER
OF SiTES
TYPES
13
INCINERATION
7
SOLIDIFiCATION/FIXATiON
2
STABILIZAT1ON/NEUTRAUZA11ON
3
VOLA11LIZAT1ON/AERA11ON
2
SOIL WASHING/FLUSHING
1
BIODEGRADATION
4
OThER
.
BIODEGRADATION
SOIL WASHING/
FLUSHING
(2)
-------
Exhibit 3
Summary of FY 1987 ROD Sites Selecting Treatment
Technologies as Components of Source Control Remedies
TECHNOLOGY REGION SITE NAME/STATE
Incineration (13) I Davis Liquid Waste, RI
I Ottati&Goss,NH
II Williams Property, NJ
IV Geiger (C&M Oil), SC
IV Sodyeco, NC
IV Tower Chemical, FL
V Laskin/Poplar, OH
V Rose Township, MI
VI Bayou Bonfouca, LA
VI Cleve Reber, LA
VI Gurley Pit, AR
VI Hardage/Cnner, OK
VI Sand Spnngs Petrochemical
Complex, OK
Solidification/Fixation (7) II Chemical Control, NJ
IV Geiger (C&M Oil), SC
IV Gold Coast, FL
IV Independent Nail, SC
V Liquid Disposal Landfill, MI
V Northern Engraving, WI
VI ,.- Sand Springs Petrochemical
Complex, OK
Stabilization/Neutralization (2) VI Gurley Pit, AR
VI Mid-South, AR
Volatilization/Aeration (3) I Ottati & Goss, NH
II Waldick Aerospace, NJ
V Seymour Recycling, IN
Soil Washing/Flushing (2) I Davis Liquid Waste, RI
IV Palmetto Wood, SC
Biodegradation (1) II Renora, Inc., NJ
Other (4) I Resolve, MA
Ill Palmerton Znc, PA
Ill West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV
VIII Central City/Clear Creek, CO
-------
Exhibit 4
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES SELECTED AT FY82-86 ROD SiTES
FISCAL YEAR OF
ROD SIGNATURE TECHNOLOGY REGiON SITE NAME. STATE
FY82 Stabu lizatiorvNeutralizaHon Ill 8ru n Lagoon, PA
FY83
FY84 Incineration V Berlin & Farro, MI
LaskiivPoptar, OH
X Western Processing, WA
Biodegradation VI Old Inger, LA
Stabilization/Neutralization VI Buoecology, TX
FY85 Incineration II Bog Creek Farm, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Swope Oil, NJ
V Acme Solvents, IL
VI MOTCO,TX
Triangle Chemical, TX
VIII Woodbury Chemical, CO
Soil Washing/Flushing II Goose Farm, NJ
X South Tacoma/Well 12-A, WA
Stabili ationINeutraIization II Wide Beach, NY
IV Davie Landfill, FL
Biodegradation V Byron/Johnson Salvage, IL
Volatilization/Soil Aeration I McKln, ME
V Verona Well Field, Ml
Vi Triangle Chemical, TX
-------
Exhibit 4
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES SELECTED AT FY82-86 ROD SiTES
(Continued)
FISCAL YEAR OF
ROD SIGNATURE TECHNOLOGY REGION SITE NAME, STATE
FY86 Incineration 1 ’ 2 I Baird & McGuire, MA
II Hyde Park, NY
III Drake, PA
Westline, PA
I V Coleman Evans, Fl ..
Mowbray Engineering, AL
V Arrowhead Refinery, MN
Fields Brook, OH
LaSalle Electrical, IL
Metamora Landfill, Ml
Spiegelberg Landfill, Ml
VI Sikes Disposal Pit, TX
Solidification 1 ’ 2 IV Mowbray Engineering, AL
Peppers Steel, FL
Sapp Battery, ft
V Burrows Sanitation, MI
Fields Brook, OH
Forest Waste, MI
X Queen City Farms, WA
Volatilization/Soil Aeration 3 I linkham Garage, NH
II Caidwell Trucking, NJ
Metattec/Aerosystems, NJ
IV Hollingsworth Solderless, FL
Stabilization/Neutralization 4 II Marathon Battery, NY
III Bruin Lagoon, PA
VIII Denver Radium/ROBCO, CO
Soil Washing/Flushing 3 I Tinkham Garage, NH
X Unifed Chrome, OR
Biodegradation Ill Leetown Pesticide, WV
V Burlington Northern, MN
Land ApplicationlComposting 3 I linkham Garage, NH
1 Includes Mowbray Engineering, AL, which will select erther incineration or solidification
2 Includes Fields Brook, OH, which selected both incineration and solidification
3 Includes Tlnkham Garage, NH, which will select either soil washing, aeration, or composting
4 Includes Denver RadiumIROBCO, CO, which may select stabilization
-------
Exhibit 5
FY 1987 Regional Record of Decision Remedy Selections
I II III IV V VI VII VIII DC X
Total
Total # of RODs
3 15 5 11 14 11 3 7 5 1
75
# of RODs Addressing
Final Source Control
3 9 2 11 10 7 1 0 0 1
44
# of RODs Selecting
No Action Alternative
0 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0
7
# of RODs Selecting
Treatment Technology
4 6 2 6 5 4 0 0 0 0
32
# of RODs Selecting Olisite
Disposal of Untreated Wastes
0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
3
# of RODs Selecting Onsite
Disposal of Untreated Wastes
0 3 2 4 9 5 1 0 0 0
24
# of RODs Selecting
Alternate Water Supply
1 4 0 4 2 0 0 0 1 1
13
# of RODS Selecting
Temporary Onsile Storage
0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 0 0
8
# of RODs Selecting
Ground Water Treatment
3 7 0 5 7 3 1 1 4 1
32
-------
r
SECTION II
RECORDS OF DECISION ABSTRACTS
Each ROD summary presented in this section consists of the following:
• ROD Abstract - summarizing site location and background information,
contaminated media, key contaminants, selected remedial action, and
capitai and O&M costs.
• Performance Standards or Goals - describing qualitative/quantitative
cleanup criteria.
• Institutional Controls - describing site ordered restrictions.
o Key Words - highlighting treatment technologies, contaminated media,
key contaminants, and major key word categories for the RODs. A list of
RODs by key words is presented in the last section of this document.
J
-------
RECORDS OF DECISION ABSTRACTS
FY 1987
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SITE NAME/STATE PAGE
REGION I
Davis Liquid Waste, RI I
Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH 2
Re—Solve, MA 4
** REGION II
Chemical Control, NJ 6
Cooper Road, NJ 7
Diamond Alkali, NJ B
Endicott Village Well Field, NY 10
GE Moreau, NY 11
Haviland Complex, NY 12
Katonah Municipal Well, NY 13
Montgomery Township, NJ 14
Renora, Inc., NJ 15
South Brunswick Landfill, NJ 17
Suffern Village Well Field, NY 18
Vega Alta, PR 19
Volney Landfill, NY 20
Waldick Aerospace, NJ 21
Williams Property, NJ 22
REGION III
Icane & Lombard, MD 23
Palmerton Zinc, PA 24
Presque Isle, PA 25
Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds, VA 26
West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV 27
** REGION IV
Geiger (C&M Oil), SC 29
Gold Coast, FL 30
Independent Nail, SC 32
Newport Dump Site, KY 33
Northwest 58th Street Landfill, FL 34
Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC 35
Parramore Surplus, FL 36
Powersville Landfill, GA 37
Sodyeco, NC 38
Tower Chemical, FL 40
Tn—City Conservation, FL 42
-------
RECORDS OF DECISI .)N ABSTPACTS
FY 1987
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
SITE NAME/STATE PAGE
** REGION V
FMC Corporation, MN 43
Industrial Excess Landfill, OH 45
Johns—Manville, IL 46
Laskin/Poplar, OH 47
Liquid Disposal, MI 48
Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN 49
New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, MN 50
New Brighton/Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant, MN 51
Northern Engraving, WI 53
Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN 55
Rose Township, MI 57
Schxnalz Dump, WI 58
Seymour, IN 59
REGION VI
Bayou Bonfouca, LA 61
Bayou Sorrel, LA 63
Cleve Reber, LA 65
Compass Industries Landfill, OK 67
Crystal City Airport, TX 68
Gurley Pit, AR 69
Hardage/Criner, OK 70
Highlands Acid Pit, TX 72
Mid—South Wood Products, AR 73
Petro—Chemical Systems, TX 75
Sand Springs Petrochemical Complex, OK 76
** REGION VII
Conservation Chemical, MO 77
Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek — Romaine
Creek Portion, MO 79
Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek — Stout
Portion, MO 80
** REGION VIII
Central City/Clear Creek, CO 81
Denver Radium 1/12th and Quivas, CO 82
Denver Radium 11/11th and Umatilla, CO 84
Denver Radium III, CO 86
Denver Radium/Card Property, CO 88
-------
RECORDS OF DECISION ABSTRACTS
FY 1987
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
SITE NAME/STATE PAGE
** REGION VIII (continued)
Denver Radium/Open Space, Co 89
Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO 91
** REGION IX
Litchfield Airport, AZ 92
Operating Industries, CA 93
San Fernando Area I, CA 94
San Gabriel Area 1, CA 95
Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA 96
1* REGION X
Colbert Landfill, WA 97
-------
DAVIS LIQUID WASTE, RI
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Davis Liquid Waste site is located in a rural section of the Town of
Smithfield, Providence County, Rhode Island. The 15—acre site, bounded on
the northand south by wetlands and swamp areas, is within one—half mile of
38 homes. Throughout the ].970s, the site served as a disposal location for
various hazardous liquid and chemical wastes including: paint and metal
sludge, oily wastes, solvents, acids, caustics, pesticides, phenols,
halogens, metals, fly ash, and laboratory pharmaceuticals. Liquid wastes
were accepted at the site in drums and bulk tank trucks and then dumped
directly into unlined lagoons and seepage pits. This dumping has resulted
in soil, surface water, and ground water contamination that still persists.
Periodically the semi—solid lagoon materials were excavated and dumped in
several onsite locations and covered with available site soil. Other site
operations included the collection of junked vehicles and machine parts,
metal recycling, and tire shredding. In 1978, the discovery of offsite well
contamination prompted the State Superior Court to prohibit dumping of
hazardous substances on the Davis property. Presently 11 acres of the
property operate as a staging and storage area for approximately 30,000,000
to 35,000,000 tires. In July 1985, a removal action shipped 600 intact and
crushed drums offsite. Significant quantities of hazardous substances still
exist in the ground water, surface water, sediments, and soils. The primary
contaminants of concern include: VOCs, organics. inorganics. metals,
arsenic, benzene, TCE. and 1,1—DCE.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of
25.000 yd 3 of raw waste and contaminated soils for onsite incineration;
treated soil will be tested and used as backfill or placed in an onsite RCRA
landfill; implementation of an alternate water supply; and onsite ground
water treatment using air stripping and carbon adsorption. with reinjectiort
to the aquifer. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action
is $27,392,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : To attain the ground water MCL target
cleanup levels and the L0 risk level, it is necessary to treat
25.000 yd 3 of contaminated soil to levels <2.0 mg/kg total VOCs and
benzene, and DCE and TCE to 5.0 ugh each.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
WORDS : Acids; Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Benzene;
Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment;
Incineration; Inorgani.cs; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Oils; Onsite Discharge;
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Pesticides; Phenols; Public Exposure;
RCRA Closure Requirements; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sediments; Sludge; Soil;
Solvents; State Criteria; TCE; Treatment Technology; VCCs; Wetlands.
—1—
-------
OTTATI & COSS/GREAT LAKES. NH
First Remedial Action - Final
January 16, 1987
ROD ABSIRACT
The Ottati. and GosslGreat Lakes Container Corporation site (GLCC) is
located in Kingston, New Hampshire, west of Route 125. The study area for
the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) includes the 35—acre OG
site, a marsh area east of Route 125. and Country Pond ad)acent to the marsh
area. North Brook and South Brook drain the marsh at its interface with
Country Pond. From the late 1950s through 1967, Conway Barrel & Drum
Company (CBD) owned the site and performed drum reconditioning operations.
The reconditioning operations included caustic rinsing of drums and disposal
of the rinse water in a dry well near South Brook. As a result of State
concerns regarding the proxinu .ty of the dry well to South Brook and
complaints of resulting South 6rook and Country Pond pollution. CBD
established leaching pits in an area removed from South Brook. The State’s
Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission (WSPCC) reported onsite runoff
and seepage from the leaching pits draining into South Brook and eventually
into Country Pond. Reports included fish kills iii Country Pond, dying
vegetation along South Brook and skin irritation of swimmers in Country
Pond. In May 1973, International Mineral & Chemical Corporation (EMC)
purchased the drum and reconditioning plant. and owned and operated it until
1976. Beginning in 1978. heavy sludges (approximately thirty 55—gallon
drums pe month) from the wash tank and drum drainings. as well as residues
from incinerator operations. were brought to the CC site for processing.
After CC operations ceased in June 1979. the New Hampshire Bureau of Solid
Waste Management ordered the owners and operators of the site to remove the
drums and cease site operations. Contamination has been identified both
onsite and offsite in the ground water, surface water, soil, and sedi.ments.
The primary contaminants of concern include: VOCs, acid and base/neutral
compounds, PCBs. pesticides, metals. and cyanide.
The selected remedial action includes: excavation of approximately
5,000 yd 3 of PCB contaminated soil and sediments followed by destruction
of contaminants by incineration: aeration (low temperature thermal
stripping) of approximately 14,000 yd 3 of contaminated soil; installation
of ground water extraction and treatment systems with upgradient discharge
possibly to local surface waters; site grading and disposal of contaminated
GLCC building materials with Site covering; installation of ground water and
Country Pond monitoring systems; and establishment of a drinking water
surveillance program. The estimated capital cost for this remedy is
$8,592,500 with annual 0&M of $1.735.000.
—2—
-------
OTTAT I & GOSS/GREAT LAKES, NH
First Remedial Action - Final
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water will be restored to attain the
cancer risk level of 10 . Specific ground water cleanup goals include:
l.2—DCE 3.8 ugh; TCE 26.0 ugh; and PCE 6.7 ugh. Soils will be excavated
to total VOCs 1.0 mg/kg and PCBs 20.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Aeration; ARARs; Capping; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Incineration; Metals; O&M; Offsite
Discharge; Organics; PCBs; Pesticides; Sediments; Soil; Surface Water:
Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—3—
-------
RE-SOLVE, MA
Second Remedial Action — Final
September 24. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Re—Solve, Inc. site is a former waste chemical reclamation facility
situated on six acres of land in North Dartmouth, Massachusetts. Bounded by
wetlands to the north and east, the land surrounding the site is
predominantly zoned for single family residential use. All residences
obtain their water from private wells located on their property. The
Copicut River, located about 500 feet from the site, has been designated for
the protection and propagation of fish, other aquatic life, wildlife, and
primary and secondary contact recreation. Between 1956 and 1980, Re—Solve,
Inc. handled a variety of hazardous materials including solvents, waste
oils, organic liquids and solids, acids, alkalie , inorganic liquids and
solids, and PCBs. Residues from the distillation tower, liquid sludge
waste, impure solvents, and burnt tires were disposed of in four onsite
unlined lagoons. The lagoon contents were burned periodically to reduce the
VOC content. An oil waste that accumulated at the bottom of the degreaser
distillation still was disposed on one portion of the site through
landfarming. This oil waste was also spread throughout the site to control
dust. Cooling water from the distillation tower was discharged to a
shallow, onsite lagoon. In 1974, the Massachusetts Division of Water
Pollution Control issued Re—Solve, Inc. a license to collect and dispose of
hazardous waste. In December 1980, the Massachusetts Division of Hazardous
Waste agreed to accept Re—Solve’s offer to surrender its disposal license on
the condition that all hazardous waste be removed from the site. The
contents of the four onsite lagoons were not removed. Currently ground
water, soil, and sediments are contaminated with VOCs, PCBs, and other
organics. Contaminants leaked into the ground water, soil, and sediments.
The primary contaminants of concern are PCBs and VOCs.
The selected remedial action includes: excavation of 22,500 yd 3 of
PUB—contaminated soil located above the ground water table with onsite
treatment in a mobile dechlorination facility and placement back onsite with
18 inches of gravel capping; excavation of 3,000 yd 3 of PCB—contaminated
sediments located in wetland resource areas. with onsite treatment in the
mobile dechlorination facility and placement back onsite with 18 inches of
gravel capping; conduction of dechlorination pilot—scale studies to
determine irnpleiuentability of full—scale level (if dechlorination is not
implementable, onsite incineration may be used); implementation of a wetland
restoration program; ground water pump and treatment using precipitation.
air stripping, and activated carbon filtration with discharge back into the
aquifer via a distribution system (soil within these ground water treatment
areas will be flushed to reduce VOCs); implementation of pilot ground water
treatability studies; ground water, surface water and wetlands monitoring;
and implementation of ground water use institutional controls. The
estimated capital cost for dechlorination is 57,332.900 with present worth
O&M of $1,097,000. If incineration is substituted for dechlorination, the
estimated capital cost would be 511,841.900 with present worth O&M of
$5,121,000.
—4—
-------
RE-SOLVE, MA
Second Remetha]. Action — Final
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS : PCB contaminated soils above the water
table will be excavated and treated to concentrations of 25.0 mg/kg or
less. This cleanup level corresponds to a l0 health—based risk level.
An excavation and treatment cleanup level of 1.0 mg/4cg for PCB contaminated
wetland and tributary sediments has also been selected. TCE, PCE, and
methylene chloride will be treated to 5.0 ug/l, the MCL value for ground
water. These three indicator chemicals will reduce VOC ground water
contamination to the —5 health—based risk level. Since PCBs will remain
present in onsite ground water in excess of the i0 5 health—based risk
level, institutional ground water usage controls will be implemented.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Onsite institutional ground water usage controls
will be implemented.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air
Act; Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Excavation; Granular Activated Carbon;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Institutional
Controls; Land Treatment; MCLs; O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment;
Onsite Disposal; Organics; PCBs; Public Exposure; Safe Drinking Water Act;
RCRA Closure Requirements; Sediments; Soils; Soil Flushing; State Criteria;
Surface Water; TCE; Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology; Toxic
Substances Control Act: VOCs; Water Quality Criteria; Wetlands.
—5—
-------
OI MICAL CONTROL, NJ
Second Remedial Action
September 23, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Chemical Control Corporation (CCC) site, consisting of 2.2 acres and
a portion of the Elizabeth River, is located in Union County, New Jersey.
The site area, formerly a marsh, is flat and barely above sea level. The
surrounding area is mostly industrial, however, one residence is within
200 feet of the site. Densely populated neighborhoods are located across
the Elizabeth River. From 1970 to 1978, CCC operated as a hazardous waste
storage, treatment, and disposal facility accepting various types of
chemicals including: acids, arsenic, bases, cyanides. flammable solvents,
PCBs, compressed bases, biological agents. and pesticides. Throughout its
operations, CCC was cited for discharge and waste storage violations. 1n
March 1979. the State of New Jersey initiated a site cleanup of bulk solids
and liquids, drums found at and below the surface, gas cylinders, infectious
wastes, radioactive wastes, highly explosive liquids, debris, and tanks.
Excavated soil areas were replaced with a 3—foot gravel cover. An April
1980 explosion and fire interrupted the site cleanup and created additional
cleanup needs by destroying the site and reportedly launching drums of
burning waste into the air. From November 1980 until July 1981, the State
operated a ground water recovery and treatment system. Initial Remedial
Measures conducted at the site have mitigated the immediate hazards. The
site closure RI, completed in July 1986, determined that soils beneath those
previously removed are highly contaminated with a variety of organic
compounds and, to a lesser degree, with metals. Sediments along the
Elizabeth River are also contaminated (potentially from other sources in
addition to Chemical Control). However, the greatest potential risk from
this site is associated with the possible exposure of the contaminated
soil. The primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil include:
VOCs, organics, pesticides, acid and base/neutral extractables. and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: treatment of
approximately 18,000 yd 3 of contaminated soils using in—situ fixation
(solidification); removal of debris including drill cuttings, items
recovered from the river under the IRM, used disposable equipment. and the
decontamination pad; monitoring well development water and sealing of the
sanitary sewer line under the site; and repair of the site/river berm. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $7,208,000 with annual
O&Z1 of $57,400 for years 1—5 and $22,400 for years 6—30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Remediation efforts will comply with the
M bient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for the protection of saltwater
aquatic life. There are rio MARs for the chemical concentrations in soil.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
1 YWORDS : l .RARs; Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Metals; Onsite Treatment; Organics; Pesticides; Public Exposure; Sediments;
Soil; Solidification; Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology; VOCs;
Water Quality Criteria.
—6—
-------
COOPER ROAD, NJ
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD A2STRACT
The Cooper Road site consists of an approximately 100—square foot
dumping area located in Voorhees Township, Camden County, Mew Jersey. In
1982. several dozen, 1—to—2 ounce glass vials containing unknown liquids
were discovered at the site. Some vials were broken, but most remained
intact. Sampling of the vials by the Mew Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection (NJDEP) indicated the presence of benzene, ethylbenzene. xylene,
naphthalene. and other contaminants. MJDEP requested the owners of the
property perform a complete and total removal of all vials. No response
from the site owners followed. The site changed ownership in June 1983. and
upon request by NJDEP, the new owners removed all vials and six inches of
underlying soil. Subsequent sampling of soil and ground water indicate no
contaminants present above normal background levels.
EPA determined that no significant risk or threat to public health and
the environment exists and therefore no further action will be taken at this
site. There are rio ixnplementatiort issues or costs associated with this no
action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Chemical—specific goals met by this no
action remedy were not specified.
INSTITUTIOMAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
YWORDS : No Action Remedy.
—7-.
-------
DIAMOND ALKALI, NJ
First Remedial Action
September 30. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Diamond Shamrock site, also referred to as Diamond Alkali and the
80 Lister Avenue property. is located in the Ironbound section of Newark.
New Jersey. The 3.4—acre property is three miles upstream from the mouth of
Newark Bay and is surrounded by the former Sergeant Chemical Company site
(subsequently purchased by Diamond Shamrock), the Duralac Company. a
Sherwin— Jilliams Company property and the Passaic River. The site has been
used for chemical manufacturing by numerous companies for more than
100 years. The mid—1940s marked the beginning of the manufacturing
operations related to the current site conditions and included the
production of DDT and phenoxy herbicides. The Diamond Shamrock Company
acquired the property in 1951 and produced various chemicals and pesticides
until 1969, when it was shut down. Subsequent owners remained on the
property until 1983, when EPA sampled the site and revealed high levels of
dioxin. The dioxin discovery led to the excavation and securing of the
site. All exposed soils were covered with geofabric to prevent potential
migration of contamination, and guards were placed at the site. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting soil, structures, ground water, and air
include dioxin and DDT.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: construction of a
slurry wall and a 100—year flood wall dike; RCRA capping; disassembly and
decontamination of nonporous permanent structures for offsite reuse,
recycling, or disposal; offsite transportation of drums containing hazardous
substances with less than 1 ppb of dioxin for treatment or disposal;
demolition of all remaining ortsite structures; onsite security of all
materials contaminated above 1.0 ug/kg with dioxin; stabilization and
iri obilization of the contents of the remaining drums with dioxin
contaminated materials: onsite placement and capping of sludge from waste
water treatment ur±il an alternative method is identified; identification of
the location of underground contaminant conduits with subsequent plugging
and rerouting of active systems; hauling, emptying, spreading, and
compaction of the contaminated materials stored at 120 Lister Avenue with
decontamination and shipping of containers for offsite reuse, recycling, or
disposal; installation, operation, and maintenance of a ground water
withdrawal system: installation, operations and maintenance of a treatment
system for ground water and other aqueous liquids; implementation of
monitoring, contingency. O&M, and site security plans; and performance of a
feasibility study every two years following the implementation of the
remedy. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $8,068,000
with annual O 4 of $261,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The criteria for the protection of human
health will be based on a level of protection corresponding to a 10—6
increased cancer risk. The relevant and appropriate corresponding ground
water criteria for dioxin, DDT, and hexachlorobenzene include:
1.4 X i0 ug/l; 2.4 X 10—2 ug/].; and 7.4 X 10—1 ug/l, respectively.
The cleanup goal for dioxin in soil and structures is 1.0 ug/kg.
—8—
-------
DIAMOND ALKALI, NJ
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air; ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Decontamination;
Dioxin; Direct Contact; Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment; Interim Remedy; C&M; Pesticides; Public Exposure;
RCRA; Slurry Wall; Soil; State Criteria; VOCs.
—9—
-------
JDICOTT VILLAGE WELL FIELD, NY
First Remedial Action
September 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Endicott Village Well Field site is located in Endicott Village,
Broome County. New York. The site consists of a Ranney well and its zone of
in.f].uence on area ground water. Landfills and industrial tracts of land are
located to the northwest and west of the study area including the Endicott
Landfill, identified as a potential source of contamination. In the 1950s,
the Ranney Well Collector Corporation developed the well for use by the
Village of Endicott. After a May 1981 chemical spill nearby. the well was
sampled and found to contain vinyl chloride and trace amounts of other
VOCs. Remedial actions undertaken by the Enthcott Public Works Department
included sampling and eventual closing of radial collectors from the Ranney
well. Additionally. an aeration system was installed in the well to reduce
vinyl chloride levels. Subsequent actions undertaken included the
installation of monitoring wells and a purge well between the Ranney well
and the Endicott Landfill. Further studies are currently being conducted to
determine the source of contamination and to develop final aquifer
restoration alternatives. The studies will be addressed in a subsequent
Record of Decision. The primary contaminants of concern are vinyl chloride
and other VOCs.
The selected remedial action for this operable unit includes:
installation and operation of an air stripping system to remove VOCs from
the Ranney well; continued operation of the purge well located between the
Ranney well and the Endicott Landfill; and continued monitoring of the
Ranney well to detect the presence of vinyl chloride and other VOCs. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $1,200,000 with annual
O&M of $147,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water will be treated to MCL values,
which include vinyl chloride 2.0 ug/l. 1,2—dichloroethane 5.0 ug/l. and
trichloroethane 5.0 ugf 1. Tetrachloroethene 0.88 ugh and
1,1,2—trichloroethane 0.6 ug/l will meet Federal Water Quality Criteria
established by the 10—6 health—based cancer risk level. Vinyl chloride
air emission will meet 10.0 ppm, the National Emission Standard of the Clean
Air Act.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Drinking
Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water
Treatment; MCLs; O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Safe Drinking
Water Act; State Criteria; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—10—
-------
GE Moreau, NY
First Remedial Action
July 13, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The GE Moreau site, located in the Town of Moreau, Saratoga County, New
York, is situated in a semi—rural setting with single family houses nearby.
These houses rely on individual drinking water wells for their water
supply. From 1958 to 1968, the site was used as an industrial waste
disposal site. An evaporation pit received approximately 452 tons of waste
material generated by the General Electric Company (GE). The waste
materials include TCE, PCBs, spent solvents, oils, sludge, and other
miscellaneous waste. In late 1982, elevated levels of TCE were found onsite
in the ground water. The Town of Moreau installed activated carbon filters
on the drinking water systems of 70 homes believed to be downgradient of the
site and therefore affected, or potentially affected. by contaminants. In
the summer of 1983, EPA initiated negotiations with GE to address the
offsite contamination problems. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water, surface water and river include: TCE,
dichioroethylene, VOCs, and organics. Approximately 8,600 yd 3 of soil are
contaminated with PCBs.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: utilization of the
soil—bentoriite cutoff wall around the former disposal area to contain the
source of offsite ground water contamination (constructed in 1984);
utilization of the air stripping system to remove VOCs offsite at Reardon
Brook (installed in fall 1985); reüió ’al of 8,600 yd 3 of PCB—coritaminated
soil ad)acent to the disposal area and placement within the slurry wall
containment area (completed in late summer 1985); capping of the disposal
area in conformance with Mew York State Department of Environmental
Conservation requirements; and extension of public water mains to
approximately 100 homes. The estimated capital cost for this remedial
action is $16,382,000 with annual O&M of $78,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Rernediation will attain the proposed MCL
value for TCE 5.0 ugh and the New York State Ambient Water Quality value
for trans—1 ,2—dichloroethylene 50.0 ugh 1. Soil cleanup goals were not
specified.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : The withdrawal of ground water within the
contaminant plume will be restricted and a pipeline installation permit will
be required.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARMs; Capping; Drinking
Water Contaminants; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Ground Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; MCLs; O&M; Offsite
Discharge; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Containment; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PCBs; Plume Management; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sludge; Slurry
Wall; Soil; State Criteria; VOCs.
—11—
-------
HAVILAND COMPLEX, NY
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Maviland Complex site consists of a planned development comprising
275 acres in the town of Hyde cark, Mew York. This development contains an
apartment complex, a junior high school, an elementary school, a shopping
center, and a number of private homes. Beginning in October 1981, a local
resident filed a complaint with the Dutchess County Health Department noting
that his well water was foaming. Other complaints of water quality supply
problems prompted a sampling program and sanitary survey of the Havilartd
area. Results of these tests indicated failure in nearby car wash and
laundromat septic and sewage systems. In 1982, the laundromat installed a
sand filter and a new tile field to handle the laundry effluent. Due to
increasing concern over potential ground water contamination by volatile
organic chemicals, the Mew York State Department of Health (NYDOH) began
sampling wells in December 1982. In January 1983, the laundromat was
ordered to disconnect the dry cleaning unit from the recently upgraded sewer
disposal system and dispose of all spent cleaning fluids offsite with a
licensed disposal firm. Continued evidence of contamination led to
installation of two spray aeration systems in Haviland Complex wells. The
primary contaminants of concern include: VOCs (TCE, XE, toluerte, benzene,
vinyl chloride. 1,l,1—trichloroethane) and metals (cadmium, chromium,
mercury, lead). Total cancer risk for each organic chemical ranged from
10 to
The selected remedial action for this site includes: connection of
affected and potentially affected Haviland Complex residences to the
Harbound Hills water distribution system; ground water extraction and
treatment using air stripping with discharge to surface water; pumping and
cleaning out contaminated sediments from the local septic disposal system;
and implementing a monitoring system to ensure effectiveness of the remedy.
The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $1,257,500 with
annual O&M of $105.500.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Specific treatment goals will be determined
during pilot studies.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Benzene; Clean
Water Act; chromium; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; McLs; Metals; O&M; Onsite Discharge;
Onsite Treatment; Safe Drinking Water Act; State Criteria; Sediments; TCE;
Toluene; VOCs.
—12—
-------
KATCNAH 4UNICIPAL WELL. NY
First Rernetha]. Action — Final
September 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Katonah Municipal Well site is located in the Village of Katortah in
the Town of Bedford, Westchester County, New York. The well is situated on
a peninsula owned by the City of New York that extends into the Muscoot
Reservoir. In 1978. the Westchester County Department of Health (WCDH),
acting on Putnam County Health Department findings, sampled the Katonah well
and other local wells for contamination. These samples revealed the
presence of tetrachioroethylene (PCE) and other volatile organic chemicals
in the well water. These contaminants were traced to a local septic waste
collector who was disposing of wastes taken from several Katonah dry
cleaning establishments. In 1978. the Katonah well was closed, and source
control measures were initiated requiring dry cleaning establishments to
pump out their septic systems and modify solvent disposal techniques.
Attempts by WCDH and the Town of Bedford to remove contamination from the
affected aquifer failed. The primary contaminant of concern is PCE.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: installation of a
new production well adjacent to the abandoned well; filling and sealing of
the abandoned Katonah well; installation and operation of an onsite air
stripping facility to remove PCE and other volatiles from the aquifer with
discharge of treated water to the Bedford Consolidated Water District
distributors system; establishment of a monitoring progr itcto detect
residual contamination of treated water; and recommendations to the Town of
Bedford to remove trash and debris located on the peninsula. The estimated
capital cost of this remedial action is $1,365,000 with annual 0&M of
$296,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : With the absence of an MCL for PCE, the
target treatment level has been established as less than 1.0 ugh or
nondetectable, based on the i06 cancer risk level.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KE?WORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
PCE; State Criteria; Water Quality Criteria.
—13—
-------
MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, NJ
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Montgomery Township Housing Development (MTHD) is a 72—acre tract of
land located in Somerset County, New Jersey. The housing development
consists of 71 home sites. The original potable water source for each home
was a private well drawing from the underlying aquifer. In 1978, the
Borough of Rocky Hill, which is located near the site, sampled ground water
from the Borough well and found it to be contaminated with trichloroethylene
(TCE). Testing continued through 1983, and repeated evidence of TCE
contamination prompted the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
(NJDEP) to sample the MT} well. Results indicated the presence of TCE and
other volatile organics in that and other surrounding wells. In 1981,
20 homes in the MTHD were connected to the Elizabethtown Water Company water
mains. To date, 38 residences have been hooked up. Due to the similarity
of contaminants and the proximity of the MT and Rocky Hill Municipal Well
Superfund sites, a combined Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
is being performed. This ROD focuses only on an alternate water supply for
MTHD. The alternate water supply for the Rocky Hill Superfund site was
installed in a separate action undertaken by the town. The primary
contaminant of concern is TCE, with secondary contaminants being other
volatile orgariics.
The selected first operable unit remedial action is to extend the
Elizabethtow’n Water Company distribution system to currently or potentially
affected residents of MTHD. The estimated capital cost of the alternative
is $319,000 with no annual O&Z1.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The water supply will be regularly
monitored for contaminant compliance with MCLs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Direct
Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
M Ls; Safe Drinking Water Act; State Criteria; TCE; VOCs.
—14—
-------
R JORA INC., NJ
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Renora Inc. site, in Middlesex County, New Jersey. occupies a
one—acre parcel of land in art area zoned for light industrial use. Within
2,000 feet of the site is a residential area with a nursery school, a senior
citizens center and an apartment complex. The site consists of relatively
flat land built up from a 100—year flood plain with three to twelve feet of
demolition debris. From 1978 to 1982, Renora, Inc., certified as a
collector/hauler of waste oils, transported and accepted materials
containing hazardous substances for transfer, storage, blending, and
ultimately disposal through abandonment at the site. State and local
inspection reports indicate that the site was poorly maintained throughout
the period of its operation. In July 1978. the Mew Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) detected several minor spills and
determined that Renora, Iz c. was acting as a Special Waste Transfer Station
without proper registration. Subsequently Renora was ordered to remove all
contaminated soil and drums. In May 1979, drums were leaking on the
property. In March 1980, NJDEP ordered the cessation of all operations and
the implementation of remedial actions at the site. By June 1980,
operations had ceased, but no remedial action had taken place. In November
1980, MJDEP revoked Renora’s registration to collect and haul solid waste.
The site was abandoned by June 1982. A removal action, initiated in October
1984, disposed of 33,000 gallons of liquid waste, 28,000 gallons of
PCB—contaminated waste oil, and 1,060 yd 3 of soil offsite. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground water include: PCBs,
PANs, VOCs. organics. metals, PCE, phenols, and pesticides.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of all
P B—contaminated soil containing concentrations above 5 mg/kg (1.100 yd 3 )
with offsite disposal (landfill or incineration); biodegradation of all
PAR—contaminated soil containing concentrations above 10 mg/kg
(4,400 ycP); use of ground water as an irrigation medium for the
biodegradation system; and backfiiling, grading, and revegetation. The
present worth cost for this remedial action is $1,401,000 or $6,021,000 for
land.fiiling and incineration, respectively.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Target treatment/remedial levels for soil
based on State action levels/chemical class cleanup objectives include:
total VOCs 1.0 mg/kg; total PARs 10.0 mg/kg; total petroleum hydrocarbons
100.0 mg/kg; cadmium 3.0 mg/kg; zinc 350.0 mg/kg; and PCBs
5.0 mg/kg. Target treatment/residual levels for ground water contaminants
include: total VOCs 50.0 mg/i; arsenic
50.0 mg/l; cadmium 10.0 mg/i; chromium 6 50.0 mg/i; and Lead 50.0 mg/i.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
—15—
-------
RENORA INC., NJ
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
(continued)
I YWORDS : ARARs; Clean Closure; Direct Contact; Excavation; Flood Plain;
Ground Water; MCLs; Metals; O&Z4; Offsite Disposal; Offsite Treatment;
Organics; PAils; PCBs; PCE; Pesticides; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil;
State Criteria; Toxic Substances Control Act; Treatability Studies;
Treatment Technology; VCCs.
—16-P
-------
SOUTH BRUNSWICK LANDFILL NJ
Second Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Browning—Ferris Industries South Brunswick Landfill (SBL) is a
closed landfill situated on approximately 68 acres in Middlesex County, New
Jersey. The landfill is located adjacent to a school, park, and private
residences, although a substantial portion of the landfill is surrounded by
woods. The site is in close proximity to a brook that feeds into a public
drinking water supply ten miles downstream. For more than 20 years, the
site operated under two separate owners as a solid waste landfill that
received municipal refuse, pesticides. chemical wastes, and hazardous
wastes. Pursuant to a July 1978 closure order from the Mew Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (MJDEP) the site was officially
closed in December 1978. In June 1980, EPA conducted a site investigation
that revealed elevated levels of VOCs and iron in ground water and surface
water. The selected containment remedy has been in place and operational
since September 1985. This Record of Decision (ROD) evaluates the remedy
selection process in the context of SARA.
The selected remedial action for this site includes onsite containment
(leachate collection/treatment system, slurry wall, clay cap, and gas
venting system), which was initiated in May 1983 and completed on September
1985; and post—remedial ground water, surface water, and air monitoring. Mo
costs were -provided.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS NJDEP will provide EPA with
chemical/ambient—specific levels upon evaluation of the initial sampling
results from the post—remedial monitoring program.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Clean Water Act; Ground Water Monitoring;
Leachate Collection/Treatment; O&M; RCRA.
—17—
-------
SUFFERN VILLAGE WELL FIELD, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
September 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Suffern Village Well Field site is located iii Rockland County, New
York. The Village of Suffern operates four production wells that provide
water to approximately 12,000 people. In September 1978, monitoring
activities detected 1,1,1—trichioroethane (TCA), a common industrial
chemical compound. and trace VOCs in the municipal water distribution
system. In December 1978, wells, 1, 2. and 4 had TCA levels of 90—114 ug/l
and were shut down. Municipal water supply requirements were met by
well 3. A subsequent survey identified the Tempcon Corporation. a small
local oil burner reconditioning business, as the potential source of TCA.
In January 1979, Tempcon ceased using a seepage disposal pit and TCA—based
cleaning products. By March 1979. removal of waste material and excavation
and devolatilization of contaminated soils were completed. A spray aeration
treatment system was then implemented to remove TCA from the municipal water
supply. Monitoring results indicate TCA levels in the four wells are now
below the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)
guideline of 50.0 ug/l. A ground water model was used to predict that the
aquifer would be below acceptable levels within a reasonable time period
(approximately 2 years). During this time, institutional controls have been
recommended to restrict site access.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action with
ground water monitoring to assure the presence of TCA at concentrations
below the New York State Department of Health action level. The
concentrations in the aquifer are expected to be below this action level via
a one—year natural attenuation. The estimated resent worth cost for this
ground water monitoring is $311,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The ground water level for TCA complies
with the NYSDEC guideline of 50.0 ugh. This State standard is more
stringent than the Federal drinking water standard.
INSTITu’rIONAL CONTROLS : Site access restrictions have been recommended.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; No Action Remedy;
Organics; State Criteria; VCCs.
—18—
-------
VEGA ALTA, PR
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Vega Alta Public Supply Wells site is a public water supply well
field located in the municipality of Vega Alta, Puerto Rico, approximately
32 1c west of San Juan where ground water is the primary source of water.
The well field consists of eight active wells arid two inactive wells. It
currently supplies about 3.800,000 gallons per day of water to Vega Alta and
surrounding residential areas. The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority
(PRASA) is responsible for operation and maintenance of the public water
supply system. The first indication of contamination was discovered in June
1983, when a survey of public water wells made by the U.S. Geological Survey
detected 574 ugh of trichloroethylerie (TCE) in the Ponderosa public supply
well. Other VCCs were detected at lower concentrations in non—public wells
in the well field system and ground water contamination was suspected. In
June arid August of 1983, Ponderosa and well GE 1 were shut down by PRASA
because of contamination, respectively. This shut down caused a potential
water supply shortage in Vega Alta. PRASA constructed well Bajura 3 to
eliminate the shortage. In 1984. an air stripper was constructed at the
Ponderosa well and operated until May 1985 when technical problems arose
with the air stripper. Currently, ground water is contaminated with VOCs.
which include: 1,1, l—trichloroethene, tet rachloroethene,,
1 ,2—dichloroethene, and 1, ].—dichloroethene.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: treatment of PRASA
wells GE 1, GE 2, arid Bajura 3 by individual treatment systems with
discharge of treated effluent into the PRASA distribution system for public
use; treatment of Ponderosa well by scaling pretreatment and air stripping
with discharge to Honda Creek; shutting down of Monterrey 2 and G&M private
wells with hookup to the PRASA distribution system; and initiation of a
subsequent R.I/FS to fully assess and evaluate the source(s) of
contamination. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$4,106,000 with annual Q&M of $581,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Individual well treatment systems will
attain the 10—6 health—based risk level and MCL values. Chemical—specific
goals include: PCE 0.7 ugh; 1,l—DcE 0.23 ug/l; benzene 0.7 ugh; and
T E 2.8 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Clean Water Act;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite
Disposal; Onsite Treatment; PCE; Publically—Owned Treatment Works; TCE; VOCs.
—19—
-------
VOLNEY LANDFILL, NY
First Remedial Action
July 31, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Volney Landfill site, located in the Town of Volney. Osuego County.
Mew York. is a 55—acre, unlined municipal landfill. From 1969 until 1983.
municipal waste disposal operations occurred at the site. Most of the waste
disposed at the site consisted of typical residential, commercial.
institutional, and light industrial waste. However, between March 1974 and
January 1975, Pollution Abatement Services, a hazardous waste incineration
facility, was permitted to dispose of approximately 8,000 drums containing
only residue coatings. Allegedly 50 to 200 of these drums contained
unidentified liquid waste. The condition of these alleged drums is unknown,
as is their location within the landfill. In September 1983, waste disposal
at the landfill ceased with the opening of the Bristol Hill Landfill
approximately two miles southeast of the site. In the fall of l985, closure
operations for the Volney Landfill were completed by the current owner,
Osuego County. Because the landfill is unlined and has a leachate
collection system only in the central and northern portion, leachate
migration is occurring in both horizontal and vertical directions. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground water include: vinyl
chloride, benzene, arsenic, VCCs, and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: supplemental
capping of the landfill side slopes; installation of a leachate collection
system including collection drain, a slurry wall around the northern and
southwestern sections, collection wells, force mains, and a collection
drain; and onsite or offsite leachate treatment. The estimated capital cost
for this remedial action is either $12,754,000 or $12,876,000 pendir.g
selection of offsite or onsite leachate treatment, respectively, wit1
present worth O 1 of $691,000 or $882,000 for onsite or offsite leachate
treatment, respectively.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The remedy meets Safe Drinking Water Act
MCLs which include: vinyl chloride 1.0 ugh; benzene 5.0 ugh; and arsenic
50.0 ugh. It also meets Clean Water Act and Water Quality Criteria, which
include: arsenic 0.0 ugh; chloroform 0.0 ugh; and nickel 15.4 ugh. The
State criteria for phenols is 1.0 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KE’IWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Benzene; Capping; Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Leachate
Collection/Treatment; Metals; Municipally—Owned Site; O&24; Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Treatment; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Slurry Wall;
State Criteria; VOCs.
—20—
-------
WALDICK AEROSPACE, NJ
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Waldick Aerospace Devices (WAD) site is a 1.72—acre inactive
industrial facility located in the Sea Girt Section of Wall Township,
Monmouth County, New Jersey. The site consists of three buildings located
on the northern, western, and southern border. WAD was originally purchased
and developed in the mid 1950s by Mr. Warren de Montmorency. The designated
owner of the site since 1979 is KDD Realty Corporation of which Mr.
de Montmorency is president. In 1979, the site was leased to Waldick
Aerospace Devices, Inc. This firm manufactured and electroplated
quick—release pins for the aerospace industry for five to s x years. For at
least the first three years of operations, waste water containing heavy
metals and organic solvents was discharged directly onto the ground on
either side of the southern corner of the main building. Additionally,
spent machine oil was allowed to drain out of perforated drums onto the
ground at the rear (western side) of the main building. In 1982, acting on
information received from a former Waldick employee, the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) conducted an inspection of
the Waldick facility. Numerous violations were recorded and, in 1982, NJDEP
ordered Waldick to undertake cleanup activity. Some measures were taken,
however, subsequent sampling indicated continued contamination of soil and
ground water by metals and volatile organics. In 1 86. a removal action was
undertaken by EPA to repack and remove several chemical contaiñers
containing granite and a wide range of chemicals. The western soil area is
contaminated with VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs). The primary
contaminants of concern to the southern and eastern areas include: cadmium,
chromium, VOCs, and PHCs.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: in—situ air
stripping of contaminated soil under and around the main building
(8.000 yd 3 ); excavation and offsite disposal of treated soils
(2,500 yd 3 ) with residual contamination above action levels; demolition or
decontamination of the onsite building, depending on the volume of soil
beneath the main building requiring excavation and offsite disposal; and
installation of ground water monitoring wells, site fencing and well
restrictions. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$2,602,118 with annual O&M of $55,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The standards applied to the soil on the
site are cleanup objectives developed by the NJDEP. They include: total
VOCs 1.0 mg/kg; total PHCs 100.0 mg/kg; cadmium 3.0 mg/kg; chromium
100.0 mg/kg; zinc 350.0 mg/kg: and nickel 100.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CON’rROLS : Rernediation will include the establishment of well
usage and site access restrictions.
KE?WORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Chromium; Debris; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls;
Metals; Offsite Disposal; O 4; Onsite Treatment; PCE; Soil; State Criteria;
TCE; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—21—
-------
WILLIAfr S PROPERTY, NJ
First Remedial Action — Final
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Williams Property site, a 5.6—acre tract of land containing a single
residence, is located in Middle Township, Cape May County, New Jersey. The
site is wooded and surrounded by land zoned for agricultural and residential
use. In 1979, approximately 150 drums of liquid chemical wastes and sludge
were emptied on the Williams Property. The New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) investigated to determine the nature and
extent of the contamination and the impact of the spill on the envirorunent,
particularly the ground water. The results indicated extensive
contamination of surf icial sludge, contamination of soil and ground water
with metals and a wide variety of organic chemicals. In June 1980, NJDEP
removed approximately 1,200 yd 3 of sludge and soil. Continued evidence of
ground water contamination forced the closing of the Williams’s well in
1984. It was subsequently discovered that widespread dumping of refuse and
construction debris had occurred on the site for years. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water and soil include:
bis(2—ethylhexyl)phthalate, PCE, methylene chloride, and xylene.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: extraction and
treatment of contaminated ground water with discharge to the underlying
aquifer;_excavation (700 yd 3 ) and offsite incineration of contaminated
sö Il; iegrading, backfilling with clean soil and revegetation; and provision
of an alternate water supply to nearby residents with contaminated wells.
The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $513,750 with annual
O&Z4 of $64,600.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Approximately 700 yd 3 of soil will be
excavated to achieve a target level of 1.0 mg/kg total VOCs. This action is
consistent with the New Jersey Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act
(ECRA). Ground water treatment will achieve MCL.s which include: TCE
5.0 ugh; chloroform 100.0 ugh; barium 1,000.0 ugh; arsenic 50.0 ugh;
cadmium 10.0 ug/l; chromium 50.0 ugh; and lead 50.0 ug/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Specific institutional controls will be identified
during the remedial design phase.
YWORDS : Air Stripping; Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Clean Closure;
Debris; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Excavation; Ground
Water; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Offsite
Incineration; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment;
Orgariics; PCE; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; State Criteria;
Treatment Technology; VCCs.
—22—
-------
KANE & LOMBARD, MD
First Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Kane & Lombard site is an 8.4—acre parcel of undeveloped land in
Baltimore, Maryland. Dumping and burning of construction debris, domestic
trash, and drums occurred at the site from 1962 until 1967, when the city
passed an ordinance prohibiting the open burning of refuse. Illegal dumping
continued from 1967 until approximately 1984, during which time many
citations were issued for illegal burning on the property. In 1980,
Maryland State inspectors observed between 400 and 500 drums, the majority
of which were rusted, damaged, and contained holes. Following an onsite
property assessment, EPA authorized the immediate removal of 1,163 drums in
1984. Of those, 822 drums were classified as empty and 341 drums contained
contaminants which included: benzene, toluene, xylene, PAHs, PCBs, and
heavy metals. Approximately six inches of soil below the drums were removed
and disposed offsite. The site was stabilized by regrading. capping, and
revegetation. Currently, soil and ground water are contaminated with these
prior drum contaminants.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: removal of drums
and contaminated soil (approximately 67.000 yd 3 ); site cleaning and
removal of vegetation to facilitate the construction of subsurface
containment/diversion structures; multi—layer soil capping; construction of
drainage system; clearing of drainage ditch along the east side-of- the—site:
development of necessary surface water run—off management facilities; and
ground water monitoring. The estimated capital cost for this remedial
action is $4.692.660 with annual O& 4 of $28,930.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : This interim remedy does not attempt to
ensure compliance with all ARARs for the entire site, but will be consistent
with action—specific ARARs. Chemical—specific cleanup levels will be
addressed in the second operable unit.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : l Iot applicable.
I YWORDS : Alternate Closure; ARARs (Action—Specific: Capping, Excavation.
Onsite Containment, Ground Water Discharge.); Benzene; Capping; Debris;
Direct Contact; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Interim
Remedy; Metals: O&M; Onsite Containment; PAHs; PCBs; RCRA Closure
Requirements; Slurry Wall; Soil; Surface Water Diversion/Collection;
Toluene; VCCs.
—23—
-------
PALMERTON ZINC, PA
First Remedial Action
September 4, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Palmerton Zinc site is located in Carbon County. Pennsylvania. The
Mew Jersey Zinc Company currently operates two zinc smelters in Palmerton at
the base of Blue Mountain. These two smelters are referred to as the east
and west plants. Since 1898, the Mew Jersey Zinc facility has produced zinc
and other metals for machinery, pharmaceuticals. pigments, and many other
products. Primary smelting of concentrated zinc sulfide ores, which was
terminated in December 1980. is the main source of pollution. Prior to
December 1980, the smelters emitted huge quantities of zinc, lead, cadmium,
and sulfer dioxide which led to the defoliation of approximately 2,000 acres
on Blue Mountain. adjacent to the east smelter. Vegetation damage first
appeared on a 1951 aerial photograph as isolated patches on the steep.
north—facing slope of Blue Mountain located immediately south of the east
plant. By 1985, vegetation damage progressed over a contiguous widespread
area leaving barren, eroded land visible. The primary contaminants of
concern leading to the defoliation of Blue Mountain include: zinc, lead,
cadmium, and sulfur dioxide.
The selected interim remedial measure focuses on the establishment of a
natural eastern forest ecosystem and includes: onsite installation of a
concrete pad with berms to mix sewage sludge and fly ash; construction of
access—roads; application- of— - -l-ime----U0 tons per acre) and potash (80 pounds
actual potassium per acre) on areas targeted for revegetation; application
of fly ash and sewage sludge on target areas; application of grass seed or
seedlings onto target areas; and application of mulch to protect the seed.
Field testing of this remedy on a portion of the mountain has been
implemented and is successful. The municipalities that may apply the sewage
sludge and other amendments should do so at no cost to EPA, provided the
cost of implementing the alternative is less than the costs to the
municipalities to dispose of the sludge. A minimal capital cost may be
incurred pending the outcome of municipality implementation issues. 0&M
will not be required.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Guidelines regarding the land application
of offsite sewage sludge were developed by the State of Pennsylvania. The
maximum loading rates for metals, expressed in pounds per acre, include:
cadmium 3.0; copper 100.0; chromium 100.0; lead 100.0; mercury 0.3; nickel
20.0; and zinc 200.0. The maximum dry sludge application rate is 60 tons
per acre, with 20—25 tons per acre being the anticipated rate for this
remedial action.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Mot applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Inorganics; Land Treatment; Lead; Metals; Onsite
Treatment; Soil; State Criteria; Interim Remedy; Treatability Studies.
—24—
-------
PRESQIJE ISLE, PA
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Presque Isle site is located on the Presque Isle State Park
Peninsula within the city of Erie, Erie County, Pennsylvania. The site
consists of a plugged, abandoned natural gas well encompassing an area of
approximately 100 ft 2 . In the early 1970s, the Erie County Health
Department (E HD) noted a seep discharging a noxious, hydrogen
sulfide—bearing black liquid. Investigations focused around whether the
liquid was a natural brine emanating from the underlying Bass Island
geologic formation, or was related to the deep well in)ectlon of spent paper
pulping liquid by a nearby paper mill. The Presque Isle well was plugged in
1982, and subsequent investigations have revealed no further release of the
hazardous liquid to the environment. No direct relationship between paper
mill injection activities and the original release has been established.
EPA determined that no significant risk or threat to public health and
the environment exists and therefore no further action will be taken at this
site. There are no implementation issues or costs associated with this no
action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Chemical—specific goals met by this no
action remedy were not specified.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Mo Action Remedy.
—25—
-------
SALTVILLE WASTE DISPOSAL PONDS. VA
First Remedial Action
June 30. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Saltville Waste Disposal site is located along the North Fork of the
Hoiston River (NFI ) between Saltville and Allison Gap in Western Smyth
County, Virginia. and partly extends into Washington County, Virginia. The
Jefferson National Forest is located approximately one—half mile north of
the site. From 1895 to 1972, Olin Corporation and its predecessors
(Mathieson Chemical Corporation and Mathieson Alkali Works) used the site
for various chemical manufacturing operations. The site includes a former
plant area and two waste ponds, 5 and 6. Between 1951 and 1972, the Olin
Corporation operated an electrolytic chlorine and caustic soda plant, which
released mercury into the process wastes and onto the plant grounds.
Mercury losses were estimated by Olin Corporation to be 100 lbs/day from the
chlor—alkali processes. In 1963, Waste Pond 6 was constructed to receive
waste overflow from Waste Pond 5. According to Olin corporation . no wastes
containing mercury were dumped into Waste Pond 6. but structural components
of the old plant reportedly were buried at the eastern edge of the pond.
Since 1970, annual fish and sediment sampling at NFHR has shown mercury
concentrations in the sediments near the site and in fish tissue at
concentrations exceeding allowable limits. In 1983, the former plant area
was capped with clay and topsoil, seeded with grass, and bordered with
boulder and broken stone rip—rap along the river edge.__Mercury, the primary
contaminant of concern, has been detected at significant levels in the soil,
surface water, sediments. air, and river biota.
The selected interim remedial measure includes: upgrading runon
controls with ditches, bertns, and/or downchutes; treatment of Waste Pond 5
outfall using either sulfide precipitation techniques or carbon adsorption;
installation of ground water monitoring systems; performance of additional
studies; and O&M with a treatment facility and continued up— and
down—gradient NFI{R sampling and analyses. Further studies to investigate
the source will be initiated in the future. The estimated capital cost is
either $840,052 or $2,143,052 with annual O&M of either $221,941 or
$258,941, pending selection of carbon adsorption or sulfide precipitation
treatment, respectively. Capital and O&M cost estimates for the ground
water monitoring system have not yet been developed.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The discharge of treatment process effluent
to the NF} must not cause total mercury concentrations in the river to
exceed 0.05 ugh, as set by the State Water Control Law authorized under the
Clean Water Act.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I WORDS : Air; ARMs; Clean Water Act; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Metals; O 4; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Containment; Onsite
Treatment; Public Exposure; RCRA; Sediments; Soil; State Criteria; Surface
Water; Surface Water Diversion/Collection; Interim Remedy; Treatability
Studies; Treatment Technology.
—26—
-------
WEST VIRGINIA ORDNANCE WORKS, WV
First Remedial Action
March 27, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The West Virginia Ordnance Works (WVOW) site covers approximately
8,323 acres in Mason County, West Virginia. In 1942, WVOW was established
as a government—owned, contractor—operated plant for the manufacture of
trinitrotoluene (TNT) explosives. Approximately one—third of the area is
currently occupied by the McClintic Wildlife Station, which is operated by
the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Smaller portions
of the rionindustrial areas of the site were declared excess and sold. They
are now owned by Mason County or by private owners. TNT was produced from
1942 to 1945 by a batch process involving the nitration of toluene by the
addition of nitric acid and sulfuric acid. Production during World War II
resulted in soil contamination of the industrial area, process facilities,
and industrial waste water disposal facilities by TNT, associated
by—products and environmental transformation products. At the close of
operations in 1945, WVOW was decontaminated by the Department of Defense and
placed on standby status. Later that year, the plant was declared surplus
and the facilities salvaged or disposed. The contamination includes: soil,
industrial sewer lines underlying shallow aquifer of the TNT manufacturing
area, trunk sewer lines leading from Pond 13 to outfalls, surface water and
sediments of Pond 13, surface soils in the East and West Burning Grounds,
and soil and sediments which eroded from the contaminated sources. The
primary contaminants of concern include: nitroaromatic residues (2,4,6—TNT,
1.3,5—TNB, 2.4—DNT) and asbestos.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: in—situ flaming of
the reactive TNT residue on the surface of the Burning Grounds Area followed
by the installation of a two foot soil cover (1.5 feet of clay and five feet
of soil) over areas with greater than 50 mg/kg total nitroaromatics
contamination; installation of a two foot soil cover over areas in the TNT
Manufacturing Area with greater than 50 mg/kg total nitroaromatics
contamination; disposal of asbestos from the Burning Grounds Area at an
offsite facility to be identified during design; and excavation, flushing,
and backfilling of the reactive sewerlines in the trenches from which they
were removed. All contaminated soils exceeding 50 mg/kg total
nitroaromatics at the surface will be covered to achieve the 10—6 risk
level. The sewerline will be rendered unreactive by flushing and buried
deeper than two feet below ground surface; and an assessment of the wetlands
will be performed prior to construction activities. The estimated capital
cost for this remedial action is $1,807,000 with no O&M provided.
—27—
-------
WEST VIRGINIA ORDNANCE WORKS, WV
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Soil remediation values will attain less
than the•’l0 individual lifetime cancer risk level. In—situ flaming of
TNT residue and soil covering will occur over areas with greater than
50.0 mg/kg total riitroaromatics contamination. No performance standard was
provided for asbestos.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Deed restrictions will prevent private use of
McClintic Wildlife Station. The State of West Virginia has authority to
maintain the land as a wildlife preserve.
YWORDS : ARARs; Asbestos; Deed Restrictions; Direct Contact; Excavation;
Ground Water; Institutional Controls; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment; Organics; Sediments; Soil; Soil Cover; Surface Water; Treatment
Technology; Wetlands.
—28—
-------
GEIGER (C&N OIL), Sc
First Reruethal Action
June 1, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Geiger (C 4 Oil) site, comprising a five—acre area, is located in
central charleston County. South Carolina. approximately ten miles west of
the city of Charleston and within one mile of tidal wetlands. Approximately
40 people live within the immediate site area. In March 1969, Adams Run
Services, Incorporated was permitted to incinerate waste oil at the site.
Eight unlined lagoons were constructed to hold the waste oil in late 1971.
In response to complaints from area residents, the South Carolina Pollution
Control Authority (SCPCA) ordered all incineration and waste deposition
activities at the site stopped. and the owner to take action to prevent
spillage, leekage, or seepage of oil from the site. In April 1974, the
Charleston County Health Department (C HD) ordered the site closed, citing
evidence of recent oil dumping and overflowing. In March 1982, the site was
purchased by George Geiger. who is the present owner. In 1983, Mr. Geiger
filled the lagoons with local soils since his requests to excavate and
dispose of contaminated soil were denied. The site has since been used for
the storage of equipment by his company, Pile Drivers, Incorporated. The
primary contaminants of concern include: arsenic, toluene, organics, PCBs,
and metals (lead, mercury, chromium).
The selected remedial action for this site includes: extraction and
onsite treatment of contaminated ground water with discharge to an offsite
stream; excavation and onsite thermal treatment of soil to remove organic
contaminants; solidification/stabilization of thermally—treated soil, if
necessary, to reduce mobility of metals; and back.filling of excavated areas
with treated soil, followed by grading and covering with gravel. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $6,927,000 to $7,694,000,
depending on the type of ground water treatment selected, with ground water
monitoring present worth O&Z1 of $367,200.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water remediation will attain the
L0 risk level, which includes reaching the MCL values of benzene
5.0 ugh. toluene 175.0 ugh, and lead 50.0 ug/1. Preliminary soil cleanup
goals include: lead 166.5 mg/kg; PCB 105.0 ug/kg; chromium 3.7 mg/kg;
benzo(a)anthracene 140.0 ug/kg; benzo(a)pyrene 1,070.0 ug/kg; benzo(b and/or
k)fluoranthene 170.0 ug/kg; benzene 14.4 ug/kg;. trans—1 ,2—dichloroethylene
76 ug/kg; toluene 971.0 ug/kg; 1,1—dichlorobenzene 497.0 ug/kg; and
l,l—dichloroethane 2.78 ug/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
CE?WORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Direct Contact;
Drinking Water Contaminants; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Incineration; Metals; Oils; Offsite
Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PANs; PCBs; RCRA;
Soil; Solidification; Stabilization; Toluene; Treatment Technology; VOCs;
Wetlands.
—29—
-------
GOLD COAST, FL
First Remedial Action — Final
September 11, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Gold Coast Oil Corporation (GCO) site is located in Miami, Florida.
The 2—acre site is within a cormnercial/industrial/residential area and
located over the Biscayne Aquifer, the sole source aquifer for the area.
Ground water is used for drinking water, irrigation, and industrial
purposes. The site property is owned by Seaboard System Railroad Company.
currently iciown as CSX Transporation , who leased the property to GCO in the
early 1970s. GCO, along with Solvent Extraction. Inc., were in the business
of distilling mineral spirits, lacquer thinner, and reclaiming solvents.
Blowdown from these operations was sprayed directly onto the ground and
53 drums of sludge—contaminated soil were stored onsite. Still—bottom waste
from the distilling operation was pumped into a tank truck for storage.
Additionally 2,500 corroded and leaking drums containing sludge from the
distilling operation, contaminated soils, paint sludges, and large storage
tanks of hazardous waste were located onsite. All wastes generated by the
solvent recovery operations were disposed or stored onsite. No waste was
shipped offsite during the 11 years of operation. Investigations of
illegally dumped and stored sludge and onsite wells took place in 1980 and
in 1981, by the Dade County Department of Envirorunental Resources Management
(DERM) and EPA’s Surveillance and Analysis Division (SAD), respectively.
In 1982, CSX Transportation evicted GCO from the property and agreed to
voluntarily clean up the site. The cleanup involved removing the drums.
emptying storage tanks and excavating and removing contaxnina ted soil to a
depth of approximately six inches. Soil and ground water are contaminated
with TCE, PCE, VOCs. lead, and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of
approximately 500 yd 3 of contaminated oi.1 and hardened waste sludges with
offsite disposal at a RCRA—approved facility; stabilization/solidification
and onsite placement with capping over approximately 1,000 yd 3 of the
remaining metal—contaminated soil; recovery of contaminated ground water by
means of a recovery well field: ground water treatment with discharge to the
aquifer, the POTW, or surface water (both treatment and disposal options
will be evaluated during design); removal and disposal of storage tanks,
concrete block office, supply shed, two abandoned automobiles, an aircraft
engine, the concrete slabs, and storage saddles; and testing and
decommissioning of the onsite supply well. The estimated total cost for
this remedial action is $3,711,600 with present worth O&M of $74,850.
—30—
-------
GOLD COAST. FL
First Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Site—specific cleanup goals for ground
water are consistent with the Reconunended Maximum Contaminant levels (RMCLS)
designated by the Safe Drinking Water Act arid the Cancer Assessment Group
estimate of a l0 health—based risk level. They include:
l,l—dich.loroetb.ane 5.0 ugh; trans—l.2—dichloroethylene 70.0 ugh; rnethylene
chloride 5.0 ugh; and tetrachioroethylene 0.7 ugh. Soil cleanup, based on
the i0 level, has set the indicator metal contaminant at 100.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Clean
Water Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Excavation: Ground
Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; Metals;
Offsite Disposal; O&M; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; PCE;
Publicly—Owned Treatment Works; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sole Source
Aquifer; Solidification; Soil; Stabilization; TCE; Toluene: Treatability
Studies; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—3]—
-------
INDEPEND ’JT NAIL, SC
First Remedial Action
September 23, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Independent Nail Company site, occupying 24.6 acres, is located near
Beaufort, South Carolina. Land in the vicinity of the site is a combination
of fields, woodlands and wetlands. Endangered and threatened species may
occur within the area of influence of the site, although habitation has not
been confirmed. The previous owners of the site, the Blake and Johnson
Company. manufactured metallic screws and fasteners. As part of the
manufacturing process, the company discharged approximately
33,000 gallons per day of plating waste water into an unlined infiltration
lagoon. The lagoon was in use from approximately 1969 to 1980. The South
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) reported
that the waste water contained some organic cleaning solvents, phosphate,
cyanide, chromium. cadmium. lead. mercury, nickel, zinc, copper. and iron.
In April 1980, the Blake and Johnson Company ceased operation. Two months
later the Independent Nail Company purchased the plant. They currently
operate a paneling nail coating process at the plant, but do not discharge
any waste water to the lagoon. The primary contaminants of concern to the
soil and sediment include: cadmium, chromium, nickel, and zinc.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of
.contaminated soils and lagoon sediments; solidification/stabilization of
excavated soils and sediments (6,200 yd 3 ); and placement of treated soils
and sediments back into the excavated lagoon with 6 inches of top soil
covering and seeding. Ground water remediation will be addressed in a
future operable unit. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action
is $1,032,000 with annual O&Z1 of $22,500 for years 1—2 and $5,600 for years
3—30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Soil cleanup goals to reduce the risk from
inhalation to below the 1O health—based cancer risk level include:
cadmium 2.6 mg/kg; chromium 5.3 mg/kg; cyanide 0.02 mg/kg; nickel
18.0 mg/kg; and zinc 1,785.0 mg/kg. MCL cleanup goals will be addressed in
a future operable unit.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KE?WORIDS : ARARs; chromium; Clean Air Act; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Inorganics; Metals; O&M; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment; Public Exposure; Sediments; Soil; Solidification; Stabilization;
Treatment Technology; Wetlands.
—32—
-------
NEWPORT DUMP SITE, KY
First Remedial Action
March 27, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Newport Dump site is located on the Licking River, a tributary of
the Ohio River, in the City of Wilder, Kentucky. The site was originally
purchased by the City of Newport in the late 1940’s and was used by the City
for the disposal of residential and commercial wastes from its opening until
its closure in 1979. Trenching and area filling were the most common
methods used to dispose of waste at the site. In 1968, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky instituted permitting requirements for landfills. The City of
Newport received a permit in late 1969 to operate the site as a municipal
sanitary landfill. The site was closed in 1979 and ownership was
transferred to the Northern Kentucky Port Authority (NKPA) the same year.
During the life of the landfill, the City was cited on numerous occasions
for operational violations and for handling hazardous waste without a
permit. The contaminated media include ground water and soil. The primary
contaminants of concern include: metals. PANs, solvents, and PCBs.
The selected remedial action includes: implementation of a multi—media
monitoring program; restoration and extension of the leachate collection
system and restoration. regrading, and revegetation of the existing clay
cap. Further actions will depend on the monitoring results. The estimated
capital cost for this remedy is $516,000 with estimated annual O&M for
years 1—3 of $63,000 and $35,000 for years 4—30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Concentrations of chromium, nickel,
benzo(a)pyrene, toluene and PCBs will be reduced to attain the 10-6 cancer
risk level. Barium and chromium concentrations will be reduced to MCL
values of 1,000.0 ugh and 50.0 ug/l, respectively. -
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Local authorities must promulgate permanent land
use restrictions, i.e.. prohibiting drilling any type of ground water well
or installing subsurface equipment. when monitoring reveals innocuous
levels of contamination after three days, agreements will be established to
maintain limits and standards to the type of land renovation suitable for
the site.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Chromium; Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Inorganics; Institutional Controls; Leachate
Collection/Treatment; MCLs; Metals; Municipally-Owned Site; O&M; Organics;
PAils; PCBs; RCRA; Sediments; Soil; Toluene.
—33—
-------
NORTHWEST 58TH STREET LANDFILL. FL
Third Remedial Action — Final
September 21, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Northwest 58th Street Landfill, one of three National Priorities
List (NPL) sites that comprise the Biscayne Aquifer Superfund Study, is a
one—square—mile site in northwest Dade County. Florida. It is bordered by a
rock pit operation and a resource recovery plant. The site is located in an
area where the ground water table is two to three feet below the ground
surface. A municipal landfill operated at the site from 1952 to 1982.
Approximately 60.000 tons of waste were disposed in 1952; volume increased
annually over the thirty years of operation to over 1.000,000 tons per year
in the 1980g. Small quantities of hazardous materials from households
(e.g., pesticides, paints, solvents, etc.) were considered to be municipal
waste and disposed at the landfill. In 1975, the landfill began placing
daily cover on the site. However. prior to this, wastes were not compacted
and daily cover was not applied. As a result of earlier practices. the
landfill is believed to be saturated with water and the volume of rainfall
infiltrating the landfill equals the volume of leachate released. Since
October 1982, the landfill has only received debris, quarry wastes, and
water paint sludges. The primary route for human exposure to the
contamination is through the drinking water and. in particular. two sets of
public drinking water wells located 2.5 miles downgradient of the landfill.
These wells serve an estimated 750,000 people. A 1986 Endangerment
-Assessment analysis ia i tified eight contaminants of concern: arsenic.
chromium, zinc. benzene. chlorobenzene. 1,1,2,2—tetrachloroetharte,
trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: controlling
leachate generation by a combination of grading, drainage control, and
capping; providing a public water supply to replace approximately 60 wells;
and landfill closure. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action
is $5,500,000 with present worth O&M of $1,500,000.
PERFORM INCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Air stripping as required in the 1985 ROD
will bring the chemicals of concern into compliance with MCLs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Arsenic; Benzene; Capping;
Chromium; Debris; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water;
Landfill Closure; MCLs; Metals; O&M; PCE; Public Exposure; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Sole—Source Aquifer; State Criteria; TCE; VOCs.
—34—
-------
PALMETTO WOOD PRESERVING. Sc
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Palmetto Wood Preserving (PWP) Site is located in the rural
cormnunity of Dixiana. South Carolina. The 5—acre site is a decommissioned
wood preserving facility, which operated between 1963 and 1985. PWP began
operating in 1963 using a fluoride—chromate—arsenate—phenol (FCAP) and an
acid—copper—chromate (ACC) process. In 1980. Eastern Forest Products took
over and switched to a chromate—copper—arsenate (CCA) process. Operations
consisted of impregnating wood with a CCA solution under high pressure, and
allowing the wood to drip—dry under normal conditions. Beginning in
December 1981, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control (SCDHEC) received complaints of green liquids running off the PWP
site during heavy rainfall. Subsequent soil sampling conducted by SCDUEC
indicated the presence of high concentrations of chromium.
Pentachiorophenol (PCP) and dinitrophenol residues were also detected. Well
water sampling showed no evidence of contarni.nation. In April 1983, a
private well was found to contain high levels of chromium and copper. As a
result of the findings, SCDHEC issued a Consent Order requesting PWP to
determine the extent of soil and ground water contamination. The primary
contaminants of concern are chromium and arsenic.
The selected remedial action for the site includes: extraction,
filtration, and onsite treatment of contaminated ground water with discharge
to a nearby stream; installation of a municipal water line or new well for a
private residence; and excavation, oztsite flushing, and onsi.te replacement
of decontaminated soil, with onsite treatment of flushing solution. The
estimated capital cost of the remedy is $1,393,000 with annual O&Z1 of
$176,163.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water will attain MCL. values for
chromium 50.0 ug/l: arsenic 50.0 ugh; and copper 1,000.0 ug/l. Soil
remediation will attain the public health evaluation levels for chromium
627.0 mg/kg and arsenic 200.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not appl .cable.
YWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Arsenic; Chromium; Excavation;
Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Offsite Discharge;
Offsite Disposal; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Soil; Soil Washing/Flushing; Treatment Technology.
—35—
-------
PARRAMORE SURPLUS, Ft.
First Remedial Action — Final
September 15, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Parramore Surplus Company (PSC) site, occupying approximately 25
acres, is located in Mt. Pleasant, Gadsden County, Florida. PSC is an
active facility, which stores and resells surplus government products
purchased from naval airbases in Florida and Alabama in 1972. Most of the
site is used for vehicle and equipment storage. In March 1982, the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (FOER) inspected the site and
estimated that 400—600 drums were stored onsi.te with many leaking and
killing vegetation. PSC conducted limited cleanup activities, which
included the removal of hazardous chemicals and contaminated soil to a
hazardous waste landfill in nel1e, Alabama. EPA denied an August 1983
request by PSC to delete the site from the NPL because no data existed to
show that the soil removal was effective in remedying surface
contamination. In March 1985, EPA conducted a Modified Remedial
Investigation which detected elevated levels of organic compounds in the
soil. However, the analytical results were not considered indicative of
true site conditions. EPA’s Public Health Evaluation concluded that the
onsite soil poses no risk to human health or the environment and that
further soil rernediation is not necessary. A ground water quality
assessment, however, was recommended to assure that no ground water
contamination has occurred for past releases of hazardous substances at the
site.
The selected remedial action for this site includes the installation of
ground water monitoring wells, followed by two periods of ground water
sampling and analyses to assure that ground water has not been adversely
impacted by past releases of hazardous substances. If contaminant levels do
not exceed ARARs. no further action will be taken and the site will, be
proposed for NPL deletion. The estimated capital cost for this selected
monitoring is $21,000 with annual O&M of $19,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Cleanup standards to be reviewed as part of
the ground water quality assessment include MCLs and Water Quality Criteria.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : ARARs; Direct Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
MCLs; Metals; No Action Remedy; O 4; Organics; PCBs; Public Exposure; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Sediments; Soil; State Criteria.
—36—
-------
POWERSVILLE LANDFILL, GA
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Powersville Landfill, which occupies approximately 15 acres, is
located in Peach County, Georgia. General crop farming is the major
agricultural practice in the area, however, cattle farms and orchards are
also conunon. Locally, the Providence aquifer system is a source of water
for both consumption and irrigation. From the early 1940s to 1969, the
landfill site was a borrow pit, which provided sand and fill material to the
county for local use. During 1969, Peach County began operating the site as
a sanitary landfill receiving municipal and industrial wastes. In December
1972, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection
Division suggested the separation and maintenance of areas for pesticides
and associated wastes, which the landfill attained. Disposal records
indicate that pesticide manufacturing wastes were disposed iii the municipal
section of the landfill prior to June 1973 and in the hazardous waste area
between June 1973 and 1978. Neither the quantity nor the location of the
waste in the municipal landfill is aiown. The landfill was closed in 1979
due to its location in a highly permeable sand and gravel aquifer. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground water
include: VOCs (vinyl chloride), organics, metals (lead and chromium), and
pesticides.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: surface capping of
hazardous waste and municipal fill areas using artificial material or clay,
with grading, drainage, and closure; installation of eight additional
monitoring wells, at a minimum, in the upper region of the aquifer to
determine area leaching or migration; and extension of the municipal water
supply pipe line as an alternate water supply. The State of Georgia
indicates an inability to pay their portion of the costs, which is 50%. if
the PRPs do not come forth to conduct the remedial action. The total
present worth cost for this remedial action is $4,000,000 with present worth
O&M of $577,013.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The mandates of Safe Drinking Water Act
apply to the Providence aquifer. However, none of the contaminants exceed
the standards established under this act.
INSTITU’rIONAL CONTROLS : Site deed restrictions will be implemented to
prevent any drilling or construction activities that would compromise the
integrity of the remedy. Deed restrictions will also be established to
prohibit the drilling of water wells in the area between the site and Mule
Creek, the area in which ground water is likely to be affected by the
landfill.
I YWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds;
chromium; Deed Restrictions; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls; Lead; Metals;
Municipally—Owned Site; OS 1 24; Organics; Pesticides; Public Exposure; RCRA;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; State Criteria; VOCs.
—37—
-------
SODYECO, NC
First Remedial Action — Final
September 24. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Southern Dyestuff Company (Sodyeco) site, located in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina, consists of approximately 1,300 acres.
Approximately 20—30 residents reside within a one—quarter mile radius of the
site, while many of the area’s 9,137 residents commute daily to the site for
employment. The site contains an operating manufacturing facility
consisting of production units, a waste water treatment area and material
storage areas. Approximately 1,040 acres are undeveloped. Sodyeco began
operations at the site in 1936. In 1958, American Marietta (which became
Martin Marietta in 1961) purchased the site and expanded the company’s
liquid sulfur dye production to include the manufacture of vat and disperse
dyes and specialty products for agrochertucal. electronic, explosive,
lithographic, pigment, plastic, rubber, and general chemical industries.
The Sandoz Chemical Company purchased the plant in 1983. Five CERCLA
facilities, identified as A, B, C, D, and E, were identified as probable
sources of ground water and soil contamination. Area A operated as a
landfill between the 1930s and 1973 or 1974. It accepted sulfur residues
and dyes, fiber cloths, empty metal, cardboard drums and cartons, non—acidic
and non—flammable chemica].s. chemical wastes, and construction debris. This
area is currently covered with asphalt and buildings. Area B operated as a
landfill between 1973 and 1978 and received wastes previously disposed in
Area A. Area C-consisted of three covered--t renches that contained
laboratory and production samples, distillation tars, and waste solvents.
They have since been excavated, regraded. and grassed. Area D contained two
waste water settling ponds that have been taken out of service. Area D
currently holds a lined fresh water pond and a fuel oil storage tank.
Area E, downgradient of the old plant manufacturing area, has no kno’Jn waste
disposal receptacles. The primary contaminants of concern include: TCE,
PANs, and other volatile organics.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: extraction and
onsite treatment at the waste water treatment facility of contaminated
ground water with offsite discharge to a stream; onsite treatment of
contaminated soil in Area C (treatability studies will be performed to
determine which type of treatment will be used); excavation and offsite
incineration of contaminated soil in Area D; and asphalt capping of Area B.
The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action will range from
$2,089,000 to $3,865,000.
PERFORMANCE STA1 1DARDS OR GOALS : Ground water cleanup goals are based on
MCLs and MCLGs, Federal Ambient cqater Quality Criteria, National Ambient Air
Quality Standards, and State environmental standards. Specific cleanup
goals include: trichloroethylene 2.7 ug/].; tetrachioroethylerte 0.8 ugh;
chlorobenzene 60.0 ug/l; ethylbenzerie 680.0 ug/l; l,2—dichlorobenzene
400.0 ug/l; toluene 2,000.0 ugh; xylene 440.0 ugh; anthracine 2.8 ugh;
fluorene 2.8 ng/1; and total PANs 2.8 ng/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
—38—
-------
SODYECO, NC
First Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Clean Water Act; Direct Contact; Excavation;
Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment; Incineration; MCLs; MCLGs; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Offsi.te Discharge; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; PAHs; Public Exposure; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; State
Criteria; Surface Water; TCE; Treatability Studies; Treatment Technology;
VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—39—
-------
TOWER CHEMICAL, FL
First Remedial Action
July 9, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Tower Chemical ‘Company CTCC) site is an abandoned manufacturing
facility located along the eastern edge of Lake County, Florida. The TCC
owned and utilized two separate parcels of land: a main facility and a
spray irrigation field with approximately 16 residences, located within a
1.2—mile radius of the site, which tap the underlying aquifer for their
water supply. Wetlands and swamps are also nearby the site. From 1957 to
1981, the TCC manufactured, formulated, and stored various pesticides.
Acidic waste waters produced during the manufacturing process were
discharged into the unlined percolation/evaporation pond located at the main
facility. In July 1980, the pond overflowed and discharge was diverted to
the spray irrigation field. In June 1980. as a result of damages caused by
the waste water pond overflow, the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER) ordered TCC to cease all discharges from the site.
Studies initiated by EPA and FDER indicated high concentrations of DDT and
associated pesticide compounds in the main facility and a below—normal fish
population in the unnamed stream onsite. In April 1983, the Centers for
Disease Control (CC) recommended site stabilization and access restriction
to the main facility/disposal areas. In July 1983, an IRM was initiated.
It included: excavation of 2,275 ft 2 of soil, 1,545 yd 3 of sediment and
72 drums with offsite disposal; waste water pump and treatment of
approximately 1,000.000 gallons with . disc arge to the unnamed stream;
backfilling, capping; surface water runoff diversion system; and fencing.
The primary contaminants of concern to the soil and ground water include:
DDT, pesticides. and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: removal and onsite
treatment of approximately 100.000 ,000 gallons of contaminated ground water
with temporary onsite storage followed by discharge to surface water;
provision of individual treatment units for two private wells within the
immediate site vicinity; excavation and incineration of approximately
4,000 yd 3 of contaminated surface soil from both the overflow area and
portions of the burnlburial area of the site; analysis of the treated soil
to determine the proper action for residual management; exploration of the
burn/burial area to determine the source of a magnetic anomaly; if relic
drums are identified, thermal destruction of contents after typing;
decontamination of two storige tanks and nearby concrete pads; and point
source run—off diversion. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $6,788,000.
—40—
-------
TOWER CH ICAL, FL
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water restoration will attain the
Florida Administrative Code drinking water health advisory, 106
health—based risk levels, and ACLs. Specific cleanup goals for ground water
include: arsenic 0.05 ug/].; nickel 350.0 ugh; chromium 0.05 ugh;
a] .pha—BHC 0.05 ug/l; chloroform S ugh; DDT 0.01 ugh; chlorobenzilate
1.0 ugh; and dicofol 1.0 ugh. Target cleanup levels for soil
contamination will attain the 10—6 health—based risk level, which includes
copper 100.0 mg/kg, lead 100.0 mg/kg, arsenic 5.0 mg/kg, and DDT 35.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Site access restrictions will be implemented for
main facility disposal areas.
YWORDS : ACts; ARARs; Arsenic; Chromium; Debris; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment; Inorgazucs;
Incineration; Institutional Controls; Metals; Offsite Disposal; Offsite
Treatment; Onsite Containment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Organi.cs;
Pesticides; RCRA; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; State Criteria; Surface
Water; Surface Water Diversion/Collection; Treatment Technology; Wetlands.
—41--
-------
TRI-CITY CONSERVATION, FL
First Remedial Action — Final
September 21,1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Tn-City property, occupying approxi mately one—quarter acre, is
located in Temple Terrace, Hillsborough County, Florida. The site is
located within one—fourth mile of at least eight private drinking water
wells and within two miles of major public drinking water supply wells.
From 1960 to 1975, the Tn—City property was used for the operation of a
heating oil service business. From 1978 to 1983, Tn—City Oil
Conservationist Corporation was a waste oil collection and distribution
center. During the operational period of the Tn—City site, the
Hillsborough County Environmental Protection Commission and the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (FOER) received several complaints
regarding odor problems and sloppy practices. In 1982, a 3,000 gallon waste
oil spill occurred at the Tn—City operation. The owner failed to clean up
the site at the request of FDER and in February 1984, EPA conducted an
immediate removal action. Following this removal, soil contamination posed
a threat to the ground water. In April 1985, 850 yd 3 of contaminated soil
and sludges were excavated from the site and transported offsite to an
approved hazardous waste facility. The June 1986, analyses of soils, ground
water, and sediments conducted by FDER indicated the source of contamination
had been removed and contaminant concentration levels did not exceed. State
or Federal drinking water standards.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action since
current contaminant levels do not exceed State or Federal drinking water
standards. This remedial selection has no cost or O&M activities.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Current contaminant concentration levels
are below analytical detection limits and are consistent with the Safe
Drinking Water Act, Clean Water Act, RcRA, Clean Air Act, Toxic Substances
Control Act, and the State of Florida Administrative Codes.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; No Action Remedy; RCRA;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; State Criteria.
—42—
-------
FMC CORPORATION, I
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30,. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The FMC site is located in the City of Fridley. Minnesota. The site is
approximately 1,000 feet east of the Mississippi River, just north of the
City of Minneapolis, and upstream of the City of Minneapolis drinking water
intake, which serves approximately 500,000 people. This ground water
operable unit addresses those portions of the site known as the FMC lands
(13 acres) and the Burlington Northern Railroad Company (BNR) lands
(5 acres). From 1941 to 1964, Northern Ordnance, Inc. operated a naval
ordnance manufacturing complex at the site. Between 1945 and 1969, a tract
of land south of the complex was used for the burning and disposal of
wastes, including plating wastes, paint, paint sludges, oils, bottom ash,
and chlorinated and non—chlorinated solvents. In 1964, the FMC Corporation
purchased the property and continued to use the waste disposal area.
Disposal was discontinued by FMC in 1969. In November 1980, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff received a hot line complaint alleging
past waste disposal at the FMC and BNR lands. Further investigation
revealed historical waste disposal practices and found contamination of
ground water and the Mississippi River. By June 1983, approximately
38,600 yd 3 of contaminated soil with VOC concentrations greater than
1 mg/kg were excavated from the unsaturated zone in the area of the waste
burn and disposal pits and placed in a RCRA onsite containment and treatment
facility. Currently, ground water in the underlying alluvial aquifer, which
discharges to the Mississippi River, is contaminated with ICE, PCE, benzene,
toluene, zylene, and other VOCs. ICE has been estimated to account for
98 percent of the contaminant loading.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: ground water pump
and treatment with discharge to a P01W (sewer system); ground water
monitoring; and implementation of institutional controls with land use
restrictions to mitigate against near—term usage of contaminated ground
water between the site and the Mississippi River. The estimated capital
cost for this remedial action is $773,935 with present worth O&M of $744,870.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The MPCA—approved cleanup standard for TCE
(270.0 ug/l) will be met at the site boundary. This corresponds to the
10—6 health—based risk level. The risk at the receptor will be at or
below the 10—6 level. Specific MCL criteria to be met during treatment
include: trichioroethylene 5.0 ugh; tetrachioroethylene 10.0 ugh; and
benzene 5.0 ug/l. For those contaminants where no MCL has been established,
cleanup levels have been developed using the Minnesota Department of
Health’s Reconm%ended Drinking Water Limits. Specific criteria include:
1,l,2—trichloroethane 6.1 ug/l; toluene 2,000.0 ug/l; and xylene
440.0 ugh. Effluent discharge standards for total VOCs will be met at the
point of discharge to the existing sewer prior to mixing with facility
wastewater. They are based on P01W standards under the Clean Water Act and
include 5,000.0 ug/]. (10,000.0 ugf]. for the first two months) with a limit of
15,000.0 ug/l (20,000.0 ug/l for the first 2 months).
—43—
-------
FNC CORPORATION,
Second Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : A City of Fridley ordinance prohibits installation
of a potable water supply well within the FMC site area when muni ipal
service is within reasonable proximity.
1 YWORDS : ARARs; Benzene; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Institutional Controls; MCLs; O&M;
Offsite Discharge; PCE; Publicly—Owned Treatittent Works; Safe Drinking Water
Act; State Criteria; TCE; To].uene; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—44—
-------
INDUSTRIAL CESS LANDFILL. OH
First Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL) is a 30—acre closed sanitary
landfill located in Uniontown, Stark County, Ohio. Over 400 residential
homes, located within a 0.5 mile radius of the landfill, rely on individual
or private well supplies for drinking water. Prior to 1961, the landfill
property may have been utilized as a coal mine and later for mining sand and
gravel. Gradually, the mining/excavation pit was converted into a landfill
which received a variety of wastes. Between 1964 and 1968, the site was
used. to store fly ash, masonry rubble, paper, and lumber scrap. From 1968
to 1980. IEL accepted municipal, commercial, industrtal, and chemical wastes
of substantially undetermined and uniciown composition, primarily from the
nearby rubber industry. Large quantities of chemical and liquid waste were
dumped onto the ground either from 55—gallon drums or from tanker trucks.
In January of 1972, the Stark County Board of Health (SCBH) ordered the
dumping of chemical wastes stopped. In 1980. due to public concern and
facility volume limitations, the landfill was ordered to close. Closure
plans were completed and the site was covered and seeded. In 1983,
complaints by conm%unity residents prompted investigations to ascertain
whether drinking water was contaminated and if health risks existed. The
results indicated that residential wells were contaminated with inorganics,
organics, and VOCs.
The selected remedial action involves provision of an alternate water
supply to approximately 100 homes located west of the site. EPA has
deferred the decision on the source of this water until the completion of
initial design activities. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action ranges from $1,715,870 to $2,289,060, pending water source
selection.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The provision of an alternate water supply
will protect public health until an overall remedy can take effect.
Chemical—specific cleanup goals will be selected in the second operable unit.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Water; Iriorganics; Interim Remedy; Organics; Public
Exposure; VOCs.
—45—
-------
JO}fl IS-44ANVILLE, IL ,
First Remedial Action — Final
June 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Johns-Manville—Waukegan site is located along Lake Michigan in Lake
County, Illinois. The disposal site covers approximately 120 acres of the
approximately 300 acres of land owned by the Manville Service Corporation,
formerly the Johns—Manville Sales Corporation. The Manville plant presently
produces and has produced a wide range of building materials. Since 1922,
waste materials containing primarily asbestos, and to a lesser extent, lead,
chrome, thiram, and xylene have been deposited in a variety of pits at the
site, many of which are no longer in use. Presently, no asbestos or lead is
used in this manufacturing process except friable asbestos. Currently.
active waste disposal pits include: the asbestos disposal pit, which
receives friable asbestos wastes from manufacturing building reconstruction
activities; the sludge disposal pit, which receives dredged materials from
the onsite waste water treatment system; and the miscellaneous disposal pit
in which miscellaneous, non—asbestos-containing wastes are and were
deposited. Airborne asbestos monitoring was conducted in 1973 and 1982.
The 1973 study did not provide conclusive evidence of asbestos air
contamination. The 1982 study indicated elevated onsite and downwind
asbestos fiber concentrations in the 2.5 to 15 micrometer range. The
primary contaminants of concern affecting the air, ground water, soil, and
Lake Michigan surface water include: asbestos, lead, chromium, particulate
matter, and potentially, arsenic.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: grading and
covering of waste materials and soil in inactive waste disposal areas;
closure of the asbestos disposal pit (in June 1989); offsite disposal of
asbestos—containing material generated from reconstruction activities (after
June 1989); soil covering; clearance of debris; closure of the small ditch
and open area miscellaneous disposal pits; construction of a dike and
peripheral ditch; fencing at the eastern boundary with posting of warning
signs; and ground water, surface water, and air monitoring. The estimated
capital cost for this remedial action is $4 ,026.000 with annual O&M of
$49,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Reinediation activities meet the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) requirements for
asbestos. Site monitoring activities will provide data to determine
compliance with additional requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KE’IWORDS : Air; Air Monitoring; ARARs; Arsenic; Asbestos; Capping; Chromium;
Clean Air Act; Direct Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Inorganics; Lead; Metals; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Public Exposure; State
Criteria; Surface Water; RCRA Alternate Landfill Closure; Water Quality
Criteria.
—46—
-------
LASKIN/POPLAR OIL, OH
Second Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Laskin/Poplar Oil site, occupying approximately 9 acres, is located
in Ashtabula County. Ohio. Approximately 80 years ago, a greenhouse
operation began. Boilers were installed approximately 30 years ago to heat
the greenhouses. During the l960s. tanks were installed to hold waste oil
to fire the boilers. The oils were not analyzed prior to acceptance and oil
containing PCBs and other hazardous constituents were accepted. As the
greenhouse business deteriorated, the owner began collecting, reselling, and
disposing of waste oils containing PCBs and other hazardous constituents.
Several emergency actions were taken after the site was discovered and
during critical periods such as mud slides and flooding. Between July and
October 1982, a planned removal action removed 302,000 gallons of waste oil.
solidified 205,000 gallons of sludge. and treated and released 430,000
gallons of contaminated water. Currently, bulk waste material including
6.000 gallons of oil, 60,000 gallons of waste water, and 705,000 gallons of
sludge are still present at the site. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the soil include: VOCs, PCBs, PANs, and lead.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: construction of a
fence around contaminated portions of the site and the onsite incinerator;
onsite incineration of oils, sludges, and highly contaminated soils; offsite
treatment of all waste water, decontamination water and scrubber water;
offsite disposal of all incinerator ash; dismantling and offsite disposal of
all tanks; crushing and incineration of cinder block walls of the pits; and
back.filling and grading all excavated areas. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $8,500,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The final cleanup levels will be determined
at the completion of the overall site RI/FS.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Clean Air Act; Incineration; Lead; Metals; Offsite
Disposal; Offsite Treatment; Oils; Onsite Treatment; Orgariics; PANs; PCBs;
RCRA; Sludges; Soil; State Criteria; Treatment Technology; VCCs.
—47—
-------
LIQUID DISPOSAL. MI
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
Liquid Disposal, Inc. (LDI) is a 6.8—acre site located in a
residential/light industrial area in Shelby Township. Michigan. LDI is
bordered by the Clinton River and its flood plain, the Shadbush Tract Native
Study Area. andautomobile junkyards. The site was first used as a source
of sand and gravel prior to becoming a landfill around 1964. Between 1968
and 1982, LDI operated as a commercial incinerator of liquid waste. During
this time, the site contained a large volume of hazardous substances stored
in the waste oil and scrubber lagoons. ash sludge piles, above and below
ground storage tanks. and in 55—gallon drums. Since 1982, EPA has completed
four immediate removal actions. As a result of these actions, no surface
waste sources exist at the site. However, several hundred waste sample
jars, old incinerator parts, emptied tanks, wooden pallets, miscellaneous
containers, and other debris remain onsite. Currently onsite and offsite
soil and ground water (the upper aquifer) are contaminated with a wide
variety of organic and inorganic chemicals. Onsite concentrations are
generally higher than offsite. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water and soil include: VOCs, semi—volatile organics,
PCBs, barium, cadmium, and lead.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: onsite land
disposal of all existing debris and equipment; onsite solidification!
fixation of soil and waste; ground water pump and treatment using air
stripping and ion exchange with discharge to Clinton River or POTW; and
construction of a slurry wall and impermeable cap containment system. The
estimated capital cost of this remedial action is $21,743,100 with present
worth O&M oE $316,600.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Target cleanup levels (TCLs) for
carcinogens in soil and ground water were based on the 10—6 health—based
cancer risk level. For noncarcinogens in ground water, MCLs and
health—based levels were used as TCLs. The TCLs for ground water include:
barium 1,000.0 ug/l; cadmium 10.0 ug/l; chloroform 0.1 ug/l; benzene
0.2 ugh; methylene chloride 1.0 ug/l; and TCE 0.8 ug/]. The TCLs for soil
include: T E 77.0 ug/g; tetrachioroethylene (POE) 16.0 ug?g; benzo(a)pyrene
0.4 ug/g; PCBS 1.0 ug/g; and lead 20.0 ug/g.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : 1ot applicable.
YWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Benzene; Cadmium; Capping; Carcinogenic
Compounds; Clean Water Act; Debris; Direct Contact; Flood Plain; Ground
Water; Ground Water Treatment; Inorganics; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M: Onsite
Containment; Onsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics;
POBs; POE; Pesticides; Public Exposure; Publicly Owned Treatment Works; RCRA
Closure Requirements; Sludge; Slurry Wall; Soil; Solidification; State
Criteria; TCE; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—48—
-------
MARION/BRAGG LANDFILL, IN
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Marion/Bragg Landfill is a 72—acre site located near the
southeastern city limits of Marion, Indiana. The site is bordered on the
north and east by the Mississinewa River. The main features of the site
include a 45—acre landfill and a 15—acre pond. From 1935 to 1961. the site
was used as a sand and gravel quarry. From 1949 to 1970, portions of the
site. leased by Radio Corporation of America and Bragg Construction Company,
were used for industrial and municipal waste disposal, respectively.
Throughout this period, the Indiana State Board of Health (ISBH) noted the
disposal of acetone, plasticizers. lacquer thinner, and enamels. Drwnmed
wastes were also accepted and contents were allegedly emptied from the drums
and worked into the landfill waste with a bulldozer, causing several fires
onsite. Drums also were allegedly rinsed and resold. In 1975, Bragg
Construction Company ceased operation of the landfill. In 1975, Waste
Reduction Systems constructed a transfer station to properly transfer solid
wastes to an approved landfill. The transfer station was closed in 1977.
The landfill contains approximately 1,100,000 yd 3 of waste. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the ground water include: DCE. TCE, vinyl
chloride, bis(2—ethylhexyl)phthalates, and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: capping with
regrading; provision and maintenance of flood control measures to protect
the portion of the site within the 100—year flood plain; fence construction;
provision of three private wells for drinking water; sealing shallow wells;
and ground water monitoring to determine effectiveness of the remedy.
Additional studies will be conducted to determine remedies for ground water
and the onsite pond. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$5,800,000 with present worth O&M of $1,000,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : This interim remedy meets State of Indiana
and RCRA 264 regulations. Chemical—specific cleanup goals were not
specified at this time. Continued testing is being performed to determine
whether bioaccumulation of chemicals necessitates further ground water
treatment.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Site access and deed restrictions prohibiting
ground water usage or installation of onsite shallow wells will be
implemented.
KEYWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Capping; Deed Restrictions;
Drinking Water Contaminants; Direct Contact; Flood Plain; Ground Water;
Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls; Metals; 0GM; Organics;
RCRA; Soil; State Criteria; TCE; VOCs.
—49—
-------
NEW BRIGHTON/ARDEN HILLS/ST. ANTHONY, I
Fifth Remedial Action
March 31, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony site is located approximately
two miles north of the Twin Cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota. The
City of St. Anthony, located directly north of the Twin Cities, is one of
several conm unities which obtains its municipal water supply from the
Prairie du Chien—Jordan aquifer system. The City of St. Anthony obtains its
water supply from well numbers 4 and 5 and an interconnection to the City of
Roseville’s water distribution system. In June 1981, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
detected VOC contamination in the Praire du Chiert—Jordan aquifer system used
for municipal drinking water in New Brighton. Subsequently. the City of St.
Anthony has also detected VCC contamination in their three Praire du
Chien—Jordan aquifer wells; well numbers 3, 4, and 5. Well 4 is the city’s
major source of water. Well 5 and the Roseville interconnection are used
for swim er, peak. or emergency situations. Well 3 was shut down in early
1984 due to ‘IOC contamination. As the number of contaminated wells within
the Praire du Chien—Jordan began increasing, EPA initiated several Initial
Remedial Measures. In 1983, granular activated carbon filters were
installed on New8righton wells S and 6 and several private well users were
connected to New Brighton and Arden Hill’s water mains. In 1984, the City
of St. Anthony received a temporary water connection to the City of
Roseville due to water shortages resulting from subsequent closure of a
contaminated well. The primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground
water include: TCE, DCE, and VCCs.
The selected remedial action for this site incudes: construction of
granular activated carbon (GAC) water treatment facilities to remove VOCs
from St. Anthony wells 3. 4. and 5 with discharge to the municipal water
treatment plant and distribution system; and construction of a pipeline to
connect St. Anthony well S with the GAC treatment facilities. Total capital
costs for the selected remedial action is estimated to be $1,100,500 with
annual O&M of $160,770.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water treatment will attain the MCL
for TCE 5.0 ug/l. MCLs for other VOCs have not been exceeded.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARAR3; Drinking Water Contaminants;
Granular Activated Carbon; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground
Water Treatment; MCLs; Orisite Treatment; Organics; TCE; VCCs.
—50—
-------
NEW BRIGHTON/TWIN CITIES ARMY AZ2 UNITION PLANT,
Third Remedial Acti.ori
September 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) is located north of the
Twin Cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota and comprises the northern
edge of the New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony (NBAHSA) Superfund NPL
site. Fourteen identified source areas exist in the TCAAP and three sites
are expected to be the source of VOC contamination emanating from the
southwest boundary. The U.S. Army estimates approximately 26 pounds per day
of volatile organic contaminants are migrating into the ground water at the
southwest boundary of TCAAP. This contamination is migrating in both the
Hillside Sand Aquifer and the deeper Prairie du Chien/Jordan Aquifer (both
are aquifers that supply water to the cities of New Brighton and St.
Anthony). Both of these cities have made modifications to their water
supply due to ground water contamination. From 1982 to 1984, various
municipal wells were deepened. shut down, or had carbon filters installed.
Several private well users ad acertt to the TCAAP site were connected to city
water supplies. Three previous RODs for the MBAHSA site have recommended an
additional well for New Brighton from art alternate aquifer, carbon treatment
for two of St. Anthony’s wells, and construction of a Boundary Ground Water
Recovery System (BGRS) to intercept the contaminant plume. This operable
unit source control ROD addresses operation of the BGRS, collection of
operating data in order to evaluate the system, and modification of the
system, as necessary, to ensure interception of contaminated ground water in
the two affected aquifers. The primary contaminants of concern affecting
the ground water include: PCBs, benzene, toluene, TCE, VOCs, arsenic,
chromium, lead, and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: operation of a
six—well system to extract ground water migrating from the southwest corner
of TCAAP and treatment with air stripping. Approximately 300,000 gallons
per day will be utilized for in—plant use with the remainder disposed by
reinjection/infiltration through the arsenal sand and gravel pit; evaluation
of operating data and monitoring results; and implementation of any
additional measures required to capture contaminated ground water migrating
from the site. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$4,000,000 with annual O&M of $120,000. Additional capital expenditures may
occur if modifications to the system are needed to achieve adequate water
quality.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : During all phases of the remedy, the
protection of receptors will be based on the 10—6 cumulative carcinogenic
risk—based criteria. Discharged water will, at a minimum, meet MCL
standards, which include: benzene 5.0 ug/l; toluene 2,000.0 ug/l; TCE
5.0 ugh; PCE 6.9 ugh; vinyl chloride 2.0 ugh; xylene 440.0 ugh; arsenic
50.0 ugh; and chromium 50.0 ug/]..
—51—
-------
NEW BRIG}{TOM/TWIN CITIES ARMY ANUNITION PLANT, I
Third Remedial Action
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Arsenic; Benzene; Carcinogenic Compounds;
CI romium; Clean Air Act; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground
Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; Metals; O&M;
Onsite Treathent; Safe Drinking Water Act; TCE; Toluene; VOCs.
—52—
-------
NORTHERN ENGRAVING, WI
First Remedial Action — Final
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Northern Engraving Corporation (NEC), located in Sparta, Wisconsin,
presently owns and operates a manufacturing facility at the site, which
produces metal name plates, dials and decorative trim for the automotive
industry. The majority of the land within the Sparta area is zoned for
general agriculture, which includes livestock raising, nursery, greerthouse,
and poultry farming. Four separate areas of contamination at the NEC
facility have been identified as potential sources of soil, ground water,
and surface water contamination. They include the sludge laqoon. seepage
pit. sludge dump site, and lagoon drainage ditch. The chemical constituents
found in these areas are from past waste water treatment and disposal
practices employed at the site. Since the 1960s, waste rinse waters,
by—products of the metal finishing process. have been treated onsite. An
onsite waste water treatment lagoon was installed in 1967. Rinse water from
the plant was collected and treated with sodium hydroxide for precipitation
to metal hydroxide solids. The treated rinse water was discharged to the
sludge lagoon to allow solids to settle. The treated lagoon effluent was
discharged to the LaCrosse River by way of a storm drainage ditch. Between
1968 and 1976, the sludge lagoon accumulated solids from the treated waste
water. On two ocasions, sludge was removed from the lagoon and landfilled
in an onsite dump area. The sludge lagoon was eventually removed from
service in 1980, by which time two to four feet of metal hydroxide sludge
had accumulated on the bottom of the lagoon and presently remains. An
onsite seepage pit was employed to neutralize spent waste. It was removed
from service, filled with approximately five feet of clean fill and graded
in 1981. A new above ground orisite waste water treatment system was
installed in 1976 and modified in 1984 to meet more stringent State effluent
standards. Approximately 900 yd 3 of sludge is contaminated with
phosphorous, aluminum. cadmium, copper, nickel, iron, and fluoride. The
drainage ditch is contaminated with fluoride, aluminum, chromium, and
copper. The seepage pit is contaminated with trichioroethylene (TCE).
Ground water is contaminated with copper, nickel, and zinc.
The selected remedial action includes: excavation and onsite
solidification of approximately 4,400 yd 3 of sludge and soil; installation
of a RCRA cover atop the lagoon; application of access and deed restrictions
to the seepage pit property; and ground water monitoring. The total
estimated capital cost is $295,000 with annual O&M of $16,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water contamination at the site will
be managed through the use of alternate concentration limits (ACLs). which
are protective of the river. They include: TCE 21,900.0 ugf 1; copper
12.0 ugh; nickel 160.0 ugh; and zinc 110.0 ugh.
—53—
-------
NORT} RN ENGRAVING. WI
First Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
INSTITiJ I’IONAL CONTROLS : The State will restrict access to the seepage pit
property and restrict future land develcpment through deed restrictions arid
water well construction.
KEYWORDS : ACLs; ARMs; Capping; Clean Closure; Deed Restrictions; Direct
Contact; Excavation; Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring;
Inorganics; Institutional Controls; Metals; O&M; Onsite Disposal; Onsite
Treatment; RCRA Closure; Soil; Solidification; Surface Water; TCE; Treatment
Technology; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—54—
-------
NORTHSIDE SANITARY LANDFILL/
JVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION AND CH 4ICAL CORPORATION. IN
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Northside Sanitary Landfill (NSL) and the Environmental Conservation
and Chemical Corporation (ECC) are adjacent sites located in Boone County,
Indiana. These two sites have been combined into the first remedial action
because of their close proximity and similarities in contaminants, affected
media, rernedjatj.on needs, and regulatory status. Between 1977 and 1982, ECC
was involved in the recovery, reclamation, and brokering of primary
solvents, oils, and other wastes received from industrial clients. Waste
products were received in drums and bulk tankers and prepared for subsequent
reclamation or disposal. Onsite accumulation of contaminated stormwater,
poor management of drum inventory, and several spills prompted State and EPA
investigation of ECC. Between 1977 and 1981, some still bottom and oily
liquid wastes were permitted to be disposed of at NSL. In May 1982, ECC was
ordered by the court to close and environmentally secure the site for
failure to produce hazardous waste inventories. Two emergency actions, in
March 1983 and March 1985, eliminated the major sources of contamination at
the site. Onsite soil contains high concentrations of VOC compounds
including: trans—l,2—DCE, trichloroethene, 1,1—XE, and vinyl chloride.
The possibility exists for the presence of other sources of contamination at
the site. Sometime between 1955 and 1962, NSL began landfill operations.
From 1972 to 1973, numerous operational deficiencies, including failure
to cover refuse, surface burning, underground fires, leachate, and vermin
problems, resulted in three Indiana State Board of Health (ISBH) orders to
cease operations. By February 1975, operations were permitted at the site.
By November 1982, MSL had accepted at least 16,000,000 gallons of hazardous
substances. The primary contaminants of concern affecting the ground water,
surface water, soil, and sediments include: inorgani.cs, organics,
pesticides, acids, base—neutral compounds, oils, and VOCs (benzene, 1,1—XE,
TOE).
The selected remedial action for the two sites combined includes:
implemention of deed and access restrictions to prevent future site
development; excavation and dewatering of 4,200 yd 3 of leachate soils and
sediments with onsite disposal under a RCRA multi—layer cap; soil capping
over non—RCRA capped areas; site grading; demolition of the former ECC
process building followed by capping; surface water rerouting; collection
and treatment of leachate at NSL; and implemention of ground water
collection and onsite treatment for both sites. The estimated present worth
cost for this remedial action is $33,900,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS : Cleanup goals will be consistent with MCL,
MCLG, and Federal and State Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the
protection of aquatic life and consumption of aquatic organisms in a nearby
stream. Specific goals include: benzene 5.0 ugh; 1,1—DOE 7.0 ugh;
arsenic 50.0 ugh; lead 50.0 ug/l; and TCE 200.0 ugll.
—55—
-------
NORTHSIDE SANITARY LANDFILL/
‘JVIRONM ITAL CONSERVATION AND CHEIICAL CORPORATION. IN
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Deed arid access restrictions will be implemented at
both sites to prevent future development of the land.
KEYWORDS : Acids; ARARS (Chemical—Specific: Berizene. Action—Specific:
Capping.); Berizene; Carcinogenic Compounds; Capping; Deed Restrictions;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Excavations; Ground Water;
Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Inorganics; Institutional
Controls; Leachate Collection/Treatment; MCLs; MCLGs; Metals; Oils; O&M;
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PANs; PCBs; Pesticides; Public
Exposure; RCRA Landfill Closure; Safe Drinking Water Act; Sediments; Soil;
State Criteria; Surface Water; TCE; VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—56—
-------
ROSE TOWNSHIP, MI
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Rose Township Dump site is located in rural Rose Township. Oakland
County, Michigan. The 110—acre site comprises an upland area almost
completely surrounded by wetlands, with an abundance of wildlife onsite.
From 1966 to 1968, an unknown number of drums containing solvents, paint
sludges, and PUBs were buried in a 12—acre portion of the site. Bulk wastes
were also discharged to the surface or into shallow lagoons or pits in the
area. In June 1979, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (b NR)
tested domestic wells in the area and found low level TCE and PCE
contamination. This contamination made it necessary to supply bottled water
to residents. Based on 1979 drum sampling results, funds were appropriated
for an immediate removal action, which disposed of over 5,000 drums
offsite. Further testing. between 1980 and 1982. indicated the presence of
organic chemical contamination in the ground water. Currently, the primary
contaminants of concern affecting the soil and ground water include: VOCs,
PANs, PcBs, organics, and inorganics.
The selected remedial action includes: excavation of as much as
50,000 yd 3 of contaminated soil; onsite thermal destruction of
contaminants in the excavated soil with disposal of resultant ash (either
onsite or offsite depending on the results of EP toxicity testing); and
ground water pump and treatment using chemical coagulation, air stripping,
and activated carbon adsorption with discharge to an appropriate place. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $32,547,000 with annual
O 4 of $200,000 for years 1—10 and $70,000 for years 10—30.
P FORMMCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Cumulative ground water and soil cleanup
levels will attain the 10 —b cancer risk level. Specific ground water
cleanup goals include: vinyl chloride 0.015 ugh (MCL); arsenic 50.0 ug/l
(MCL), lead 50.0 ug/l (M L); chlorobenzene 60.0 ug/l (proposed MCLG);
benzene 0.133 ugh; TCE 0.627 ug/l; PCBs 0.002 ug/l; and methylene chloride
0.919 ugh. Specific soil cleanup goals include: arsenic 14.0 mg/kg; PCBs
10.0 mg/kg; and lead 70.0 mg/kg.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Clean Water Act; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment; Incineration; Inorganics;
MCLs; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Incineration; Organics; PANs; PCBs;
Public Exposure; RCRA Closure Requirements; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil;
VOCs; Wetlands.
—57—
-------
SG AL.Z DUMP, WI
Second Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Schmalz Dump site, occupying approximately seven acres of the
Waverly Beach wetlands area, is located on the north shore of Lake Winnebago
in the town of Harrison, Wisconsin. Industries dumped wastes at various
locations along the north shore of Lake Winnebago for several years. Mr.
Gerald Schzualz, the previous site owner, began filling his property in
1968. Records show that hauled wastes consisted of solid wastes, car
bodies, stone, trees, pulp chips, and mash. Between 1972 and 1973, the site
accepted fly ash a.nd bottom ash from Men.asha Utility and, in 1978 and 1979,
Schxnalz accepted the demolition debris of a building owned by the
Allis—Chalmers Corporation. Initial onsite sampling, in early 1979,
determined that an area containing the Allis—Chalmers debris was
contaminated with concentrations of PCBs as high as 3,100 mg/kg with lead
and chromium also detected in relatively high concentrations. In August
1985, a ROD was signed approving an operable unit to address the PCB
contamination. This second operable unit addresses soil, contamination with
lead and chromium ’ ’ 3 .
The selected remedial action for this site includes: installation of a
low permeability compacted earth material cap over approximately seven
acres of lead and chromium contaminated soils; installation of a slurry
wall; and implementation of ground water monitoring. A voluntary well
abandonment program for nearby wells is also proposed. The estimated
capital cost for this remedial action is $687,664 with annual O&M of $17,940.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Chromium ’I ’ 3 detected in ground water did
not exceed the MCL (50.0 ugh), and lead was not reported above the
detection units. Ground water and leachate release at the site are in
compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act without implementing treatment.
Capping will comply with the State Solid Waste Management Administrative
Rule, Chapter NR 180 WAC.
INSTITUTIONAL. CONTROLS : Mot applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARS; Capping; Chromium; Direct Contact; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Lead; MCLs; Metals; O&M; Onsite Disposal; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Slurry Wall; Soil; State Criteria; Wetlands.
—58—
-------
SEYMOUR, IN
Second Remedial Action — Final
September 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Seymour Recycling Corporation (SRC) site, encompassing a 14—acre
area, is approximately two miles southwest of Seymour, Indiana. SRC and its
corporate predecessor, Seymour Manufacturing Company, processed. stored, and
incinerated chemical wastes at the site from about 1970 to early 1980. The
facility was closed when SRC failed to comply with a 1978 agreement with the
State of Indiana to cease receiving wastes and to institute better waste
management practices. In 1980, several thousand drums were removed from the
site by two potentially responsible parties (PRPs). In 1981, EPA removed
chemicals from tanks at the site and disposed of those wastes offsite. A
1982 Consent Decree with potential PRPs resulted in the removal, between
December 1.982 and January 1984, of approximately 50,000 drums. 100 storage
tanks, and the first foot of contaminated soil from about 75 percent of the
site s surface. A Record of Decision, signed in September 1986, evaluated
the stabilization of the ground water plume emanating from the site and
selected the implementation of a plume stabilization system to extract,
treat and discharge ground water to a waste water treatment plant.
Currently a shallow aquifer under and just beyond the site boundaries,
serves approximately 100 residences and businesses. The primary
contaminants of concern to the ground water, soil, and sediments include:
more than 35 different hazardous chemicals, such as 1,2—dichioroethane,
benzene. vinyl chloride, and 1,1,1—trichioroethane.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: deed and access
restrictions and other institutional controls: implementation of a
full—scale soil vapor extraction system; ground water extraction and
treatment by air stripping; mixed—media capping; and excavation of 800 yd 3
of contaminated creek sediment and consolidation of the sediment beneath the
cap. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $10,536,000
with present worth O&Z4 of $7,200,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water will be restored to attain a
cumulative excess cancer risk of i0 at and beyond the site boundaries.
The remedy meets individual MCLs for carcinogenic compounds, which include:
benzene 5.0 ugh: chloroform 100.0 ugh; 1,2—dichloroethane 5.0 ugh;
1,1—dichloroetharte 7.0 ugh; trichloroethene 5.0 ug/l; and vinyl chloride
2.0 ug/l. Noncarcinogenic compounds will attain the chronic health index
levels and include: barium 50.0 ugh; cadmium 10.0 ug/l; and lead 50.0 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Deed restrictions will prohibit excavation of soil,
onsite building construction, offsite ground water extraction, and limit
adjacent land use.
—59--
-------
SEYMOTJL IN
Second Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Benzene; Capping; Clean Air Act; Deed
Restrictions; Direct Contact; Drinking cqater Contaminants; Excavation;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Institutional Controls; MCt s; O&M;
Offsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; Public Exposure; RCRA; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Sediments; Soil; State Criteria; Treatability Studies;
Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—60—
-------
BAYOU BONFOUCA. LA
Second Remedial Action - Final
March 31. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Bayou Bon.fouca site is an abandoned creosote works facility that was
operational from 1892 to 1970. It is located north of Lake Pontchartrain in
Slidell, Louisiana in a 100—year flood plaih. and is characterized by
standing water and saturated surface soil. The creosote plant treated
pilings for use in railway construction. Over the years the plant operated
under the ownership of various creosote companies. The Braseman Corporation
presently owns the property. Numerous creosote releases occurred during the
years of operation. Since 1976, numerous studies examined the extent of the
problems originating from the Bayou site. An August 1985 Record of Decision
(ROD) selected excavation and offsite landfilling of creosote waste piles as
a source control remedy. The remedial design and remedial action activities
associated with this phase experienced delays due to the pending
reauthorization of Superfund. A Supplemental Phase II Remedial
Investigation, to determine the extent of soil contamination beyond that of
the Phase I investigation, was completed in June 1986. In July 1986,
citizens requested a 3—month extension through October 1986 of the public
co mnent period. During this extension, SARA was signed and the proposed
selected remedy did not fully comply with the provision of the Act. Since
1986, numerous studies have been undertaken to examine the extent of the
problems originating from the site. These studies indicated that
20,000 yd 3 of soil, 46,500 yd 3 of sediments, and potentially, ground
water are contaminated with polyrtuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
including: benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)flouranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, indeno(1,2,3—cd)pyrene, and chrysene.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: incineration of
5,000 yd 3 of surface creosote accumulations in a mobile unit; incineration
of 46,500 yd 3 of contaminated sediments from the bayou, creek, and channel
bottoms; isolation followed by drainage and dredging of one half of the
bayou; excavation of sediment to about five feet or to a depth that will
ensure mitigation of the source of ground water contamination by creosote;
routing the flow through the clean area upon completion of excavation and
then, drainage and dredging of the opposite side of the bayou; dewateririg of
bayou sediments prior to offsite transportation; onsite treatment and
discharge to the bayou of water drainage from the dewatered side of the
bayou, along with drainage associated with the dewatering activities; RCRA
capping of contaminated soil (20,000 yd 3 ; 34 acres); and remediation of
ground water through a pump, treatment, and reirtjection process. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $59,594,534 with annual
O&M of $173,748.
P FORZ1ANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Contaminated sediments will be excavated
either to a depth of 6 feet or until PAH contamination is less than
1,300.0 mg/kg. At the completion of remediation activities that portion of
the site (approximately 34 acres) with contaminated soil above 100.0 mg/kg
total carcinogenic PAHs will be RCRA capped. The Clean Water Act drinking
water criteria suggest a 3.1 ng/l ground water level for PAHs. It is not
yet known if this target level is technologically achievable, however, the
ground water target cleanup will be a health—based l0 or i0 6 risk
level, as per Feasibility Study guidance.
—61—
-------
BAYOU BONFOtJCA, LA
Second Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
INSTITU’rIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping: Direct Contact; Excavation; Flood Plain; Ground
Water; Ground Water Treatment; Incineration; O&Zl; Onsite Disposal; Offsite
Disposal; PANs; RCRA Landfill Closure; Sediments; Soil; Treatment
Technology; Wetlands.
—62—
-------
BAYOU SORREL, LA
First Remedial Action — Final
November 14, 1986
ROD ABSTRACT
The Bayou Sorrel site is located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana,
approximately 20 miles southwest of Baton Rouge, LA. Fifty acres of the
265—acre site have been used for waste disposal. The waste dispd’sal areas
consist of four landfills: a spent lime cell, a crushed drum cell, four
covered liquid waste ponds, and a landfarm. The remaining acres are covered
by dense brush and trees. The entire site has a marshy, bayou—type
environment and is prone to flooding and poor drainage. Early in 1977, the
Environmental Purification Advancement Corporation (EPAC) began operating
the Bayou Sorrel site. A sister firm, Clean Land Air Water, Inc. (CLAW)
operated an injection well approximately six miles south of the site. EPAC
operations included landfarming, open liquid impoundments, drum burial, and
landfilling of chemically fixed wastes. The fixation process is unknown but
may have included lime, cement, and native soil. EPAC and CLAW were two
separate operations. However, it was suggested that wastes from the
injection well were diverted to EPAC when process problems at the well
caused a bottleneck. In the summer of 1978, a truck driver died at the
site. It is suspected he died as a result of inhaling hydrogen sulfide gas
created when liquid wastes were dumped into the receiving pond. State and
Federal regulatory officials inspected the site following this incident.
Unknown materials were found in large, open, unpermitted ponds, and the site
was ordered closed. Approximately 36,400 yd 3 of wastes remain onsite
following the September 1978 closure activities. The primary contaminants
of concern affecting the ground water and soil include: sulfide wastes,
pesticide/herbicide process wastes, and spent wash solutions. Localized
surface soil contaminated with herbicides and other organic compounds was
found at the south end of the site.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: regrading the site
to control runoff, limit cap erosion, limit surface water ponding and divert
storm water from waste areas; RCRA top—soil/geomembrane/clay capping of
former disposal areas; Lnstallatlon of a sand/geofabric pore water drainage
layer above the wastes and below the cap, including a venting system to
reduce buildup of methane and other gases beneath the cap; consolidation of
all miscellaneous wastes outside currently capped areas under the new caps
for grading and fill purposes or disposing of wastes at an offsite facility;
installation of a 30—foot deep slurry wall around the former landfill area
and a shallow slurry wall around the former Pond 4 area; fencing all capped
areas to restrict access; constructing gravel access roads around fenced
areas to allow continued recreational use of adjacent lands and borrow lake
while diverting traffic around and away from the disposal areas; and
installation of a ground water monitoring system. The estimated capital
cost for this remedial action is $23,200,000 with present worth O& 1 of
$5,700,000.
—63—
-------
BAYOU SORREL, LA
First Remedial Action—Final
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Chemical—specific cleanup levels were not
specified.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Onsite Containment; Excavation; Ground Water;
Ground Water Monitoring; Offsite Disposal; O&M; Onsite Disposal; Organi s;
Pesticides; RCRA Closure Requirements; Sediments; Surface Water; Surface
Water Diversion/Collection; Slurry Wall; Soil; Venting; VCCs.
—64—
-------
CL.EVE REBER. LA
First Remedial Action
March 31. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Cleve Reber site is located in Ascension Parish between Baton Rouge
and Mew Orleans,. Louisiana. Originally a burrow pit for the construction of
a local highway, it was subsequently used between 1970 and 1974 as a
landfill for both municipal and industrial waste . There are an estimated
6,400 drums containing chemical wastes buried at shallow depths on this
24.6—acre site. The site and surrounding area, relatively flat and
exhibiting the charateristics of high—water areas prone to flooding and poor
drainage, lies within the theoretical 100—year flood plain. The site
currently contains four surface water ponds. Mo records of the waste
received at the site are available. The wastes were reportedly segregated
into municipal and chemical waste piles, and then landfilled. Volatile
chemical wastes reportedly caused nausea and illness to the landfill
employees during handling and disposal. In 1974, the site was abandoned
and, in 1979, declared an abandoned hazardous waste site by the State. In
1983, the State fenced the site due to community concern and, in July 1983,
EPA conducted an emergency removal. Surface waste piles, and approximately
1,100 surface barrels were removed offsite. A thin, clay cap was placed
over the areas thought to contain buried drums/wastes. After two
comprehensive field investigation efforts, one began in July 1984 and one
began 1anuary 1986, EPA determined that all significant contamination was
restricted to the site. The primary contaminant of concern affecting the
ground water, soil, surface water, and sediments is hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
which is associated with the buried drums and bulk sludges. Because HCB has
a high affinity for clays, and due to the slight ground water gradient, it
has not spread beyond the site boundaries. However, the potential exists
for future migration and contamination.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation and
onsite incineration of buried drums and sludges; drainage and backfilling of
onsite ponds with solidification of nonincinerable wastes, notably mercuric
sulfide; capping the portion of the site used for the disposal of
industrial/hazardous waste; and ground water monitoring. The estimated
capital cost for this remedial action is $25,000,000 with annual O&M of
$100,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Current remediation will prevent
contamination from migrating and will attain the 10—6 carcinogenic risk
level through Clean Water Act criteria. Specific cleanup goals include:
hexachlorobutadiene 0.45 ugh; hexachlorobenzene 21.0 ug/l; and
hexachloroethane 2.4 ug/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
—65—
-------
CLEVE REBEL. LA
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Debris; Direct Contact; Excavation; Filling;
Flood Plain; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Encineration; Metals;
O&14; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; RCRA Closure Requirements;
ediments; Sludge; Soil; Solidification; Surface Water; Treatment
Technology; Wetlands.
—66—
-------
COMPASS INDUSTRIES LANDFILL, OK
First Remedial Action — Final
September 29. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Compass Industries site is an abandoned landfill west of Tulsa.
Oklahoma and in close proximity to a county recreational facility. The
landfill is situated 200 feet above the Arkansas River, into which surface
water drains from the site in the form of runoff. springs, and streams.
From 1930 through 1950, the site operated as a limestone quarry. From 1972
to 1976, it operated as one of the major landfills for municipal and
industrial wastes in the Tulsa area under permit by the Oklahoma State
Department of Health. Evidence exists, however, that dwnpi.rig occurred as
early as 1964. Few records were kept on the exact type, quantity, and
location of wastes in the landfill during its operation. although. during
the 1970s and 19803. air quality monitoring identified organic chemicals at
non—hazardous levels. Sampling performed in conjunction with the remedial
investigation identified numerous organic and inorganic pollutants. The
total volume of waste is estimated to be 620,000 yd 3 . The primary
contaminants of concern affecting the shallow aquifer and overlying soil
include: inorganics (zinc, lead, copper, barium, chromium) and organics
(2—methynaphthalene, phenanthrene. bis(2—ethylhexyl)xylenes.
benzo(b)—fluoranine, benzo(a)anthylenepyrene phthalate).
The selected remedial action for this site includes: Ground water
extraction and onsite treatment in upper perched water bearing zone; RCRA
capping, site grading, surface water diversion, and air emissions
monitoring; installation of security fences and warning signs: and
implementation of ground water and air monitoring analysis programs. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $9,255,526 with annual
05.14 of $272,830.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Chemical—specific cleanup goals were not
specified.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEIWORDS : Air Monitoring; ARARS; Capping; Chromiuxe; Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Inorganics; Lead; O&M;
Onsite Disposal; Organics; RCRA; Soil; Surface Water Diversion/Collection;
Venting.
—67—
-------
CRYSTAL. CITY AIRPORT, TX
First Remedial Action — Final
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Crystal City Airport (CM) site, comprising approximately 120 acres,
is located in Zavala County, Texas. CCA began operations during World
War II as a military installation for transporting arid detailing persons of
Japanese descent. In 1949, the U.S. Government deeded the airport to
Crystal City. Since that time, the city has operated the facility as a
municipal airport. Several private companies conducted aerial
pesticide—applicating businesses at the airport until 1982. In April 1983,
the Texas Department of Water Resources investigated the site because of the
potential threat to local residents of waste pesticides left by aerial
applicators. These companies are no longer in operation. Surficial soil at
the site was found to be highly contaminated with pesticides. In October
1983, an Irmnediate Removal Action, initiated by EPA, consolidated 40 yd 3
of waste and 50—70 drums in two onsi.te disposal cells. In May 1984, a
second removal action disposed of 19 drums offsite and secured the site with
a fence. Approximately 12,000 yd 3 of surface soil are contaminated with
pesticides (DDT, toxaphene) and arsenic.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: onsite
consolidation of contaminated soil, drums, and buildings; multi—layer RCRA
capping; deep—well injection of decontamination liquids at an offsite well;
and fencing. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action is
$1,600,000 which includes OSM.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR ( OALS : Following remediation, total pesticides
will attain the 10—6 cancer risk level value of 100.0 mg/kg. Debris
cleanup will be based on visible inspection.
INSTITUTIONAL COWrROLIS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Capping; Direct Contact; Metals;
Municipally—Owned Site; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Onsite Disposal; Pesticides;
Public Exposure; RCRA Closure Requirements; Soil; Water Quality Criteria.
—68—
-------
GURL.EY PIT, AR
First Remedial Action
October 6, 1986
ROD ABSTRACT
The Gurley Pit site, located within the flood plain of the 15 Mile
Bayou, a tributary of the St. Francis river, is 1.2 miles north of Edxnondson
in Crittenden County, Arkansas. The site is contained on three sides by
soybean fields and slopes gently toward the Bayou. The site was a single
large pit originally created when a clay deposit was excavated for use as
construction material. Currently, the single pit is divided into three
cells by earthen dikes. From 1970 to 1975, the Gurley Refining Company
operated the pit under an Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and
Ecology (ADPCE) permit for the disposal of sludge and filter material from
the re—refining of used motor oil. Gurley Refining returned its permit in
December 1975 saying the waste disposal had stopped and the site was
secure. In May 1978, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reported that
overflows from the pit had damaged fish and waterbirds in the Bayou. The
15 Mile Bayou flooded in April 1979 and inundated the pit causing as much as
500,000 gallons of oil to escape from the pit into the surrounding fields
and Bayou. The primary contaminants of concern affecting approximately
432,470 ft 3 of sludge, soil, sediments, and oil contained in the pit are
lead, barium, zinc, and PCBs.
The selected remedial action includes: construction of an onsite pond
water treatment unit with discharge of treated pond water to 15 Mile Bayou;
removal of solid contaminants from pond water arfddisposal with the pit
sludge; removal of oil from the pond water by an oil/water separator to be
drun ned and incinerated in a PCB approved incinerator; excavation and
stabilization of pit sludge, sediments, and soil (stabilized materials will
be held onsite in the pit’s north cell); and onsite capping of stabilized
waste. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $5,780,000
with annual OEIZI of $21,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The remedy meets RCRA, Clean Air Act,
National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and Toxic Substances Control Act
criteria, chemical—specific cleanup levels were not specified. Treated
pond water discharge complies with NPDES permit requirements.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Clean Air Act; Direct Contact; Excavation; Flood
Plain; Incineration; Lead; Metals; O&M; Offsite Discharge; Offsite
Treatment; Oil; Onsite Contairunent; Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment;
Organics; POBs; RCRA; Sediments; Sludge; Soil; Stabilization; Surface Water;
Treatment Technology; Wetlands.
—69—
-------
HARDAGE/CRINER. OK
First Remedial. Action
November 14, 1986
ROD ABSTRACT
The Hardage/Criner site is located in McClain County, Oklahoma,
approximately 15 miles southwest of Norman, bklahoma. The area is
agricultural with land on all sides of the site used for cattle grazing.
From September 1972 to November 1980, the site was operated by the Royal
Hardage Industrial — Hazardous Wasteland and Disposal Facility, which was
permitted to accept all types of industrial and hazardous wastes except
radioactive materials. The types of waste included: oil, recycling wastes,
chlorinated solvents, styrene tars, acids, caustics, paint sludges. lead,
chromium, cyanide. arsenic, pesticides, nJcs, PCBs, and large quantities of
unknown wastes from injection wells and other facilities including what
became the rio and Bioecology Superfund sites. Originally two pits were
excavated. Liquids and sludges from drums and tank trucks were discharged
directly into these unlined pits which filled to capacity. Wastes from the
pits were transferred to temporary ponds and then piled on a sludge mound.
A total of 18,000,000 to 20,000.000 gallons of waste were disposed at the
site. In 1978, the State of Oklahoma filed complaints against the facility
for suspected lead poisoning of air around the site. In September 1979, the
Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) began proceedings to revoke the
facility permit for operating unpermitted pits. failure to seal permeable
lenses in the pits. improper closure of pits, failure to retain runoff, and.
improper storage of wastes. Site operations ceased in November 1980.
Royal Mardage undertook site decontamination and closure efforts, which
extended into 1982. These efforts included: mixing pit fluids with soil;
excavating visibly contanunated soils from mixing areas and temporary ponds;
capping the source areas with a soil cover; and consolidating wastes in the
source areas. The primary contaminants of concern to the soil and ground
water include: chlorinated solvents (j.,2—dichloroethane, 1.1,2—
trichloroethane, 1, 1—dichioroethene, tetrachioroethene, trichioroetherie),
lead, chromium, PCBs, and toxaphene.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of
approximately 180,000 yd 3 from the principal source areas (the drum mound,
main pit and sludge mound) to bedrock and separation of wastes; treatment
and disposal of solids in an onsite RCRA—constructed and operated landfill
cell; incineration of organic liquids; treatment and disposal of inorganic
liquids; and temporary closing of former source areas with residual
contamination until remedial action is selected under the second operable
unit. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $68,0]. .000
with present worth O&M of $2,282,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS CR GOALS : The selection of cleanup levels will be
addressed in the second operable unit. Soil—based cleanup levels are not
appropriate for this operable unit, which deals exclusively with the
concentrated pits and waste piles.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
—70—
-------
HARDAGE/CRINER, OK
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Ground Water; Incineration; Inorganics; Lead; Metals; O&M;
Onsite Disposal; Onsite Treatment; Organics; PCEs; PCEs; Pesticides; RCRA
Landfill Closure; Soil; TCE; Treatment Technology; VOCs.
—71—
-------
HIGHLANDS ACID PIT, TX
Second Remedial Action - Final
June 26, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Highlands Acid Pit site is located 16 miles east of Houston on a
6—acre peninsula in Harris County. Texas. The site is bordered on the west
and south by the San Jacinto River, on the north by a wooded area, and on
the east by a sand pit. The site lies within the 10—year flood plain and
has subsided 2.4 feet since 1964. An unknown quantity of industrial waste
sludge was disposed at the site in the l950s. The sludge is believed to be
spent sulfuric wastes from a refinery process. The June 1984 Record of
Decision (ROD) addressed the source of contanuriation. The 1984 ROD remedy
included: excavation of waste and soil over a 2.41—acre area down to the
water table, with transportation to a permitted Class 1 thsposal facility;
backfillirig of the area with clean fill; installation and operation of a
ground water monitoring system; and site maintenance. The majority of
information presented in the 1984 ROD was adequate for identifying ground
water reclamation alternatives for the Ground Water Feasibility Study
(January 1986), however, information on the subsurface environment was
inadequate to evaluate any corrective action for the shallow aquifer. The
integrity of the clay aqui.tard separating the upper and middle aquifers and
the full extent of ground water contamination were not investigated prior to
the Ground Water Study completed in April 1987. The exposure to risks
associated with organics, VOCs, and metals, which were present in the
shallow ground water upon completion of the 1984 ROD source removal, form
the basis for this second operable unit.
The selected remedial action for this site includes a no action remedy
with long—term ground water and surface water monitoring since the
contaminants of concern were not detected above criteria levels. The
estimated capital cost for this monitoring program is $4,700 with annual O&M
of $11,120 for year 1 and $6,980 for years 2—30.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Water quality criteria were used to
evaluate the effect of upper aquifer contaminants in the surface water. MCL
concentrations were used to evaluate the deeper portions of the aquifer.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
YWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Benzene; hromiuni; Clean Water Act; Flood Plain;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; MCLs; Metals; No Action Remedy; O&M;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Surface Water Monitoring; VOCs; Water Quality
Criteria.
—72—
-------
MID-SOUTH WOOD PRODUCTS. AR
First Remedial Action
November 14, 1986
ROD ABSTRACT
The Mid—South Wood Products site is located in Polk County, Arkansas
approximately 1/2 mile southwest of Mena, Arkansas. The 57—acre site
includes the following areas: the Old Plant site, the Small Old Pond and
Old Pond areas, the North and South t..andfarms, the landfill, Clear Lake and
an existing chromated copper arsenate CCCA) treatment plant. The Old Plant
site was used to treat wood with pentachiorophenol (PCP) and creosote. The
Small Old Pond was the original impoundment for waste PCP and creosote.
These two areas have been covered with soil. The Old Pond area was used to
store PCP and creosote sludge and has since been graded and covered with
soil; materials from the Old Pond were spread over the Landfarm areas and
mixed into the soil. The Landfill area contains deposits of sawdust,
woodchips, and other waste wood products. Clear Lake receives runoff from
all the above areas. The CCA treatment plant contains an ongoing wood
treating operation where the surface drainage from the plant is put in sumps.
The plant site was originally developed by a lumber company in the late
l930s as a post and pole production plant. In 1967, Edward Hines t.umber
Company purchased the plant and operated it as a PCP and creosote wood
treating plant until 1977 when the CCA treating process was first introduced
at the plant. In September 1978, Edward Hines Lumber Co. sold the plant to
Mid—South Wood Products, Inc. In estigation of the Mid—South Wood Products
site began in 1976 when several fish kills were reported in waterways
downstream of the site. The Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and
Ecology (ADPCE) tested the ground water, surface water, ponds, and three
wells. They found low levels of PC? in the wells, higher levels of PCP in
the surface water samples, and arsenic and chromium in the ground water and
surface water. In December 1981, ADPCE concluded that a contamination
problem existed and recommended initial remedial actions be taken.
Contaminants were found in the site surface soils, surface sediments,
surface water, and ground water. The primary contaminants of concern
include: creosote compounds (PAHs), PCP, CCA, arsenic, and chromium.
The selected remedial action includes: excavation of onsite
contaminated soils, with the exception of those existing in the Old Pond
area, and consolidation with the contaminated soils in the North Land.farni
area; stabilization of any free oil, liquid, or sludge found in the heavily
contaminated area of the Small Old Pond/Old Plant area and placement of
these wastes in the North L .andfarm area; grading and covering the
contaminated soils consolidated in the North Landfarm with RCRA top—soil
clay cap; investigation of the Old Pond area to locate any free oil,
liquids, or sludges and in—situ stabilization of these materials; RCRA
top—soil clay capping in the Old Pond area; remedial action at the CCA
treatment facility: completing installation of the french drain system at
—73—
-------
MID—SOUTH WOOD PRODUCTS, AR
First Remedial Action
(Continued)
the site and pumping water to the treatment system; and ground water
treatment using carbon filtration. Any ground water found to be
contaminated with inorganics will be treated by carbon filtration, then used
as makeup water for the CCA treatment facility. Oils and sludges collected
in the french drains will be disposed of in at EPA approved hazardous waste
disposal facility. Treated water from the ground water treatment facility
will be discharged to surface drainage; and a ground water monitoring system
will be installed. The estimated capital cost for this remedy is $3,500,000
with annual O&M of $153,500.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The cleanup criteria specify action levels
for arsenic and chromium to be set at any concentration that exceeds the
range of background concentrations (i.e.. arsenic >5.6 mg/kg and
chromium >19.4 mg/kg). Cleanup requirements for total carcinogenic PAR
compounds (3 mg/kg) will attain a lifetime cancer risk of i0 5 .
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Unspecified deed restrictions will be implemented.
I YWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Capping; Chromium; Deed Restrictions; Excavation;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Inorganics; Institutional Controls;
Oils; O&M; PAHs; RCRA; Sludge; Soil; Stabilization; Surface Water; Treatment
Technology.
—74—
-------
PETRO-Q ICAL SYSTEMS, TX
First Remedial Action
March 27, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Petro—Chemical Systems site is a 296—acre tract of land located in
Liberty County, Texas. It is in a sparsely populated area seven miles north
of 1—10 off Frontier Park Road. Waste oils were stored orisite prior to
their use, in several pits on approximately four to six acres of the site.
Records indicate that waste oils were spread on Frontier Park Road at the
site as a method of dust control. In June 1970, all waste oil disposal
operations were discontinued and, in 1974, the site’s commercial disposal
facility permit was withdrawn. The Texas Water Commission (TWC) and EPA
conducted preliminary investigations of the site in 1982 and 1984. Elevated
concentrations of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were found in the
former disposal pits. At the end of 1984, the site was placed on the
National Priorities List (NPL). Contamination has been identified in soil
along Frontier Park Road. The primary contaminants of concern include:
VOCs, PANs, benzene, and naphthalene. Benzene and naphthalene contamination
were found up to a maximum concentration of 2.100 mg/kg and 700 mg/kg,
respectively.
The selected remedial alternative includes: excavation of contaminated
soil to below 100 mg/kg PANs with temporary onsite RCRA storage; road
construction over -the excavated areas and existing roadway; and temporary
relocation of onsite residents during construction. The estimated capital
cost for the remedial action is $1,232,785 with annual O&M of $4,750.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Soil will be excavated to below 100.0 mg/kg
PARs or 100.0 mg/kg total VOCs.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARS; Benzene; Direct Contact; Excavation; Leachate
Collection/Treatment; O&M; Orgarucs; PAils; Relocation; Soil; VOCs.
—75—
-------
SAND SPRINGS PETROCH 1ICAL COMPLE C. OK
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Sand Springs Petrochemical Complex is a 235—acre site in Sand
Springs, Oklahoma on the northern bank of the Arkansas River. The site
includes acid sludge pits, a surface impoundment, spray ponds. solvent and
waste lagoons, surficial sludge contamination, solvent and waste oil
lagoons, and contaminated sediments. From the turn of the 20th century
through the 1940 g. the site operated as a refinery but has since been
developed into an industrial area, which now consists of an abandoned
solvent and waste oil recycler, an active transformer salvage/recycler,
active chemical manufacturers, and various other industries. The total
known waste volume is approximately 130,000 yd 3 . Sulfuric acid sludge
exists in unlined sludge pits and metal and organic wastes are contained in
the lagoons, pits, and spray ponds. While both soil and ground water are
contaminated, this first operable unit source control ROD addresses surface
liquids. sludges. and heavily contaminated soils. The primary contaminants
of concern include: bis(2—ethylhexyl)phthalate, toluene, lead, zinc,
chromium, and barium.
During the ROD’s public comment period, ARCO Petroleum Products Company,
one of the potentially responsible parties (PRPs), formally proposed a
privately—financed remedy for- the site, which is similar to an alternative
evaluated by EPA. The PRP will institute this alternate remedy and has
agreed to take further corrective action if EPA deems that the remedy has
not been effective. Components of ARCO’s proposed remedy include
excavation and offsite thermal destruction of sludges; solidification and/or
stabilization of all remaining sludges with containment of the resulting
matrix in a RCRA orisite hazardous waste cell; and implementation of henucal
and physical treatability studies. The estimated capital cost for this
remedial action is $37,453,050 with annual O& l of $15,000. PRP replacement
costs total $100,000,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Treatability tests for solidification
and/or stabilization will be performed to assure compliance with Federal and
State requirements. Chemical—specific treatment goals were not specified.
INSTtTtJTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
ICEYWORDS : ARMS; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Inorganics; Metals; O&Z4; Offsite Treatment; Onsite Containxnent
Organics; RCRA; Sludges; Soil; Solidification; Solvents; Stabilization;
State Criteria; Surface Water; Toluene; Treatability Studies; Treatment
Technology; VOCs.
—76—
-------
CONSERVATION CHEMICAL, MO
First Remedial Action — Final
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The 6—acre Conservation Chemical Company (CCC) site is situated on the
flood plain of the Missouri River near the confluence of the Missouri and
Blue Rivers within the city limits of Kansas City, Missouri. CCC initiated
its activities at the site in 1960, beginning with construction of chemical
tre thent basins, the process area, and a roadway ramp. Waste disposal
operations began at the site soon after site costruction was initiated and
continued until approximately 1980. The exact nature and quantities of
chemicals and wastes handled during the site’s active operating period are
unknown. Many site operating records are reported to have been destroyed in
a 1970 fire. Operating records indicate the primary materials accepted at
the CCC site include: organics, solvents, acids, caustics, metal
hydroxides. and cyanide compounds. Reports also indicate that pesticides,
herbicides, waste oils, organic solvents, halogenated compounds, arsenic,
and elemental phosphorus were handled at the site. In addition, there are
reports and evidence that pressurized cylinders and other metal containers
were placed in the lagoons. The facility handled liquids, sludges, and
solids. The above waste totals include 48.000,000 gallons of liquids and
sludges and 1,144 tons of solids. Because the records are incomplete, these
figures are believed to understate the total quantity of materials brought
to the site. Most of the materials reportedly brought to the site were
disposed of onsite, with or withou€treatment. CCC employed a variety of
waste handling practices. Residual materials from the various treatment
processes were generally disposed of onsite in the basins. Approximately
93.000 yd 3 of materials, including drums, bulk liquids, sludges, and
solids were burned at the site. In 1975, the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, Solid Waste Management Program (DNR/SWMP) investigated the site
and found it to be operating as a solid waste disposal area. In 1977, the
Missouri Clean Water Commission ordered the site closed and covered. At
present the site contains miscellaneous surface structures, such as tanks
and buildings, and six basins used for storage, treatment, and disposal of a
variety of chemicals, liquid wastes, and sludges. which are presently
covered. The primary contaminants affecting the soil and ground water
include: inorganics, organics, VOCs, metals, and dioxin.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: surface cleanup
including demolition and disposal of the existing building, tanks, and
debris; installation of a protective surface cap; ground water pump and
treatment using sulfide precipitation with discharge to the Missouri River;
and offsite ground water monitoring. The estimated capital cost for this
remedial action is $8,626,000 with estimated present worth O&M of
$12,774,111.
—77—
-------
CONSERVATION CHEMICAL, MO
First Remedial Action — Final
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The goal of this remedial action is to
restore ground water to drinking water quality through MCL. AWQC, and the
10—6 health—based risk level targets. Recommended MCL cleanup levels
include: arsenic 50.0 ugh; cadmium 10.0 ugh; total chromium 50.0 ugh;
lead 50.0 ugh; TCE 5.0 ugh; benzene 5.0 ugh; and vinyl chloride
2.0 ugh. The AWQC cleanup levels include nickel 13.4 ugh and zinc 5,000.0
ug/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Site access restrictions will be implemented.
KEYWORDS : Acids; ARARs; Capping; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Water Act;
Dioxin; Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Flood Plain; Ground
Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Institutional
Controls; MCLs; Metals; O&N; Offsite Discharge; Organics; Phenols; RCPA
Closure; Safe Drinking Water Act; Soil; Solvents; State Criteria; VOCs;
Water Quality Criteria.
—78—
-------
MINKER/STOLf /ROMAINE CREEK - ROMAINE CREEK. MO
Second Remedial Action
September 28, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Romaine Creek portion of the Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek site is
located in Jefferson County, Missouri, approximately 20 miles southwest of
St. Louis. Romaine Creek starts at the Minker area and flows 4.6 miles to
its confluence with Saline Creek. Romaine Creek is located in a rural
residential area, and is not used for municipal, industrial, or domestic
purposes. In the late l960s and early 1970g. a southwest Missouri chemical
plant producing 2,4,5—I and hexachiorophene contracted a waste oil reclaimer
to remove process residues. The residues, contaminated with
2 ,3 ,7,8—tetrachlorodibenzo—p—dioxin (TCDD) were mixed with waste oils and
sprayed as a dust suppressant on a nearby horse arena. In March of 1973,
the owner of the horse arena had the contaminated soils removed to various
portions of the Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek site. Approximately 120 yd 3 of
this soil was used as fill in a ravine on the MAker property and, since
1973, much has eroded into Romaine Creek. In 1982, contaminated soils above
1.0 ug/kg T DD were excavated from the Minker portion of the site. The
primary contaminant of concern is TCDD (dioxin).
The selected interim remedial measure for the Romaine Creek portion of
this site includes: excavation and temporary onsite storage of soil and
sediments contaminated with greater than 1 ug/kg TCDD (int rirn storage will
be utilized until a final dioxin management option can be selected); and
backfilling of the excavated areas with clean material suitable for the
establishment of a natural stream bed. The estimated present worth cost for
this remedial action is $4,488,000 with annual O&M of $28,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Soil and sediments will be excavated until
a residual TCDD concentration of less than 1.0 mg/kg remains. However,
excavation will not continue beyond a depth of 4 feet or reaching bedrock.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Dioxin; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Interim Remedy; 0&M; Onsite Containment; Public Exposure; RCRA;
Sediment; Soil; Surface Water; Temporary Onsite Storage.
—79—
-------
MINKER/STOLJT/ROMAINE CREEK - STOUT, MO
Third Remedial Action
September 28, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Stout portion of the Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek site is located on
West Swaller Road near Imperial, Missouri.. approximately 20 miles southwest
of St. Louis. The Stout portion consists of five private properties. three
of which have been purchased by EPA as part of a permanent relocation of
area residents. In the late l960s and early 1970s, a southwest Missouri
chemical plant producing 2,4,5—T and hexachlorophene contracted a waste oil
reclaimer to remove process residues. These residues, contaminated with
2,3,7,8—tetrachlorodibenzo—p—dioxi.n (TCDD), were mixed with waste oils and
sprayed as a dust suppressant on a nearby horse arena. In March of 1983,
the horse arena owner had the contaminated soils removed to various portions
of the Minker/Stout/Romaine Creek site. Approximately 700 yd 3 of this
soil was used as fill in the Stout area, near two mobile homes. In 1982,
EPA sampling revealed high concentrations of TCDD in onsite soils. t..ater
that year.. three of the five properties making up the Stout portion were
purchased by EPA and the residents were permanently relocated. No removal
of contaminated soil has been performed to date. The primary contaminant of
concern is TCDD (dioxin).
The selected interim remedial measure for the Stout portion of this site
includes :-—excavation and temporary onsite storage of soils contaminated—
with greater than 1.0 ug/kg TCDD (interim storage will be utilized until a
final dioxin management option can be selected); and backfilling and
revegetation of the excavated areas with clean materials. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is $5,817,000—$7.0l8 ,000 with
annual O&M of $6,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS CR GOALS : Soil will be excavated until a residual
TCDD concentration of less than 1.0 mg/kg remains. However, excavation will
not continue beyond a depth of 4 feet or reaching bedrock.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Site access will be restricted and warning signs
will be posted.
1 YWORDS : ARARS; Carcinogenic Compounds; Dioxin; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Interim Remedy; Institutional Controls; O&M; Onsite Containment;
Public Exposure; RCRA; Relocation; Soil; Temporary Onsite Storage.
—80—
-------
CENTRAL CITY/CLEAR CREEK, CO
First Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Central City/Clear Creek site is located in Clear Creek County and
Gilpin County in the Colorado Mineral Belts, Colorado. More specifically,
the focus is on five abandoned mines/tunnels proximal to the cities of Idaho
Springs. Black Hawk, and Central City and the influence of acid mine
drainage from those tunnels on adjacent stream courses. Surface water
contamination results from acid mine drainage emanating from the five
tunnels. Approximately 1,200 lbs per year of dissolved and suspended metals
are discharged to the Clear Creek drainage from the five mine tunnels.
These dissolved and suspended metal loadings have resulted in a significant
depletion of aquatic life and have potential impact to sediments and
downstream user3 of surface water and ground water. The ten contaminants of
concern include: aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, fluoride.
lead. rt anganese. nickel, silver, and zinc.
The selected interim remedial action for this site includes construction
of passive treatment systems to treat mine tunnel discharge prior to
discharge to surface water. This is the preferred alternative and is
contingent upon results of ongoing pilot plant studies. If water quality
criteria concentrations cannot be achieved by passive treatment, either a
combination system of passive and active treatment systems will be
constructed or an active treatment system will be constructed to treat mine
tunnel discharge. The estimated capital cost is $1,663,000 (passive
treatment) with annual O&M of $115,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Upstream water quality criteria concen-
trations will be used as operational standards for this interim remedy.
This remedy is an interim solution for the overall site. Compliance with
contaminant—specific ARARs will be addressed in future operable units.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
! YWORDS : ARARs; Arsenic; Chromium; Ground Water; Interim Remedy; Metals;
O&M; Offsite Discharge; RCRA; State Criteria; Surface Water; Treatability
Studies.
—81—
-------
D 1VER RADIUM 1/12TH AND QUIVAS, CO
Fourth Remedial Action
September 29. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Denver Radium site, located in Denver, Colorado, consists of more
than 40 contaminated properties. These properties have been grouped into
eleven operable units. This operable unit consists of five Denver Radium
site properties which are known collectively as the 12th and Quivas
properties. The 12th and Quivas property site consists of approximately
8.1 acres in an industrial use area. In 1979, EPA noted a reference to the
National Radium Institute (NRI) in a 1916 U.S. Bureau of Mines report. This
reference revealed the presence of 31 radioactive sites in the Denver
metropolitan area. In 1913, the NRI was established in Denver as a domestic
source of radium which was in high demand as a wonder drug for the treatment
of cancer. Subsequently. the Denver radium, vanadium, and uranium industry
thrived until the early 1920s. when rich deposits of ore were discovered in
Africa. The Pittsburgh Radium Company (PRC). a division of the National
Vanadium Products Company. refined ore on Quivas Street until 1924 and is
considered the source of contamination on the five 12th and Quivas
properties. There is no serious public health risk at present from radium
and its associated decay products. However, since radium has a half—life of
1,600 years, there is a long—term potential for increased public health risk
if the contaminated media and debris were to be misused or inadvertently
spread. The primary contaminants of concern affecting approximately
11,000 yd 3 of soil is radium an .rts associated decay products.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: capping open areas
of soil contamination (7,6CC yd 3 ); excavation of contaminated soil lying
under structures on the properties (3,400 yd 3 ) and placing this material
into an onsite temporary storage facility; maintenance of the cap and
temporary storage facility until a facility suitable for the permanent
disposal of Denver Radium site waste becomes available; and final offsite
disposal of the contaminated material to a permanent disposal facility. The
estimated present worth cost for this remedial action is $3,702,800 with
5—year O&M of $290,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The selected remedy meets EPA Standards for
suRemedial Action at Inactive Uranium Processing Sites’. The concentration
of radium—226 in land averaged over any area of 100 m 2 shall not exceed
the background level by more than 5 pCi/g , averaged over the first 15 cm of
soil below the surface and 15 pCi/g and averaged over 15 cm thick layers of
soil more than 15 cm below the surface. Average annual radon decay product
concentrations will not exceed 0.02 WL. The level of gamma radiation will
not exceed the background level by more than 20 uR/hr.
—82—
-------
DENVER RADIUM 1/12TH & QUIVAS, Co
Fourth Remedial Action
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air; ARMs; Capping; Debris; Direct Contact; Excavation; Interim
Remedy; Offsite Disposal; O&M; Public Exposure; Radioactive Materials; Soil;
Temporary Onsite Storage.
—83—
-------
DENVER RADITJM 11/11th & UMATILLA, CO
Fifth Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Denver Radium site, located in Denver. Colorado. consists of more
than 40 contaminated properties. These properties have been grouped into
eleven operable units. This operable unit consists of eleven Denver Radium
site properties which are i own collectively as the 11th and Urnatilla
properties. The 11th and tJmatilla properties site consists of approximately
24 acres in an area zoned for heavy industrial use. Two—thirds of the 11th
and Umatilla properties are located within the designated 100—year flood
plain. In 1979, EPA noted a reference to the National Radium Institute
(NRI) in a 1916 U.S. Bureau of Mines report. This reference revealed the
presence of 31 radioactive sites in the Denver metropolitan area. In 1913,
the NRI was established in Denver as a domestic source of radium, which was
in high demand as a wonder drug for the treatment of cancer. Subsequently,
the Denver radium, vanadium, and uranium industry thrived until the early
1920s, when rich deposits of ore were discovered in Africa. The Schlesinger
Radium Company and its successor, Radium Company of Colorado, produced
radium on the 11th and tlrnatilla properties from 1915 to 1921, and is
considered to be the source of contamination of the eleven 11th and Umatilla
properties. There are approximately 15,400 yd 3 of contaminated material
of which 1.000 yd 3 lie under structures and material and 11 ft 2 consist
of contaminated—roofing from the Rocky Mountain Resea-rch—building. The
primary contaminants of concern are radium, radon gas. and radon decay
products. At present. no serious public health risk from radon decay
exposure exists. However, a significant increase in risk would occur if any
of the contaminated material and debris were to be misused or inadvertently
spread.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of
contaminated soil from open areas and from under buildings and placement
into an onsite temporary storage facility; decontaminating the roof in the
Rocky Mountain Research building (approximately 11 ft 2 ) and placement in
the temporary onsite facility; maintenance of an existing concrete cap; and
maintenance of the temporary storage facility until a facility suitable for
the permanent disposal of site wastes becomes available; and final offsite
disposal of the contaminated material (15,400 yd 3 ) to a permanent disposal
facility. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action is
$4,230,300 with 5—year present worth O&M of $194,700.
P FORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS : The selected remedy meets EPA standards for
“Remedial Action at Inactive Uranium Processing sites.” The concentration
of radium—226 in land averaged over any area of 100 m 2 shall not exceed
the background level by more than 5 pCi/g averaged over the first 15 cm of
soil below the surface and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm below the surface.
Average annual radon decay product concentrations will not exceed 0.02 WL.
The level of ganm a radiation will not exceed 0.02 WI. The level of gamma
radiation will not exceed the background level by more than 20 uR/hr.
-84—
-------
DENVER RADIUM 11/11th & UMATILLA. Co
Fifth Remdial Actior
(Continued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air; ARI’.Rs; Debris; Direct Contact; Excavation; Flood Plain;
Interim Remedy; O 1; Offsite Disposal; Public Exposure; Radioactive
Materials; Soil; Ten porary Onsite Storage.
—85—
-------
D JVER RADIUM III, CO
Fifth Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Denver Radium site. located in Denver, Colorado, consists of more
than 40 contaminated properties that have been grouped into operable units.
This is the fifth operable unit of the Denver Radium site for which EPA has
selected a remedy and is comprised of the 3.4—acre 1,000 West Louisiana
vacant lot and the 0.46—acre Creative Illumination property, as well as two
contiguous properties, the Packaging Corporation of America and the Colorado
Southern Railroad (CSR). A property adjacent to the railroad, Titian
Labels, Inc., is included in all discussions of the CSR property. The
properties cover approximately 11 acres in an area zoned for industrial
use. In 1979, EPA noted a reference to the National Radium Institute ( TRI)
in the 1916 Bureau of Mines report. This reference revealed the presence of
31 radioactive sites in the Denver metropolitan area. In 1913, WRI was
established in Denver as a domestic source of radium, which was in high
demand as a wonder drug for the treatment of cancer. Subsequently, the
Denver radium, vanadium, and uranium industry thrived until the early 1920s,
when rich deposits of ore were discovered in Africa. Subsequent field
research revealed the presence of 31 radioactive sites in the Denver
metropolitan area, two of which are now included with the 1,000 West
Louisiana properties. Immediately after identifying these properties, the
Radiation Control Division of the Co-lerado Department of Health notified the—
affected property owners of the presence of radiological contamination on
their properties. The letters requested that no excavation or soil movement
be undertaken without first contacting the division. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting 16,000 yd 3 of soil and debris are radium
and its associated decay products.
EPA’s preferred remedial action for this site is permanent offsite
disposal. However, until a facility suitable for permanent disposal of the
1,000 West Louisiana properties material is designated and, if necessary,
acquired and developed, this alternative cannot be implemented. The State
of Colorado estimates facility selection to take up to five years to
complete. The selected remedial action for this site is temporary storage
on the Card Corporation property which includes: cleanup of the Creative
Illumination property with storage of approximately 200 yd 3 of
contaminated material; excavation of the contaminated soil remaining on the
1,000 West Louisiana properties with consolidation and capping on the vacant
lot at 1,000 West Louisiana Avenue; capping and storage facility
maintenance, until a suitable permanent offsite facility becomes available;
and final removal of the contaminated material from both properties to the
permanent disposal facility. The estimated capital cost for this remedial
action is $2,172,800 with 5—year present worth O&M of 5305.800.
—86—
-------
DENVER RADIUM III, Co
Fifth Remedial Action
(Continued)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The selected remedy meets EPA Standards for
“Remedial Action at Inactive Uranium Processing Sites”. The concentration
of radiuxn—226 in land averaged over any area of 100 in 2 shall not exceed
the background level by more than 5 pCilg averaged over the first 15 cm of
soil below the surface and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm—thick layers of soil
more than 15 cm below the surface. Average annual radon decay product
concentrations will not exceed 0.02 WL. The level of gamma radiation will
not exceed the background level by more than 20 uR/hr.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Air; ARARs; Capping; Containment; Debris; Direct Contact;
Excavation; Interim Remedy; O&M; Offsite Disposal; Onsite Containment;
Onsite Disposal; Public Exposure; Radioactive Materials; Soil; Temporary
Onsite Storage.
—87—
-------
DENVER RADIUM/CARD PROPERTY, Co
Third Remedial Action
June 30. 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Denver Radium/Card Corporation property is a 17.2—acre site located
in Denver, Colorado. In 1979. EPA discovered a reference to the !‘Jational
Radium Institute in a 1916 U.S. Bureau of Mines report. Subsequent field
research revealed the presence of 31 radioactive sites in the Denver
metropolitan area, one of these being the Card property, the location of the
original Pittsburgh Radium Company processing facility. The site consists
of five buildings and an oil and waste water pond at the eastern boundary.
Currently. no serious public health risk is present from radium, radon gas,
or radium decay products. However, there is the potential for increased
public health risk if the radium contaminated materials are misused or
inadvertently spread. Currently . the primary contaminant of concern is
radium w uch has been detected in the soil, sediment and underneath the
Brick Commercial and UPL building.
EPA’S preferred remedial action for the Card property is permanent
offsite disposal. However, before this alternative can be implemented a
suitable offsite facility must be designated. In the interim, the selected
remedial action for this site includes: temporary onsite storage;
excavation of approximately 4.000 yd 3 of radium—contaminated soil and
sediment; storage of the contaminated material within reinforced synthetic
bags placed within the True Truss building and within possible additions to
the building; optional staging or storage of contaminated material from
selected other Denver Radium site properties on the Card property; final
offsite disposal of all contaminated material to a facility suitable for the
permanent waste disposal; and decontamination and dismantling of True Truss
building, and any additions, with disposal of the material in a sanitary
landfill. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action is
$1,148,000 with present worth O&Z4 of $89,500.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The selected remedy meets EPA Standards
from “Remedial Action at Inactive Uranium Processing Sites”. The
concentration of radium—226 in land averaged over any area of 100 m 2 shall
not exceed the background level by more than 5 pCi/g averaged over the first
15 cm of soil below the surface and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm thick
layers of soil more than 15 cm below the surface. Average annual radon
decay product concentrations will not exceed 0.02 WL. The level of gamma
radiation will not exceed the background level by more than 20 uR/hr.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air; ARARs; Debris; Excavation; Interim Remedy; O&M; Offsite
Disposal; Public Exposure; Radioactive Materials; Sediments; Soil; Temporary
Onsite Storage.
—88—
-------
DENVER RADIUM/OPEN SPACE, CO
Seventh Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Denver Radium site, located in Denver, Colorado, consists of more
than 40 contaminated properties. These properties have been grouped into
eleven operable units. This operable unit consists of eleven Denver Radium
properties in an industrial use area, which are known collectively as Open
Space properties. Three of the properties lie within the designated
100—year flood plain. In 1979, EPA noted a reference to the National Radium
Institute (NRI) in the 1916 Bureau of Mines report. This reference revealed
the presence of 3]. radioactive sites in the Denver metropolitan area. In
1913, the NRI was established in Denver as a domestic source of radium.
which was in high demand as a wonder drug for the treatment of cancer.
Subsequently. the Denver radium, vanadium, and uranium industry thrived
until the early 1920s, when rich deposits of ore were discovered in Africa.
Records indicate that one source of contamination at the Open Space
properties results from the radium, vanadium, and vranium processing
conducted by the National Radium Corporation, Radium Company of Colorado,
Schlesinger Radium Company, and Rocky Mountain Radium Products Company.
Additionally, the Allied property, a 21.5—acre portion of the Open Space
properties site, contains contaminated fill brought in from an unknown
construction site in the early 1960s. The Brannan property, a 47.5—acre
portion of the site, is suspected to contain radiological hospital waste.
Other sources of radioactive materials present at the site have not
been determined. Although presently no serious public health risk from
radon decay product exposure exists, a significant increase in risk could
occur if the contaminated materials were to be misused or inadvertently
spread.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: onsite temporary
containment (capping) of approximately 4,320 ft 2 (290 yd 3 ) of
contaminated material followed by offsite permanent disposal consisting of
cap removal, excavation, and offsite transportation; and removal of
approximately 1,020 yd 3 of material with placement in containers and
offsite disposal at the Card Corporation Property, until an offsite
permanent disposal facility becomes available. At that time, the temporary
storage facility on the Card Corporation property will be decontaminated
and, if necessary, dismantled and disposed of at an offsite solid waste
disposal facility. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial
action is $955,400, which includes 5—year O&M.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The selected remedy meets EPA Standards
from “Remedial Action at Inactive Uranium Processing Sites”. The
concentration of radium—226 in land averaged over any area of 100 m 2 shall
not exceed the background level by more than 5 pCi/g averaged over the first
15 cm of soil below the surface and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm thick
layers of soil more than 15 cm below the surface. Average annual radon
decay product concentrations will not exceed 0.02 WL. The level of gamma
radiation will not exceed the background level by more than 20 uR/hr.
—89—
-------
DENVER RADIUM/OPEN SPACE, Co
Seventh Remedial Action
(Cont .tnued)
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : The city and county of Denver wi.ll improve existing
institutional controls so that routine maintenance, repaLr, construction, or
removal activities in the Alley will be monitored.
KEYWORDS : Air; ARARs; Capping; Debris; Direct Contact; Excavation; Flood
Plain; Institutional Controls; Interim Remedy; O&N; Offsite Disposal; Public
Exposure; Radioactive Materials; Soil; Temporary Onsite Storage.
—90—
-------
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL, CO
First Remedial Action
June 4, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA) is a facility owned and operated by the
U.S. Ar ny. It was established in 1942 with the primary mission of
manufacturing and assembling chemical and incendiary munitions to support
the war effort. Pesticides and herbicides were then produced “on—post” by
private leases. Many of these substances, their by—products and residues
were later disposed of on—post. The RMA off—post site is located northeast
of downtown Denver. Colorado, adjacent to RMA. The area is almost
completely developed with residential subdivisions, industrial facilities,
and gravel operations. South Adams County Water and Sanitation District
(SACWSD) was created in 1953 to supply approximately 30,000 customers with
well water from the alluvium and bedrock. Recent studies by EPA and SACWSD
indicate that significant concentrations of organic solvents are present in
the local and regional ground water system, which is the main source of
drinking water for SACWSD. This operable unit addresses treatment or
replacement of contaminated ground water within the RZIA off—post site prior
to its use as drinking water by customers of the SACWSD. The primary
contaminants of concern to the ground water supplying the SACWSD wells
include: TCE, ?CE, 1,1,1—trichioroethane, 1,l—dichloroethane,
1.1—dichloroethylene. and trans—1,2—dichioroethylene. Other volatile,
semi—volatile, and non—volatile organic compounds are present in the ground
water in areas adjacent to RMA’s off—post site, but have not been detected
in SACWSD supply wells to date. Vinyl chloride has also been detected
upgradient from the SACWSD wells.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: construction of a
granular activated carbon (GAC) water treatment system with regeriera:iori of
spent carbon at another location; modification of the GAC system, if
necessary, to include an air stripping facility to treat vinyl chloride;
replacement of existing well pumps and motors; installation of transmission
piping; and construction of laboratory and office space to ensure that the
remedy operates effectively. The estimated capital cost for the GAC system
is $8,869,000 or $10,100,000 (air stripping) with annual O&M of $372,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Treatment will attain MCLs which include:
1,l—dichloroethylene 0.007 mg/i; TCE 0.005 mg/l; POE 0.005 mg/i;
1 , .1,i—trichloroethane (TCA) 0.200 mg/i; 1.1—dichloroethylene 0.007 mg/i;
trans—1 ,2—dichloroethylene 0.005 mg/i; and vinyl chloride 0.001 mg/i.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Excavation; Granular Activated Carbon; Ground Water; Ground
Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Onsite Treatment; MCLs; O&M;
Organics; POE; ICE; VOCs.
—91—
-------
L ITC ’IELD AIRPORT, AZ
First Remedial Action
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The E itchfield Airport site, also known as Phoenix—Goodyear Airport
(PGA). covers a total area of approximately 35 square miles, and is located
approximately 17 miles west of Phoenix, Arizona. The site is divided into a
northern and a southern area by a ground water divide running under the Yuxna
Road area. Section 16 (approximately 17 acres) lies in the southern area
and includes the t.oral Corporation facility (formerly owned by Goodyear
Aerospace Corporation) and the Phoenix—Goodyear Airport (formerly owned by
the U.S. Navy), both being potential sources of VOC contamination. Ground
water contaminant concentrations in Section 16 are at least 100 times
greater than down gradient levels. Development by the City of Goodyear is
planned for the area west or downgradient of Section 16. This development
will include using the ground water resources currently threatened by the
contamination in Section 16. In 1981, the Arizona Department of Health
Services discovered solvent and chromium contamination in the ground water
within the PGA area. Additional sampling in 1982 and 1983 found 18 wells
contaminated with TCE. The primary contaminants of concern include: TCE,
VOCs, and chromium.
The selected interim remedial action for this site includes: ground
water pump and treatment from the Subunit A aquifer of the entire Section 16
area by air stripping with reinjection of the stripped water back into the
Subunit A aquifer; and Loral Corporation and PGA will continue to pump
ground water from Subunit B/C and treat with granular activated carbon. The
estimated present worth cost for this selected remedy is $2,358,500 with O&N
of $800,200.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water treatment will meet the MC I 4
values for TCE 5.0 ug/l, 1,l,1—trichloroethane 200.0 ug/l,
1,1—dichloroethylene 7.0 ug/l, carbon tetrachioride 5.0 ug/l, chromium
50.0 ug/l, arM arsenic 50.0 ugh. Chloroform will meet the water quality
criteria value of 0.5 ug/l.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Air Stripping; ARARs; Arsenic; Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium;
Direct Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Granular Activated Carbon;
Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; Interim
Remedy; MCLs; O&M; Onsite Discharge; Public Exposure; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Solvents; State Criteria; TCE, VOCs; Water Quality Criteria.
—92—
-------
OPERATING INDUSTRIES, CA
First Remedial Action
July 31, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Operating Industries, Inc. (011) site, consisting of a 190—acre
landfill, is located in Monterey Park, California. From 1.948 to 1952, the
site was used to dispose of municipal garbage by the City of Monterey Park.
Prior to 1948, the site and surrounding areas were quarried for sands and
gravels. Between 1952 and 1984, under the private ownership of 011, the
landfill received municipal and industrial liquid and sludge wastes. The
construction of a freeway in 1974 split the landfill into a north and south
parcel. By June 1975, waste disposal operations curtailed in the northern
parcel, limiting operations to the area south of the freeway. In 1954, the
Regional Water Quality Control Board permitted disposal of liquids at the
site. Some of these liquids, and some liquid industrial wastes disposed
prior to the Board s permit. are considered hazardous by current statutes
and regulations. In 1975, a 32—acre area in the southern parcel was
permitted to accept Class 11—1 wastes. Waste disposal. operations ceased in
October 1984. In 1979, Getty Synthetic Fuels, Enc.(GSF), having established
a contractual relationship with 011 for the extraction of gas from the
landfill, began gas processing activities (CPA). EPA took over operations
of the GPA in June 1987 following a decision by GSF to abandon activities at
the landfill. EPA has been conducting site control and monitoring
activities at the site since May 1986. Additionally, EPA has conducted a
number of emergency actions to mitigate potential threats to public health
and the environment. Leachate generated at the site is a hazardous waste as
defined by RCRA regulations and contains VOCs including TCE, vinyl chloride,
berizene, and toluene.
The selected remedial action for this site includes site control and
monitoring activities. The first control component is operation and consists
of opening/closing valves, starting motors and other mechanical functions.
Maintenance is the second control component and can consist of repairs to
existing systems or preventative maintenance and improvements. Gas wells
and leachate pumping and collection will be monitored. The estimated
present worth cost for this interim remedy is $5,100,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR COALS : Cleanup goals will be met in the final
remedial action for the Oil site.
INSTITUTIONAL C0NTROL S : Previously implemented site access restrictions
will continue under this interim site remedy.
YWORDS : Air Monitoring; Benzene; Interim Remedy; O&M; Organics; TCE;
Toluene; VOCs.
—93—
-------
SAM FERNANDO AREA 1, CA
First Remedial Action
September 24, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The North Hollywood—Burbank Well Field (NHBWF) is one of four MPL sites
in San Fernando Valley, California. It is located within the San Fernando
Valley Ground Water Basin, which can provide drinking water for
approximately 500,000 people residing in the San Fernando Valley and Los
Angeles. The NHBWF, operated by the Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power (DWP), provides drinking water to the City of Los Angeles. l x i 1980,
TCE and PCE were discovered in 25 percent of DWP’s wells. In July 1981, DWP
and the Southern California Association of Governments began a two—year
study funded by EPA. The study revealed the occurrence of ground water
contamination plume patterns that are spreading toward the southeast.
Following the completion of the study. DWP began a program to control the
spread of contamination, which included preferential pumping and blending of
the contaminated ground water with uncontaminated surface water supplies.
The primary contaminant of concern to the ground water is TCE, with PCE and
other VOCs present.
The selected remedial action for this site is ground water pump and
treatment using aeration and granular activated carbon—air filtering units
with discharge to the DWP Pumping Station for chlorination and
distribution. Spent carbon will be removed and replaced with fresh carbon.
The spent carbon will be scheduled either for disposal or regeneration. The
estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $2,192,895 with present
worth O&M of $2.284.105.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The recommended chemical-specific cleanup
level is the MCL for TCE 5.0 ugh and the State Action Level for PCE
4.0 ugh. These levels were selected because they are attainable and
provide a level of public health protection equivalent to that required in
all public drinking water systems.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : Aeration; ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean Air Act; Direct
Contact; Drinking Water Contaminants; Granular Activated Carbon; Ground
Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; MCLs; O&M; Offsite
Discharge; Onsite Treatment; PCE; Plume Management; RCRA; Safe Drinking
Water Act; State Criteria; TCE; VOCs.
—94—
-------
SAN GABRIEL AREA I, CA
First Remedial Action
September 30, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
San Gabriel Area 1, of the San Gabriel Ground Water Basin, is located
primarily underneath the City of El Monte, Los Angeles County, California.
In 1980, the State of California conducted an extensive well water testing
program in the San Gabriel basin and found numerous wells contaminated with
TCE. POE. and other chlorinated hydrocarbons. As a result, the California
Department of Health Services (DM5) directed area public water companies to
implement periodic well testing. State action levels for TCE and POE were
set at 5 and 4 ugh (ppb), respectively. If alternative methods of reducing
TCE and POE concentrations below the action levels were not effective, wells
would be removed from service. In 1983, when EPA became involved in
addressing the problem, three mutual water companies. Richwood, Rurban
Homes, and Hemlock, had no alternate water supply and had been providing
their customers with POE contaminated water above the DHS action level. In
May 1984, a ROD was signed selecting air stripping treatment as the most
cost—effective initial remedial measure to provide the three mutual water
companies in El Monte with a source of uncontaminated water. During the
design phase of the measure. it became apparent that the cost to construct
and operate air stripping systems would be much higher than estimated in the
Focused Feasibility Study and the ROD due to the severe site constraints
associated with these systems. As a result, revised cost estimates have
been—developed for all of the ROD’s alternatives. Based on these revised
costs and other factors, EPA has determined that carbon adsorption treatment
is now the cost—effective alternative to treat the contaminated ground
water. The primary contaminants of concern are VOCs. including POE.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: installation of an
activated carbon adsorption system for treatment of well discharge at the
Richwood Mutual Water Company; completion of the design and development of
bid documents for the Rurban Homes system, monitoring of this system with
implementation of a carbon adsorption system if monitoring results show an
increase in well contaminant levels; and, if necessary, upgrading the
Hemlock system. The estimated capital cost for this remedial action is
$l,616.100—$l,771 ,800 with annual O&M of $181.400—5303,100.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : No MCL exists yet for POE. The standard
detection unit for POE analyzed in conformance with EPA Method 601 for
purgable halocarbons is 1.0 ugh. The recommended alternative will reduce
POE levels to below this detection limit.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Direct Contact; Drinking Water
Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment;
O&M; POE; Publicaly—Owned Treatment Works; State Criteria; VOCs.
—95—
-------
STRINGFELLCW ACID PITS, CA
Second Remedial Action
June 25, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Stringfeliov site is located in Riverside County, California,
approximately one mile north of the community of Glen Avon. Between August
1956 and November 1972, the Stringfeiiow Quarry Company operated a hazardous
waste disposal facility at the site. Approximately 34,000.000 gallons of
industrial waste, primarily from metal finishing, electroplating. and DDT
production were deposited in onsite evaporation ponds. Spray evaporation
procedures were used to accelerate volume reduction of pond contents. In
1972, the site was voluntarily closed. In 1969 and 1978, excessive rainfall
caused the disposal ponds to overflow into Glen Avon. In 1980 and 1981, the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) implemented an
Interim Abatement Program at the site, as the first phase of site closure.
The program included removal of all surface liquids, partial neutralization
and capping of wastes, installation of a gravel drain and an onsite
downgradient well network, surface water diversion channels, and
construction of a downgradient clay core barrier dam and ieachate collection
system. A July 1984 Record of Decision approved the installation of an
onsite ground water facility using lime precipitation for heavy metals
followed by granular activated carbon treatment for the removal of orgarucs.
with initial discharge to POTW and final discharge to the ocean. The primary
contaminants of concern affecting onsite and downgradient ground water
include: VOCs, TCE, organics, inorgaru.cs. and metals.
The selected remedial action for this site includes installation of a
ground water barrier system in the lower canyon area and treatment of
extracted ground water, if necessary, followed by discharge to a POTW;
installation of a peripheral channel around the north end of the original
site to direct upgradient surface water runoff; and extension of the
existing gunite channels southward to discharge surface water to Pyrite
Creek. The estimated capital cost for the selected reme4y is
$1,047.000—$1,136,000 with annual O&M of $l ,243 ,000—$].,408.000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : The Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority
(SAWPA) permit water quality limitations for discharge to the SARI sewer
line include: arsenic 2.0 mg/i; cadmium 0.064 mg/i; chromium 2.0 mg/i;
lead 0.58 mg/i; total toxic organics (excluding PCBs and pesticides)
0.58 mg/i; and PCBs and pesticides 0.02 mg/i.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
KEYWORDS : ARARs: Carcinogenic Compounds; Chromium; Clean Water Act; Direct
Contact; Ground Water; Ground Water Treatment: Inorganics: Interim Remedy;
Lead; Metals; O&N; Offsite Discharge; Onsite Treatment; Organics;
Pesticides; Publicly—Owned Treatment Works; RCRA State Criteria; Surface
Water Diversion; TCE; VOCs.
—96—
-------
COLBERT LANDFILL. WA
First Remedial Action — Final
September 29, 1987
ROD ABSTRACT
The Colbert Landfill, a 40—acre, county—owned, sanitary landfill, is
located in Spokane County, Washington. From 1968 through 1986, the landfill
received both municipal and commercial wastes. From 1975 to 1980, a local
electronics manufacturing company, Key Tronic Corporation, disposed of
several hundred gallons per month of spent organic solvents, mainly
methylene chloride and 1,1,l—trichloroethane (TCA) at the landfill. These
wastes were typically brought to the landfill in drums and poured down the
sides of open trenches to mix with the soil or ordinary municipal refuse
already in the trench. During the same period Fairchild Air Force Base
disposed of various solvent wastes at the site. Pesticides and refinery tar
residues were also disposed onsi.te. but to date. these contaminants have not
been detected in the ground water. In 1980, nearby residents complained to
the Eastern Regional Office of the Washington Department of Ecology about
these disposal practices. Investigation of these complaints led to the
discovery of nearby private well contamination with TCA. In June 1984, an
Initial Remedial Measure (IRM) was developed to extend the public water
supply mains to affected residents. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water are VOCs (TCA. 1.1—dichioroethylene,
1,l—dichloroethane, TCE, methylchloride).
The selected remedial action for this site includes: installation and
operation of interception and extraction wells; onsite ground water
treatment; and implementation of an alternate water supply. The estimated
present worth cost for this remedial action is $24,000,000 with no O&M
specified.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS : Ground water treatment will reduce
contaminant levels to MC.. values or less, or to within the 10—6 cancer
risk level value. Specific goals include: TCA 200.0 ug/].;
1,1—dich1oroe hylene 7.0 ug/l; 1,1—dichioroethane 4,050.0 ug/l;
TCE 5.0 ug/l; ‘tetrachioroethylene 0.7 ugh; and rnethylene chloride 2.5 ugh.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS : Not applicable.
I YWORDS : Alternate Water Supply; ARARs; Carcinogenic Compounds; Clean
Water Act; Drinking Water Contaminants; Ground Water; Ground Water
Monitoring; Ground Water Treatment; O&M; Onsite Treatment; PCE; Safe
Drinking Water Act; State Criteria; TCE; VOCs.
—97—
-------
SECTION III
RECORDS OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
FY 1987
The FY 1987 Record of Decision (ROD) Summary Table provides an
overview of site problems, selected remedies, cleanup criteria and estimated
costs provided in the RODs signed during FY 1987. The table is presented by
Region, in alphabetical order according to the site name.
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
09/29/87 1st Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs, inorganics,
and organics
01/16/87 1st— Soil, sediments 1
Final and GW contaminated
with VOCs including
TCE, organics
including PCBs,
and inorganics
Re—Solve, MA 09/24/81 2nd— Soil 1 sediments,
Final and GW contaminated
with VOCs, and
organics including
PC8s
25,000 yd 3 Excavation and onsite
incineration of raw
wastes and contaminated
soils with backfilling
of treated soils not EP
toxic; onsite disposal
of EP toxic treated
soils in RCRA landfill;
GW pump and treatment
using air stripping and
carbon adsorption with
reinjection; and
provision of an
alternate water supply
for nearby residences
19,000 yd 3 Onsite iqclneration of
5 .000 yd 3 soil and
sediments with
20 mg/kg PCBs; aerat—
ion of 14,000 yd 3 of
soils >20 mg/kg PC8s and
>1 mg/kg total VOCs; GW
pump and treatment
using air stripping.
biological treatment,
and ion—exchange with
reinjection; and onsite
backfilling of all
residuals with grading
and covering
Excavation with KPEG
dechlorination and
onsite pl4cement of
22,500 yd 3 qf soil
and 3000 yd of
sediments; GW pump
and treatment using air
stripping and carbon
adsorption with
reinjection; and
institutional controls
restricting GW usage
Soils will be
tre ted to attain
l0 cancer risk
level with
concentrations of total
VOCs reduced to
c2 mg/kg. 0W will
be treated to
attain the lr 5
cancer risk level
which includes
reducing
concentrations of
benzene and TCE
to S.D ug/l (MCIs) each
Soil, sediments.
and GW will attain
the health—based
cle#nup level of
i0 . Specific
OW goals include
1,2—DCE 3.8 ug/l,
TCE 26.0 ug/l, P U
6.7 ug/l, and benzene
13.0 ug/l. Specific
soil and sediment
goals include PCBs
20.0 mg/kg and total
VOCs 1.0 mg/kg
Soils will be
treated to
PC8s 25.0 mg/kg
baspd on the
l0 cancer risk
level. Sediments
will be treated to PCBs
1.0 mg/kg. OW will
be trea ed to
the l0 cancer
risk which includes
MCI values for ICE, PCE,
and methylene chloride
of 5 0 ug/1 each
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
Davis Liquid
Waste, RI
Ottati &
Goss, NH
01
$27,392,000
(present worth)
$8,592,500
(capital)
$1,735,000
(annual 0&M)
$7,332,900
(capital)
$1,097,000
(present worth 0th)
25,500 yd 3
—1—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SU?QiARY TABLE
09/23/87 2nd Soil contaminated
with VOCs, organics,
inorganlcs, and
pesti cides
In—situ fjxation of
18.000 yd of soil;
repairing berm to
prevent surface runoff
into adjacent river;
removal of debris; and
sealing of a sanitary
sewer
$7 .208.000
(capital)
$57 .400
(annual 0th years
1—5)
$22 .400
(annual 0th years
6—30)
02
Cooper Road,
NJ
09/30/87 1st— None
Final
Not applicable
No further action
Not provided
$0
Construction of site
slurry wall and flood
wall; disassembly and
decontamination of
structures and
materials for offsite
reuse, recycling, or
disposal; offsite
transportation of all
drums containing
hazardous substances
>1 ug/kg TCDD for
treatment or disposal;
securing of all material
with >1 ug/kg TCDD
ons te; stabilization
of remaining drums with
di oKin—contaminated
materials; GW pump and
treatment; plugging or
rerouting underground
conduits; and onsite
placement and capping of
sludge
Cleanup levels
will attain O’ 6
cancer risk level.
GW will be treated to
include dioxin
1.4 x lO ug 1,
DOT 2.4 x l0 ugh,
and heKacI lorobenzene
7.4 x 10 ugh. Soil
and structures will be
treated to dioxin
1.0 ug/1
02
Chemical
Control, N.)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capitalf0&M Costs
18,000 yd 3
02
Cleanup goals or
contaminants in the soil
were not specified
Diamond 09/30/81 1st Soil, debris,
Alkali. NJ GW, and air
contaminated with
pesticides includ-
ing TCDD and DOT
Not provided
$8,068,000
(capital)
$261,000
(annual 0th)
—2-
-------
F? 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
02 Endicott
Village Well
Field 1 NY
Soil, SW, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs including TCE,
and organics
including PCBs
09/30/81 1st— Sediments and 6W
Final contaminated with
VOCs and metals
3 .100 gpm
(to be
treated)
6W treatment with
air stripping and
chlorination; and
continued operation of
an existing purge well
to Intercept contamina-
tion on its way to the
supply well
Excavation of soil with
disposal under cap;
slurry wall installation
(completed); SW and 6W
treatment with air
stripping; and
extension of municipal
water supply to
affected residents
6W pump and treatment
with air stripping;
provision of an
alternate water supply;
and excavation of
contaminated sediments
from local septic
disposal systems
Installation of a new
6W production well and
onsite treatment with
air stripping prior to
discharge to P01W
6W treatment will
attain MCI values which
include vinyl chloride
2 ug/l, l,2—dichloro—
ethane 5 ug/l, and
trichloroethane 5 ug/l
Tetrachl oroethene
0.88 ug/l and 1,1,2—
trichloroethane
0.6 ug/l w 111 meet
levels established by
the FWQC, anØ will
meet the l00 cancer
risk level. Vinyl chlo-
ride air emission will
meet the National
Emission Standard for
Clean Air of 10 ppm
Soil cleanup goals
were not specified.
6W and SW treatment
will attain the
MCI for TCE 5.0 ug/l
and the State guidance
value for l,2—DCE
50.0 ug/l
Specific treatment
goals will be determined
during pilot studies
The cleanup goal
for PCE is less
than 1.0 ug/l or
nondetectabl and is
based on lO
cancer risk level
$16,382,000
(capital)
$18,000
(annual 0&M)
$1,365,000
(capital)
$296,000
(annual 0 t h)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected .
Remedy Standards/Goals
Estimated
Capital/0&M Costs
09/25/87 1st 6W contaminated
wi th VOCs
07/13/81 1st
$1,200,000
(capital)
$141,000
(annual 0th)
02 61 Moreau, NY
02 Haviland
Complex, NY
02 Katonah
Municipal
Well, NY
8,600 y4 3
Not provided
Not provided
09/25/87 1st— 6W contaminated
Final with VOCs including
PC I
$1,251,500
(capital)
$105,500
(annual 0th)
—3—
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
02 Montgomery
Township. NJ
02 Renora., Inc.,
NJ
02 South
Brunswick
Landfill, NJ
02 Suffern
ViUage Well
Field, NY
Soil and OW
contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PCBS
and PAHs, in—
organics, and
pest icides
Extension of
El I zabethtown water
supply system to
affected residences
Biodegra Jat1on of
4.400 yd 3 of PAH
contaminated soil;
excavatiQn of
1.100 yd” of PCB
contaminated soil with
offsite disposal
(landfllling or
incineration); and
backfilling, grading.
and revegetation
Remediatlon completed
in 1985 (capping.
slurry wall, and
leachate collection
system). Post—
remediatlon monitoring
will Continue for 30
years
No further action with
GW monitoring
Water supply will
be monitored
regularly for
compliance with
1CLs
Soil will be
treated to total
VOCs 1.0 mg/kg.
total PAils
10.0 mg/kg, total
petrol eum
hydrocarbons
100.0 mg/kg, c dmiuin
3.0 mg/kg, zinc
350.0 mg/kg, and PCBs
5.0 mg/kg. OW will
be treated to
total VOCs 50.0 ug/l,
arsenic 50.0 ugh,
cadmium 10.0 ug/l,
chromium 50.0 ug/l.
and lead 50.0 ug/l
Chemical-specf fic
levels will be addressed
in the post—remedial
monitoring program
OW levels for
1,l,l—TCA comply
with the NYSDEC
guideline of 50.0 ug/1
$319,000
(capital)
$0
(0&M)
$1,401 ,000
(landfi lling)
(present worth)
or
$6,021,000
(incineration)
(present worth)
$0
(capital)
$31 1.000
(present worth)
O&M)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/0&M Costs
09/29/87 1st OW contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
09/29/87 1st
Not provided
5,500 yd 3
Not provided
Not applicable
09/30/87 1st— OW and SW con—
Final taininated with
VOCs and metals
09/25/81 1st— Potential contam—
Final ination of OW
with VOCs
$0
(no additional
funding necessary)
-4-
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TAOLE
G% contamInated 3.800,000 gpd
with VOCs including (supply)
ICE and PCE
6W pump and treatment
using scaling pre-
treatment, air
stripping, and possibly
activated carbon with
discharge to creek or
public distribution
system; and the shutting
down of 2 wells with
•connectlon to the
public distribution
sys tern
6W tre4ment will attain
the lO health—based
risk level which will
includes NCL values for
PCE 0.7 ug/l,
1,1—dichioroethene
0.23 ugh. benzene
0.7 ug/l, and trichloro—
ethene 2.8 ug/l. The
ultimate attainment
of MCLs will require
identification and
control of source(s)
$4, 106,000
(capital)
$581,000
(annual O&K)
02
Volney
Landfill, NV
07/31/87 1st GW contaminated
with VOCs and
metals
4,Q0O ,000
yd’
Supplemental capping of
landfill side slopes
covering approximately
35 acres; installation
of a leachate collec-
tion system to include
a slurry wall, collec-
tion wells, and force
mains; and offsite ç
onsite treatment of
contaminated leachate
which well be determined
during design (flow
equalization, batch
biological treatment,
and carbon absorption
considered)
Cleanup goals will
meet the MCI
values for vinyl
chloride
1.0 ugh, benzene
5.0 ugh, and
arsenic
50.0 ug/l. Additionally,
chloroform 0.0 ugh,
nickel 15.4 ug/l, and
arsenic 0.0 ug/l will
meet WQC values.
Total phenols 1.0 ugh
will meet the NY State
value
$12,754,000 —
(offsite leachate
treatment)
(capital)
$12,876,000
(onsite leachate
treatment)
(capital cost)
$882,000
(offsite leachate
treatment)
(present worth 0&Pl)
$691,000
(onsite leachate
treatment)
(present worth 0&Pl)
02 Vega Alta, PR
09/29/87 1st
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
—5—
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
02 Waldick
Aerospace, NJ
02 Williams
Property, N.)
03 Kane and
Lombard, MD
In—situ air stripping
of 8,000 yd 3 from the
saturated zone; excava-
tion and of site disposal
of 2.500 yd residuals
with contamination
above action levels;
institutional controls
to include site access
and well restrictions;
and fencing
Excavation of soil
with removal to an
offsite disposal
facility for
incineration;
regrading. revegetatlon,
and site restoration;
GW pump and treatment
using air stripping
and carbon adsorption
with reinjection; and
provision of an
alternate water supply
to affected residences
Removal of drums, ho
spots, and 67.000 yd
soil with onsite
soil capping; construc-
tion of subsurface
containment/diversi on
system; development
of SW run—off management
facility; and future
use institutional
controls
Soils will be
excavated to New
Jersey Department
of Environmental
Protection levels which
include
cadmium 3.0 mg/kg.
chromium 100.0 mg/kg,
zinc 350.0 mg/kg.
nickel 100.0 mg/kg,
total VOCs 1.0 mg/kg,
and total PHCs
100.0 mg/kg
Soil will be excavated
to the New Jersey
Environmental Cleanup
Responsibility Act
(ECRA) target level of
1.0 mg/kg total VOCs.
6W will be treated to
MCLs which Include
TCE 5.0 ug/1 ,
chloroform 100.0 ug/1,
barium 1,000.0 ug/l,
arsenic 50.0 ug/1 ,
cadmium 10.0 ugh,
chromium 50.0 ugh.
and lead 50.0 ug/l
Chemical—specific
cleanup levels
will be addressed
in 2nd 0.U.
$2,602,118
(capi tal)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
09/29/87 1st Soil contaminated 10.500 yd 3
with VOCs Including
ICE, and inorganics
09/29/81 1st— Soil and 6W 100 yd 3
Final contaminated with
VOCs Including PCE,
organics. and
metals
09/30/87 1st Soil, 6W, and debris 61,000 yd 3
contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PAHs and
PCBs, and metals
$55,000
(annual O&M)
$513,750
(capital)
$64,600
(annual O&PI)
$4,692,660
(capital)
$28,930
(annual O&M)
-i;-
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
03 Palmerton
Zinc, PA
09/04/87 1st Defoliation of
mountain side from
zinc, lead,
cadmium 1 and sulfur
dioxide
Onsite Installation of
concrete pad with berms
to mix offsite sewage
sludge and fly ash;
application of lime
(10 tons/acre) and potash
(80 lbs/acre) on target
areas; application of
fly ash and offsite
sludge on target areas;
and application of grass
seed, seedlings, and
mulch
State loading
rates for metals
include
cadmium 3.0 lbs/acre.
copper 100.0 lbs/acre,
chromIum 100.0 lbs/acre,
lead 100.0 lbs/acre,
mercury 0.3 lbs/acre,
nickel 20.0 lbs/acre,
and zinc 200.0 lbs/acre.
The maximum dry
sludge application rate
is 60 tons/acre
03
Presque Isle.
PA
09/30/87 1st—
Final
None
Not applicable No further action
Not provided
$0
03 Saltville
Waste
Disposal
Ponds, VA
Upgrading runon con-
trols; treatment of
waste pond outfall with
either sulfide
precipitation or carbon
adsorption; and
institutional controls
to include possible
implementation of local
zoning ordinances
Treatment discharge into
river will meet the
State standard for
mercury 0.05 ug/l in
water
$840 ,052—$2 ,143,052
(capital)
$221 ,941—$258,94l
(sulfide ppt. or
carbon system,
respectively)
(annual O&M)
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
Not provided
‘Minimal” to none
06/30/87 1st Soil, sediments,
SW. air, and biota
contaminated with
mercury
Not provided
—7—
-------
ri 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
03 West Virginia
Ordnance
Works. WV
04 Geiger (C&M
Oil), SC
Soil, sediments,
and S W line con-
taminated with
organics and
asbestos
In—situ flaming
treatment of reactive
nitroaroaiatlc residue;
capping of treatment
residuals with
ni troaromati C
concentrations
)50 mg/kg; excavation,
flushing, and backfill—
Ing of reactive sewer
lines; offslte disposal
of asbestos; and
Institutional controls
to Include deed
restrictions
Excavation and onsite
thermal treatment of
soil followed by soil—
dification/stabil i zatlon
with backfill;ng of
excavated areas using
grading and covering;
and GW pump and
treatment with dis-
charge to SW
Soil cleanup will
att in less than the
10 Individual
lifetime cancer
risk level. This
sets the cleanup
goal of total
nitroaromatics at
50.0 mg/kg
Specific preliminary
goals for soil based
on IICLs to Include
lead 166.5 mg/kg,
chromium 3.7 mg/kg.
benzene 14.4 mg/kg.
trans—i .2—dichioro—
ethylene 16.0 ug/kg.
toluene 911.0 ug/kg,
and PCB (Aroclor 1254)
1,050 ug/kg. OW will
att in the cumulative
lO cancer risk level
which includes MCI
values for benzene
5.0 ugh, toluene
175.0 ug/l. and lead
50.0 ugh
$1,807,000
(capital)
O&t1 not provided
15.583,000
(capital)
$367,200
(present worth 0&H)
03/27/87 1st
Site Name,
State/
Signature
Oper—
able
Estimated
Components
of Selected
Estimated
Region Type
Date
Unit Threat/Problem Waste
Volume
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&H Costs
4,305 yd 3
11,300 yd 3
62.000,000 gal
06/01/87 1st Soil and GW
contaminated with
VOCs , organics
including PCBs,
and metals
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
04 Independent
Nail, SC
04 Newport Dump.
KY
1st— Soil and OW
Final contaminated with
VOCs including TCE
and PCE, and metals
Stabilization!
solidification of
1,000 yd’ metal
contaminated soil with
onsite disposal and
capping; excavation of
500 yd’ soil and
sludges with offsite
disposal at a RCRA
facility; OW pump
and treatment (to be
identified during
design) with offsite
discharge; and well
closure
Excavation of metal
contaminated soil and
lagoon sediments with
solldtfication/
stabilization;
backfllling of
treated soil; and
covering
Implementation of
multimedia monitoring
program; restoration
and extension of
leachate collection
system; and restoration,
regrading, and bank
stabilization
of existing clay cap
with revegetation
Soils will be
exc vated to the
lO’ health—based
risk level which
Includes lead
100.0 mg/kg. 6W treat-
ment will attain MCLs
for VOC contamination
which include
1, 1—dichioroethane
5.0 ug/l.
inethylene chloride
5.0 ug/l, trans—
1 .2—dichioro—
ethylene 70.0 ugh,
tetrachloro—
ethylene 3.0 ug/l,
toluene 340.0 ug/l, and
tn chloroethylene
3.0 ug/l
Soil will attain a
l0° or less,
cancer risk level
which includes
cadmium 2.6 m9/kg,
chromium 5.3 mg/kg.
cyanide 0.02 mg/kg,
nickel 18.0 mg/kg,
and zinc 1,785.0 mg/kg
PCBs, nickel,
toluene, and other
organics will be
tre ted to the
10-0
health-based risk
level . Barium and
chromium will attain
the MCL values of
1,000.0 ug/l and
50.0 ugh,
respectively
$3,711,660
(capital)
$1,032,000
(capital)
$22,500
(annual O&M
years 1—2)
$5,600
(annual O&M years
3—30)
04
Gold Coast. FL 09/11/87
Site Name,
State!
Region Type
Signature
Data
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/0&H Costs
1.500 yd 3
100,000 gal
6,200 yd 3
1 ,I 00,O00
yd’
09/28/87 1st Soil and sediments
contaminated with
metals
03/21/87 1st Soil and 6W con-
taminated with
organics including
PCBs and PAHs,
and metals
$516,000
(capital)
$63,000
(annual 0&M years
1—2)
$35,000
(annual 0&M years
3—30)
—9—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
04 N.W. 58th
Street
Landfill, FL
04 Palmetto
Wood
Preserving, SC
04 Parramore
Surplus. FL
Landfill closure for
all contaminated soil;
controlling leachate
generation through
grading, drainage
control, and capping;
and provision of an
alternate water supply
to private well users
east of landfill
Excavation of
contaminated soil with
onsite flushing and
backfllllng of treated
soil; pumping of waste—
water to onsite treat-
ment facility; 6W pump
and treatment with off—
site discharge to SW;
and installation of
municipal waterline to
affected residents or
the drilling of new
wells
No further action
with monitoring of
6W and SW
The 6W remedial action,
as required in the 1985
ROD, will provide air
stripping to bring
contaminants Into
compliance with
MCLs
Soil cleanup will
attain public
health evaluation
levels which
include chromium
627.0 mg/kg and
arsenic 200.0 mg/kg.
6W will attain
MCI values which include
chromium 50.0 ug/l.
copper 1,000.0 ugll,
and arsenic 50.0 ug/l
Cleanup standards to be
reviewed as part of 6W
quality assessment
include MCLs and WQC
81,393.000
(capital)
$176, 163
(annual O&M)
$21,000
(capi tal)
$19,000
(annual 01.11)
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
09/21/87 3rd— 6W contaminated
Final with VOCs including
TCE and PCE. and
metals
09/30/87 1st— Soil and CV
Final contaminated with
metals
09/15/87 1st— Possible
Final contamination of
6W with metals
$5,500,000
(capital)
$1,500,000
(annual 01.11)
27 0OO,0OO’
yd
19.895 yd 3
10.500,000 gal
Not applicable
—
-------
A ’ 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUNMARY TABLE
04 Powersville
landfill, GA
09/30/87 1st— Soil and CV con—
Final taminated with
V0Cs, organics,
pesticides, and
metals
09/24/81 1st— Soil, SW, and CV
Final contaminated with
VOCs including ICE .
and organics
including PAHs
Capping with grading;
installation of
monitoring wells and
gas vents; provision
for alternate water
supply (extension of
existing municipal
water supply); and
institutional controls
Including deed
restrictions to
restrict drilling or
construction activities
Excavation and incinera-
tion of 150 yd 3 of
contaminated soil in
area 0 and backfilling
with clean soil; onsite
treatment of contami-
nated soil in area C
which may include
flushing, soil washing,
thermal processing, or
in—situ steam stripping;
capping of area 3 with
asphalt; and GW pump
and treatment with off—
discharge to SW
Current contaminant
concentration levels
do not exceed SOWA
Soil treatment will
attain all ARARs
following CV remedia—
tion. CV cleanup
goals are based on
IlCis, AWQC, MC1Gs,
N&AQ, and public
health evaluation
levels which include
ICE 2.7 ug/l, PCE
0.8 ug/l, toluene
2,000.0 ug/l, xylene
440.0 ug/l, total
PAils 2.8 ng/l,
chl orobenzene
60.0 ug/1,
l,2—DCE 400.0 ug/l,
and ethylbenzene
680.0 ug/l
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/OtH Costs
04 Sodyeco. NC
Not provided
150 yd 3
(area D soil)
$4,000,000
(capital)
$511,0 3
(present worth 0th)
$2,089,000 —
$3 , 865 , 000
(present worth)
—11—
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
lower
Chemical. FL
4.000 yd 3
(soil)
Excavation and onsite
thermal reatinent of
4.000 yd soils and
any contaminated drum
contents found;
decontamination of
debris; residual
analysis (If
non—hazardous, backfill
treated soil and debris
onsite); 6W pump and
onsita treatment using
filtration and acti-
vated carbon with
offsite discharge to
SW; Installation of
2 individual treatment
units for private
wells; and Institu-
tional controls
to include access
restrictions
Soil cleanup goals
attain a
10 health—based
risk level which
includes copper
100.0 mg/kg. lead
100.0 mg/kg, arsenic
5.0 mg/kg, and DDT
35.0 mg/kg. 6W
treatment will attain
Florida Administrative
Code levels, drinking
water healt advisory
levels, l0 health
based levels and alter-
nate concentration
levels (based on i0•6
risk level) which in-
clude arsenic 0.05 ugh.
nickel 350.0 ug/l.
chromium 0.05 ug/l,
aIpha— IlC 0.05 ug/l,
chloroform 5.0 ug/l,
DOT 0.01 ugh,
chlorobenzilate 1.0 ugh,
and dicotol 1.0 ug/l
$6,188,000
(capi tal)
$0
(O&M)
04 Tn—City Oil, 09/21/87
FL
1st— None
Final
Contaminant
concentration
levels are below
analytical
detection limits
Soil, sediments,
SW, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PCBs,
and inorganics
Excavation, dewatering
and onsite disposal of
soils and sediments
under a RCRA multi—
layer cap; re—routing
of SW, GW collection
and treatment; and
institutional controls
to include deed and
access restrictions
GW will attain MCI
values which include
benzene 5.0 ug/l,
l,1—DCE 1.0 ug/1,
arsenic 50.0 ug/1,
lead 50.0 ug/l,
and TCE 200.0 ug/l
$33 .900,000
(present worth)
04
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capltal/O&M Costs
01/09/81 1st Soil and 6W
contaminated with
pesticides and
metals
100,000,000
gal
(6W)
05
Envirochem, IN 09/25/87
Not applicable No further action
1st
4,200 yd 3
$0
—1,—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
05 Industrial
Excess
Landfill, OH
05 Johns—Kanville, 06/30/87
IL
09/30/87 1st— 6W contaminated
Final with VOCs
Including ICE
09/30/87 1st 6W contaminated
with VOCs,
organics, and
inorgani Cs
1st— Soil, SW, 6W. and
Final air contaminated
with inorganics
including asbestos
6W extraction with
discharge of untreated
6W to P01W; and
institutional controls
to include land use
restrictions to
mitigate against
near—term contaminated
6W usage
Not provided Provision of an
alternate water supply
to approximately
100 homes
Grading and covering
waste materla1 and
soil In inactive water
disposal areas; closure
of asbestos pit cover;
offsite disposal of
asbestos—containing
material generAted from
reconstruction
activities following
final closure of
disposal pit in FY89;
and SW, 6W, and air
monitoring system
6W trpatment will attain
a 10° heath—based
risk level and meet the
MCLs for 1,2—OCA
5.0 ug/l, l.L1—TCA
200 ug/l. ICE 5.0 ug/l,
PCE 10.0 ug/l,
1, 1—dichloroethylene
7.0 ugh, and benzene
5.0 ugh. Hinnesota
Recoruinended Drinking
Water Limits will be met
for 1i,2—TCA 6.1 ug/l,
1,2—DCE 7.0 ugh, toluene
2,000.0 ug/l, and
xylene 440.0 ugh
All media will
attain NESHAP
requirements for
asbestos
05 FKC, KM
Site Name,
State/
Signature
Oper—
able
Estimated
Components
of Selected
Estimated
Region Type
Date
Unit Threat/Problem Waste
Volume
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&H Costs
Not provided
$1,518,005
(present worth)
$1,715,870—
$2,289,060
(present worth)
$4,026,000
(capital)
$49,000
(annual 0&M)
Not provided
Chemical—sped fic
cleanup goals will
be selected in 2nd
0.U.
—13—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
05 Liquid
Disposal. HI
Soil 1 oil waste
water, and sludge
contaminated with
VOCs. organics
including PCBs
and PAHs, and In—
organics
09/30/87 1st— Soil and CV
Final contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PCBs,
and inorganics
Onsite Incineration of
oils, sludges, and
soils with cffsite
disposal of all
incinerator ash;
offsite treatment of
waste water;
decontamination of
water and scrubber
water; dismantling and
offsite disposal of all
tanks; crushing and
Incineration of pit
cinder block walls; and
backfllling and/or
grading of all
excavated areas
Onslte land disposal of
all debris and
equipment; onsite
solidification/fixation
of soil and waste;
construction of a slurry
wall and impermeable
Cap containment system;
and OW pump and treat-
ment using air stripping
and ion exchange with
discharge to SW
Target cleanup
levels (ICIs) for
soil and OW il1 be
based on 10U
health—based risk
level. For
noncarcinogens in
OW, IICLs and health—
based levels were used
as TCLs which include
barium 1000.0 ugh.
cadmium 10.0 ug/l,
chloroform 0.1 ugh.
beniene 0.2 ug/l,
methylene chloride,
1.0 ug/l, and
ICE 0.8 ugh.
TCL soil cleanup goals
include ICE 77.0 ug/g,
PCE 16.0 ug/g ,
benzo(a)pyrene 0.4 ug/g.
PCBs 1.0 ug/g. and
lead 20.0 ug/g
05 Laskin/Poplar, 09/30/87 2nd
OFI
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Coals Capital/0&H Costs
Selection of cleanup
levels are scheduled
in FY88
900,000 yd 3
771,000 gal
Not provided
$8,490,865
(capital)
$0
(O&M)
$21,743,100
(capi tal)
$316,600
(present worth DM 1)
—14—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
New Brghton/
Arden Hills!
St. Anthony.
MN
09/30/87 1st— Soil, SW. and 6W
Final contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PAils,
and inorganics
Regrading and capping
of site; provision for
maintaining flood
control measures;
constructIon and
maintenance of
perimeter fence;
provision of three
private use drinking
water wells; and
additional 6W studies.
as necessary
Construction of
granular activated
carbon (GAC) water
treatment facilities
with discharge to the
municipal water
treatment plant; and
construction of a
pipeline from wells to
the treatment facilities
Selection of
appropriate 6W
cleanup levels
deferred until
selection of 6W
treatment
O.U.
6W treatment will
attain the MCI for
ICE of 5.0 ug/l.
HCIs for other VOCs have
not been exceeded
$5 . 800 . 000
(capital)
$1 .000,000
(present worth O&H)
$1 ,lO0 50O
(capital)
$ 160. 770
(annual O&M)
05 New Brighton
(TCAAP). MN
09125/81 3rd 6W contaminated
with VOCs and
metals
Not provided 6W pump and treatment
with air stripping and
onsite einjection to
aqul fer
6W cleanup goal
will attain l0
health based levels.
Discharged water will,
at a minimum, meet
MCI values which
include benzene 5.0 ug/l ,
toluene 2,000.0 ugh.
ICE 5.0 ugh. PCE 6.9 ug/l,
vinyl chloride 2.0 ugh,
xylene 440.0 ug/l,
arsenic 50.0 ug/l, and
chromium 50.0 ug/l
Marl on—Bragg
Landfill, IN
Site Name,
State!
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/0&M Costs
05
05
1,100,000 yd 3
Not provided
03/31/87 5th 6W contamInated
with VOCs Including
ICE and PCE
$4,000,000
(capital)
$120,000
(annual O&M)
—15—
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DEqIsION (ROD) SU V4ARY TABLE
Northern
Engraving. WI
05 Northside
LandfiU , IN
05 Rose
Township, HI
Excavation and onsite
solidification of
of sludge and soil;
installation of RCRA
cap atop lagoon;
and institutional
controls to include
deed and access
restrictions to seepage
pit
Excavation, dewatering,
and onsite disposal of
soils and sediments
under a RCRA
multi—layer cap;
re—routing of SW; 6W
and leachate collection
and treatment system;
and institutional
controls to include deed
and access restrictions
Excavation of
soil and onsite
thermal destruction
with disposal
of ash as
either backfill or
placement in an offsite
RCRA facility (if ash
is (P toxic, leachable
lead removal treatment
will be required); 6W
pump and treatment
using chemical
coagulation, air
stripping, and activated
carbon adsorption with
discharge in
appropriate manner; and
fencing
6W cleanup will be
managed through
the use of ACIs
that are protective
of the river. ACIs
include
TCE 21 .900.0 ug/l,
copper 12.0 ug/l,
nickel 160.0 ug/l,
and zinc 110.0 ug/l
GW will attain
MCI values which
include benzene 5.0 ug/l,
l,l-DCE 7.0 ug/l,
arsenic 50.0 ug/l,
lead 50.0 ug/l, and
TCE 200.0 ugh
Cumulative soil
cleanup wi l
attain l0
cancer risk level
which Includes
arsenic 14.0 mg/kg,
PCBs 10.0 mg/kg, and
lead 70.0 mg/kg.
6W levels
will al o attain
the l0 cancer
risk level which
includes vinyl
chloride 0.015 ug/l,
arsenic 50.0 ug/l,
lead 50.0 ug/l,
chlorobenzene 60.0 ugh
(proposed MCLG),
benzene 0.133 ug/l,
TCE 0.627 ug/l,
PCBs 0.002 ug/l, and
methylene chloride
0.919 ug/l
$295,000
(capital)
$16,000
(annual O&H)
$33,900,000
(present worth)
05
Site Name,
State!
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/0&K Costs
09/29/87 1st— Soil, sludge, and
Final 6W contamInated
with VOCs Including
TCE, and inorganics
09/25/87 1st Soil, sediments,
SW, and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs Including TCE,
organics including
PCBs, and inorganics
09/30/81 1st— Soil and 6W
Final contaminated with
VOCs, organics
including PCBs
and PAHs, and
inorganics
4,400 yd 3
4,200 yd 3
50,000 yd 3
$32,547,000
(capital)
$200,000
(annual O&M years
1—10)
$70,000
(annual O&M years
10—30)
—16—
-------
FY 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
05 Schmalz Dump,
WI
09/30/81 2nd— Soil contaminated
Final with metals
Installation of a low
permeability, compacted
earth material cap over
approximately seven
acres of soil
Chromium+ 3 does
not exceed the MCL
(50.0 ug/l) and lead
was not reported
above detection units
05
06
Seymour
Recycling, IN
Bayou
Bonfouca, LA
09/25/81 2nd— Soil, sediments,
Final and 6W
contaminated with
VOCs including
TCE, and organics
03/31/87 2nd— Soil, sediments,
Final and potentially 6W
contaminated with
organics Including
PA l -is
3,000 yd 3
71 .500 yd 3
Implementation of a
full scale soil vapor
extraction system;
installation of a multi-
media cap; excavation
of contaminated sedi-
ments and consolidation
of sediments beneath cap;
6W pump and treatment;
and institutional
controls to include
deed and access
restrictions with
compliance point
at the edge of the cap
Excavation and onsite
incineratjon of
51,500 yd” of soil,
sediment, and sludge
with onsite disposal of
ash and caqping
(20 .000 yd , 34 acres);
and 6W pump and treat-
ment using technologies
to be evaluated during
design with rein—
jection
OW cleanup levels
will attain a
cumul4ive io—
to 10 cancer
risk level. l’CLs
attributing to
this level Include
benzene 5.0 ug/l,
chloroform
100.0 ug/l, 1,2—OCE
7.0 ug/l, TCE 5.0 ug/l,
and vinyl chloride
2.0 ug/l. 6W cleanup
levels for inorganics
will meet chronic
health values
including lead,
cadmium, and
barium 50.0 ug/l each
Soil/sediment
contamination
>1,300 mg/kg PAKs
will be treated.
Soil/sediment
contamination
>100 mg/kg PAils
will be capped.
OW treatment wjll
target the 10
to 10’ cancer
risk level (CWA
suggests 3.1 ng/l
level for PA i ls).
Point of
compliance is
facility property
line
$10,536,000
(capital)
$1,200,000
(present worth 0&M)
$59, 594 • 534
(capital)
$173,148
(annual O&K)
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/0&M Costs
Not provided
$687,664
(capital)
$11,940
(annual 0&M)
—17—
-------
FV 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
06 Bayou Sorrel.
LA
06 Cleve Reber,
LA
Regrading with top
sofl; RCRA geomembrane/
clay capping of fomer
disposal area;
Installation of
sand/geofabric pore
water drainage layer;
installation of a
venting System to
reduce buildup of gases
beneath cap;
installation of slurry
wall; consolidation of
all miscellaneous
wastes for grading fill
or offsite disposal;
fencing of all capped
areas; and construction
of gravel access roads
around fenced areas
Excavation and onsite
incineration of buried
drums and sludges;
RCRA capping on land
used for disposal of
industrial hazardous
waste; Installation
of as venting pipes;
drainage and backfilling
of onsite ponds;
pond water pump and
treatment with
discharge to SW; and
fencing
Chemical—specific
cleanup levels not
provided
Remediation w l
attain the 10
cancer risk level
through CWA water
quality criteria.
Specific cleanup
goals include
hexach lorobutadiene
0.45 ug/l,
hexach loro—
benzene 21.0 ng/l.
and hexachioro—
ethane 2.4 ug/l.
Specific excavation
and treatment levels
not provided
$23,200,000
(capital)
$5. 700. 000
(present worth 0&M)
$25, 000 .000
(capital)
$100 .000
(annual 0&M)
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
11/14/86 1st— Soil and 6W
Final contaminated with
pesticides, VOCs,
organics. and
inorganics
03/31/81 1st Soil, SW. 6W, and
debris contaminated
with organics
36.400 yd 3
6,400 drums
220.000 yd 3
500,000 gal
—18—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
06 Compass
Industries
Landfill, OK
09/29/87 1st— Soil and GW
Final contaminated with
organics and
Inorganics
RCRA capping with site
grading; SW diversion;
fencing with warning
signs along cap
perimeter; and OW
extraction and onsite
treatment in upper
perched water—bearing
zone
GW solid effluent
levels will meet
N PD E S
requi rements
Other chemical
specific levels
not provided
06
Crystal City
Airport, TX
09/29/87 1st— Soil and debris
Final contaminated with
pesticides and
inorganics
12,000 yd 3 Onsite consolidation of
all materials which
exceed 100 mg/kg total
pesticides; RCRA capping
over consolidation
cell; and disposal of
decontamination liquids
Soil cleanpp will
attain 10” health—
based cancer risk level
for total pesticides
>100.0 mg/kg. Debris
cleanup will be based on
visible inspection
$1 .600.000
(present worth)
1st Soil and sediments
contaminated with
organics Including
PCSs; pit sludge/
sediments contam-
inated with oily
waste and metals
Excavation and
stabilization of
sludge, soil, and
sediment with placement
In onsite RCRA
landfill; removal of
oil from water by
oil/water separation
with Incineration of
oil; treatment of pond
water with discharge
to bayou; and removal
of pond water solids to
be disposed with pit
sludge
Remedy meets RCRA, CM.
IJAAQ. and TSCA criteria
for PCBs. Specific
levels were not provided.
Treated pond water
discharges comply with
JJPDES permit require—
men t S
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&H Costs
620.000 yd 3
06
$9,255,526
(capital)
$272 .830
(annual O&M))
Gurley Pit. AR 10/06/86
432,470 ft 3
(soil, sludge.
sediments)
4.100,000 gal
$5 . 780 . 000
(capital)
$21,000
(annual 0tH)
—19—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
06 Hardage/Crlner, fl/14/86
OK
Highland Acid
Pit, TX
1st Soil, 6W, and debris
contaminated with
VOCs including
ICE and PCE,
and organics
including PCBs, and
I norganics
06/26/87 2nd- Possible
Final contamination of
SW and OW with
VOCs and metals
Soil, sediments.
SW, and 6W contami-
nated with organics
including PAils,
and inorganics
RCRA capping; Installa—
tion of leachate collec ,-
tion system; excavation
of sludge, drum mounds.
and main pit; temporary
capping of former source
areas (interim measures);
onsite offsite in-
cineration of organic
liquids; onsite or
offslte physiochemical
treatment of inorganic
liquids with discharge
to POTU; and treatment
of solids by technology
to be identified during
design. OW remediation
to be addressed in
future 0.1.1.
No further action
with SW and OW
monitoring
Excavation of soil
with consolidation and
capping; consolidation
and stabilization of
oils, liquids, or
sludge; RCRA capping;
backfilling, grading.
and seeding (or
gravel cover) of all
excavated areas; fencing;
institutional controls
to include and deed
restrictions; and
OW pump and treatment
using carbon filtration
with discharge to SW
Soil and OW cleanup
levels will be addressed
in 2nd O.U.
Contaminant
concentration
levels meet WQC
and MCI
requirements
Cleanup goals for
all media are
based on Public
Health Evaluation
levels or
concentrations
that exceed
background
levels. Specific
soil goalsrbased
on the lO
health—based risk
level include
total PAF-Is 3.0 mg/kg,
arsenic 5.6 mg/kg. and
chromium 19.4 mg/kg
$2,282,000
(present worth OEM)
$6,980
(annual O&M years
2—30)
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of e1ected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
$68,014,000
(cap i t a 1)
180,000 yd 3
10,000—20,000
(drums)
Not applicable
45,150 yd 3
06
06
Mid—South, AR 11/14/86 1st
$4,700
(capital)
$11,120
(0th year 1)
$3,500,000
(capital)
$153,500
(annual 0th)
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
Pet ro—Chemi cal
Systems, TX
Sand Springs 09/29/87 1st
Petrochemical
Complex, OK
07 Conservation
Chemical, MO
Soil contaminated 4,000 yd 3
with VOCs, and
organics Including
PAHs
Soil, surface
liquids, and sludges
contaminated with
VOCs, organics, and
inorganics
Excavation and
temporary storage of
soil In an onsite RCRA
facility; construction
of a road over
excavated areas and
existing roadway to
provide access to site
area; and temporary
relocation of residents
during excavation
Solidificatlon/stabi ii—
zatlon of sludges with
containment in an onsite
RCRA landfill; and
excavation with offsite
thermal destruction of
remaining sludges.
Second O.U. will address
GW remediation
Capping; GW pump and
treatment; and
decontamination and
destruction of onsite
structures
Soil will be
excavated to below
100.0 mg/kg PAHs or
100.0 mg/kg total
vol atiles
Cleanup goals are based
on lO health—based
risk level targets. MCL
levels to be attained
include
arsenic 50.0 ug/l,
cadmium 10.0 ugh,
total chromium 50.0 ugh.
lead 50.0 ug/l,
ICE 5.0 ug/l,
benzene 5.0 ug/l,
vinyl chloride 2.0 ug/l.
and chloroform 0.19 ug/l.
AWQC cleanup levels
to be met include
nickel 13.9 ug/l and
nnc 5,000.0 ugh
$37 .453,050
(capital)
$15,000
(annual O&M)
03/27/87
1st
06
06
Site Name,
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Oper—
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
$1 ,232,785
(capital)
$4,750
(annual O&l1)
130,000 yd 3
715.000 gal
Not provided
Chemical—specific
cleanup levels not
provided
09/30/87 1st— Soil and GV
Final contaminated with
VOCs, organics,
pesticides, metals,
and Inorganics
$8,626,000
(capital)
$12,774,111
(present worth 0&M)
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
07 Minker Stout/
Romaine
Creek, HO
07 Ninker Stout/
Stout, HO
08 Central City/
Clear Creek,
CO
08 Denver Radium
I (12th &
Quivas). CO
09/28/87 2nd Soil and sediments
contaminated with
pesticides includ-
ing TCDD
Possible contami-
nation of sediments,
and downstream SW
and GW with
inorganics
Soil contaminated 11,000 yd 3
with radium and
its decay products
Excavation and
temporary storage of
soil and sediments in
an cnslte RCRA
facility; and
backfilling of
excavated areas with
clean soil
Excavation and
temporary storage of
soil in an onsite RCRA
facility; backfilling
of excavated areas with
clean soil; and
institutional controls
to include site access
restrictions
Passive/active
treatment system for
acid mine drainage
discharge
Placement of cap over
open 7,600 yd of soil
contamination; excava-
tion of contaminated soil
under several structures
with temporary on ite
storage (3,400 yd );
maintenance of cap and
storage area until a
facility for permanent
disposal becomes
available; and final
offsite disposal
Soil and sediments
will be excavated
to below 1.0 mg/kg
TCOD. Excavation will
not continue beyond
a depth of 4 feet or
once bedrock is reached
Soil will be
excavated to below
1 .0 mg/kg TCDD.
Excavation will not
continue beyond a depth
of 4 feet or once
bedrock Is reached
Interim remedy. ARARs
will be determined
in future C d i.
Radium—226 in land
averaged over 100 m 2
will not exceed back-
ground level by more
than 5 pCi/g, averaged
over the first 15 cm of
soil and 15 pCi/g over
15 cm thick layers of
soil. Ganina radiation in
buildings not to exceed
background level by
2OuRIhr
$4,488,000
(present worth)
$28,000
(annual 0&H)
$1 .663.000
(capital)
$511,000
(annual O&M)
$3,702,800
(capital)
$290 .000
(present worth O&M)
Site
Name.
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Si9nature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
Soil contaminated
with pesticides
including TCDD
4,400 yd 3
3,500 —
5.100 yd 3
Not provided
09/28/87 3rd
09/30/87 1st
09/29/87 4th
$5,817,000—
1,018.000
(present worth)
$6 .000
(annual O&M)
—22—
-------
A’ 1981 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
Denver Radium 09/29/87 5th
I I (11th &
(Jinatilla), CO
Denver Radium 09/30/87 6th
III (1,000 West
Louisiana) . CO
Soil and debris 15,400 yd 3
contaminated with
radium and Its decay
products
Soil and debris Not provided
contaminated with
radium and Its decay
products
Excavation of contami-
nated soil with
temporary ensUe
storage;
decontamination of
11 ft t of roof
and placement in onsite
storage facility;
maintenance of existing
cap and onsite land
storage facility until
a facility for
permanent disposal
becomes available
(15,400 yd 3 ); and
final offslte disposal
Onsite temporary
containment of
contaminated material
followed by offsito
permanent disposal when
available; cleanup of
the Creative
Illumination property;
and dismantling of
temporary storage
facility with offsite
disposal; and final off—
site disposal
Radium—226 In land
averaged over 100 m 2
will not exceed back-
ground level by more than
5 pCi/g, averaged over
the first 15 cm of soil
and 15 pCl/g over 15 cm
thick layers of soil.
Ganina radiation in
buildings not to exceed
background level by
2OuR/h r
Radium—226 In land
averaged over 100
will not exceed back-
ground level averaged
more than 5 pCi/g, over
the first 15 cm of soil
and 15 pCi/g over
15 cm thick layers
of soil. Ganna radiation
In buildings not to
exceed background level
by 2OuR/hr
$4, 230, 300
(capital)
$194,100
(present worth O&M)
$2,172,800
(capital)
$305,800
(present worth 0&M)
08
Denver Radium/ 06/30/87
Card Property.
CO
3rd Soil, sediment, and 4,000 yd 3
debris
contaminated with
radium and its decay
products
Excavatiqn of
4,000 yd soil and
sediment with temporary
onsite storage and
final offsite disposal;
and decontamination and
dismantling of
buildings with offsite
disposal
Radium—226 in land
averaged over 100 m 2
will not exceed back-
ground level by more
than 5 pCi/g, averaged
over the first 15 cm of
soil and 15 pCi/g over
15 cmthick layers of
soil. Garrina radiation in
buildings not to exceed
background level by
2OuR/h r
$1,148,000
(capital)
$89,500
(present worth 0&M)
Site Name,
State/
Signature
Oper—
able
Estimated
Components
of Selected
Estimated
Region Type
Date
Unit Threat/Problem Waste
Volume
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/OEM Costs
08
08
—23—
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TABLE
08 Denver Radiu,n/
Open Space
Property. CO
08 Rocky
Mountain
Arsenal • CO
09 Litchfield
Airport. AZ
Onsite temporary
contaig ment of
290 yd’ material
followed by offsite
permanent disposal;
removal of 1 .020 yd 3
of material with
placement In containers
followed by offsite
disposal when available;
and dismantling of
temporary storage
facility with offsite
disposal
Construction of
granular activated
carbon (GAC) water
treatment system and
regeneration of spent
carbon at another
location; modification
of GAC system, if
necessary, to include
air stripping facility
to treat vinyl
chloride; replacement
of existing well pumps
and motors;
installation of
transmission piping;
and construction of
laboratory and office
space
6W pump and treatment
using air stripping
and granular activated
carbon with reinjection
into aquifer
Radiuin—226 In land
averaged over 100 in 2
will not exceed back-
ground level by more
than 5 pci/g, averaged
over the first 15 cm of
soil and 15 pCl/g over
15 cm thick layers of
soil. Ganina radiation
In buildings not to
exceed background level
by 2OuR/hr
Treatment will attain
the MCLs which Include
1 .1—dichioroethylene
0.007 mg/i,
iCE 0.005 mg/i,
PCE 0.005 mg/i.
TCA 0.200 mg/i.
trans—i . 2—di chi oro—
ethyl ene
0.005 mgfl, and vinyl
chloride 0.001 mg/i
6W treatment will meet
HCLs which include
l.i—dichloroethylene
7.0 ug/l, carbon tetra—
chloride 5.0 ug/l,
chromium 50 0 ug/l. and
arsenic 50.0 ug/l.
Chloroform will meet
the WQC of 5.0 ugh
$955,400
(present worth)
$2 , 358 . 500
(capital)
$800,200
(annual O&M)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
09/29/87 7th Soil contamInated 1,310 yd 3
with radium and Its
decay products
06/04/87 1st OW contaminated Not provided
with VOCs Including
TCE and PCE
09/29/81 1st OW contaminated Not provided
with VOCs including
TCE, and inorganics
$8,869,000 or
$10, 100,000
(with air
stripping)
(capital)
$372,000
(annual O&M)
-------
FY 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TA8LE
09 Operating
Industries,
CA
09 San Fernando
Valley. CA
09 San Gabriel.
CA
09 Stringfellow
Acid Pits, CA
09/24/87 1st Area—wide CU
contaminated with
VOCs Including
ICE and PCE
Site control (operation
and maintenance of
existing systems) to
include gas well probes
and leachate pumping
and collection
CU pump and treatment
using aeration and
granular activated
carbon—al r filtering
units with discharge to
pumping station for
chlorination and distri-
bution; and disposal or
regeneration of spent
carbon
Well discharge treat-
ment using activated
carbon adsorption; and
alternate water supply
6W pump and treatment
with possible discharge
to P01W; and SW diver-
sion/collection with
discharge to creek
Interim Remedy. ARARs
will be determined in
future O.U.
CU treatment will meet
the MCL for TCE 5.0 ug/l
and the State Action
level for PCE 4.0 ug/l
Cleanup goals will
reduce PCE below the
detection limit of
1.0 ugh for purgable
hal ocarbons
6W treatment will meet
SAWPA limitations for
discharge of
arsenic 2.0 nigll,
cadmium 0.064 mg/i.
chromium 2.0 mg/l,
lead 0.58 mg/l.
total toxic organics
(excluding PCBs and
pesticides) 0.58 mg/i.
and PCBs and pesticides
0.02 mg/i
$5, 100,000
(present worth)
Site
Name,
Oper—
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
able Estimated
Unit’ Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Est imated
Remedy Standards/Goais Capital/0&M Costs
07/31/87 1st Leachate
contamination
with VOCs Including
TCE
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
09/30/87 1st CU contaminated
with VOCs including
PC £
06/25/87 2nd 6W contaminated
with VOCs including
TCE. organics,
inorganics, and
metai S
$2, i92 .895
(capital)
$2,284,105
(present worth 01,11)
$1,616,000 —
$1 .771 .800
(capital)
$181,400 —
$303,100
(annual 0&M)
$1,047,000 —
$1,i36 ,000
(capital)
$1,243,000 —
$) ,408 ,000
(annual 0&M)
—25—
-------
I V 1987 RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) SUMMARY TA8LE
Col bert
Landfill, WA
Installation and
operation of
Interception and
extraction wells with
onsite OW treatment;
and provision of an
alternate water supply
Cleanup goals
based on MCLS
include TCA 200.0 mg/i,
DCE 7.0 ug/l.
TCE 5.0 ug/l , and DCA
4,050.0 ugIl. Piethylene
chloride 2.5 ug/l and
PCE 0.1 ug l are based
on the 10 cancer
risk level
10
Si te Name.
State/
Region Type
Signature
Date
Ope r-
able Estimated
Unit Threat/Problem Waste Volume
Components of Selected Estimated
Remedy Standards/Goals Capital/O&M Costs
09/29/87 1st— 6W contaminated
Final with VOCs including
ICE and PCE
Not provided
$24 .000,000
(present worth)
-------
(
SECTION IV
RECORDS OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
FY 1982 - 1986
The Record of Decision Summary Table provides an overview of site
problems, selected remedies, cleanup cntena and estimated costs provided
in the RODs signed between FY 1982-1986. The table is presented by
Region, in alphabetical order according to the site name.
J
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT! WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS! ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
( ) ( )
01 Auburn Road, NH 09/17/86 1st GW Not provided Extension of existing Not provided 2.372.000 57.000
contaminated municipal water supply (present worth)
with VOCs
including
TCE,
organics, and
inorganics
01 Baird and 09/30/86 1st GW, soil, and 191.000 yd 3 Excavation and orisite Excavation will 44,3 6,000 4.132.000
McGulre, MA sediments thermal destruction remove (present
contaminated of contaminated approximately 95 worth)
with VOCs, soils; GW pump and percent of
organics, treatment with onsite contamination by
pesticides discharge to the mass. Action
including aquifer; restoration levels for GW
dioxin, PAHS, of wetlands; and remediation will
and metals relocation of river be developed
during design
01 Beacon Heights. 09/23/85 1st - Final GW, SW. and Not provided Excavation of Excavation of soil 17.397.000 235.000
CT soil contaminated soils to background
contaminated with onsite levels, which will
with VOCs and consolidation; RCRA be determined
organics capping of during design
consolidated wastes.
gas venting, and
sLorni ater
management; leachate
collection with
ofisite disposal at a
licensed waste water
treatment facility j
onsite treatment with
discharge to Hockanum
Brook; extension of
public water supply
to the next municipal
supply; fencing, and
installation of a
more extensive GW
monitoring system
-------
fYaZ-F186 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TADLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE T hREAT! WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS! ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAHE, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
I )
01 Cannon 09/30/8S 1st GW, SW. soil, Not provided Removal and offsite Not provided 350.000 0
Eiugineering/ and sediments disposal of tanks, or
Plymouth, MA contaminated associated pipework, 433.000
with PAH5. and foundation to a
pesticides. RCRA approved facility
and metals
including lead
01 Charles George. 12/29/83 1st GW Not provided Extension of existing Not provided To be determrned T be
MA contaminated water Supply system determined
with VOCs
01 Charles George. 07/11/85 2nd Air, GW, SW. Not provided Capping; SW diversion Not provided 13,613,725 1.252,901
NA and sludge and collection
contaminated system; venting
with VOCs off-gas collection
including System to the
toluene, atmosphere; and a
organics, and full peripheral
metals leachate collection
system
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TA L (
EST IMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&H COSTS
( )
01 Hocomorico Pond. 09/30/85 1st — Final GW. SW, soil. Not provided Fonner La oQfl : Not provided 2.213.000 56.000
HA and sediments capping with site
contaminated grading; and
with relocation of storm
organics. drain pipe
inorganics.
and metals Kettle Pond Area :
pond dewatering and
lowering area ground
water levels; soil
and waste excavation;
dewatering sediments
with onsite
landlillirig; air
quality monitoring;
if necessary.
treatment with
discharge of effluent
water, construction
of onsite landfill;
and restoration of
wetland areas
Hocomonco Pond and
Discl)prge Stream :
mechanical dredging
and onsite disposal
of sediments; and
treatment of pond
water in system
constructed for
Kettle Pond area
Otis Streg : seal
sLorm drain
JiQiated Areas :
removal of
containi nated
materials and onsite
disposal
—3—
-------
rYa2-rvR RECOPO fl nrcTcTnu IilQ4AQY TARI [
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
THREAT!
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS Of
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS!
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
01 Keefe Environ- 11/15/83 1st
mental. NH
01 Icellogg-Deering 09/25/86 1st
Well Field. CT
6w, soIl.
sludge, and
air
contaminated
with metals.
and VOCs
including
toluene and
benzene
SW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE.
organics. and
metals
6W
contaminated
with VOCs
Including TCE
and PCE
GW, SW, soil,
and air
contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
and PCE
Capping with soil
grading; 6W pump and
treatment using air
stripping with
discharge to the
aquifer; development
of a multi-service 6W
response plan;
insti tut tonal
controls;
stabilization of side
slopes; and treatment
of gaseous emissions
Removal and ofisite
disposal of lagoon
contents, liner, and
highly contaminated
soil
IniLiation of
existing air
stripping facilities
with discharge to
existing trea tment
plant and
distribution system
Onsite cleaning and
salvage of tanks; and
offsite disposal of
liquids and sludges
Eliminate direct
contact threat of
soils with arsenic
(300 mg/kg,
lead (600 mg/kg,
and chromium
(1000 mg/kg.
6W treatment will
meet lids.
Air remedy will
achieve NAAQ
standards and unit
cancer risks
6W treatment will
achieve a 99
percent TCE
removal effi-
ciency, which
corresponds to the
106 excess
cancer risk
12,302,300
or
12,612,000
(depending on
air treatment)
(present worth)
REGION SITE NAME, ST
01 Industri-plex,
MA
09/30/86 1st
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
u i
1,000 yd 3
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
01 McKin Site, HE 07/15/83 IRM
Not provided 500,000
69, 751
285,500
or
311,000
(depending
on air
treatment)
0
52,836
0
Not provided 47,000
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIC DATE UNIT
THREATJ
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
( )
CU. SW. and
soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE
6W. SW. soil.
and sediments
containi nated
with
organics.
inorganics,
and metals
GW and soil
containi nated
with PCBs and
VOCs
including ICE
Onsite soil aeration;
offsite disposal of
drums; soil testing
of petroleum
contaminated areas;
6W pimp and
treatment; SW
discharge system;
reevaluation of CU
performance
standards: ofisite CU
and SW monitoring
program; and siLe
removal and closure
activities
Excavation and
consolidation of
sludge deposits and
sediments with
backfilling to
original grade and
revegetation of
wetlands; RCRA
capping over entire
hifl area;
construction of
upgradi nt surface
and 6W diversion
System, and
downgradient CU
monitoring
Onsite disposal of
primarily PCB and
phenol contaminated
soils in a RCPA/TSCA
landfill; and site
closure activities
CU treatijient will
meet 1O cancer
risk level
criteria including
1.1 ,l-trichloro-
ethane 92 ugh and
ICE 28 ug/l. Soil
will be treated to
TCE 0.1 mg/kg
All outlying
sludge deposits
and contaminated
soils and
sediments
associated with
these deposits
will be excavated
to background
levels for
chromium, lead.
and mercury
70.000
(years 2-3O
12. 120
(year 1)
25.648
(years 2-4)
19,048
(years 5-30
REGION SITE NAME. ST
STANDAROS/
GOAL S
ANNUAL
0811 COSTS
ti
01 McKin Site. liE 07/22/85 2nd - Final
01 Nyanza Chemical. 09/04/85 1st
MA
01 Picillo Farm, RI 09/30/85 1st
Not provided
Not provided
3,500 yd 3
3.919.000 38,900
5,600.000 - 92.000
9,800.000 (year 1)
Not provided 841.000
-5-
-------
fY82-FYUÔ _ RECORD Of DECISION _ SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIC DATE UNIT
TIIREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR CO IIPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAN DARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
1€i
01 Western Sand & 09/28/84 1st
Gravel • RI
6W, SW, and
sot 1
contaminated
with PCB 5.
VOCs, and
met a is
6W, SW. and
air
contaminated
with VOCs.
inorganics.
and heavy
metals
6W. SW, and
air
contaminated
with VOCs,
inorganics.
and metals
6W. SW, and
soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
including TCE
and PCI
organics. and
metals
6W
contaminated
with VOCs
including
ICE, and
organics
Excavation and
offsite d1spo al of
lagoon contents and
highly contaminated
soil; and clay
capping of entire
site
Capping with
installation of a
slurry wall
Not provided 6W paup and treatment
system
Excavation and onsite
treatment of soils
via aeration, soil
washing, or
composting followed
by onsite disposal;
6W pump and treatment
at P01W; and
restoration of
wetlands
Installation of
carbon canister
filters as a
temporary measure;
and installation of a
pemanent alternate
water supply
6W treatment will 4,696,400
attain ACLs
At a miniman, soil 2.058,000
will be treated to
TVO I mg/kg or
lower. 6W will be
treated to S ugll
for PCI and ICE
Not provided 1,493,513
(present worth)
100,800
(years 2-30)
REGION SITE NAME, ST
Not provided
Not provided
01 Re-Solve, MA 07/01/83 1st
01 Sylvester, NI l 07/29/82 IRK
01 Sylvester, NH 09/22/83 1st
Dl Tinkham Garage, 09/30/86 1st - final
NH
ANNUAL
08$ COSTS
( it
Not provided 3,050,000 36,000
Not provided 8,822,000 750,000
10,800 yd 3
Not provided
1,380,000
874.000
156,800
(year 1)
-6-
-------
FYB2-FYB6 RECORO OF DECISION SU *IARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
ThREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
‘4 ’
01 Winthrop
Landfill. ME
02 Brewster Well
Field. NY
GW contami- Not provided
nated with
organics
GW, soil, and
sediments
contaminated
with VOC5.
organics, and
meta is
GW
contaminated
with VOCS
including ICE
and PCE
RCRA capping.
alternate water
Supply; and
Institutional controls
Removal of waste
water and sediments
from pond and bog
with regrading and
covering of both
areas and treatment
of waste water with
discharge to stream;
excavation of VOC
contaminated soil
with onsite or
offsite incineration;
evaluation of soil
washing, egregaLion,
and other
technologies to
reduce the volune of
soils to be
Inc ineraLed;
compacted soil
capping; fencing
around site and work
areast and evaluation
of monitoring program
effectiveness
CU PLMIIP and treatment
using existin9 air
stripping facil ities
with reinjection to
the aquifer
ACLs for each 114
contaminant will
be established
based on RCRA
criteria. If ACL
not established,
protection will be
to background
levels
Excavation of soil 9.200.000
with 1O•000 mg/kg
TVOs
Existing air
Stripping system
exceeds State and
Federal ARARs for
GW which include
ICE 10 ugh
(State) and S ugh
(Federal)
42.000
(if ACt nc
exceeded)
360.000 -
1.480.000
(if ACL
exceeded)
REGION SITE NAME. ST
02 Bog Creek Farm,
NJ
STANDARDS/
G0AL S
ANNUAL
O&H COSTS
I 4 1
6.000.000
11/22/85 1st — Final
09/30/85 1st
09/30/86 1st
Not provided
Not provided
S4.400
27.468
163,912
-7-
-------
FY8 -FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBI EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAN DARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
( )
02 CaldwelI 09/25/86 1st
Trucking. NJ
GW, SW, soil.
and sediments
contaminated
with VOCs and
PCOs
6W. SW. and
soil
contaminated
with PCBs,
VOCs. and
metals
GW and soil
contaminated
with organics
including
PAHs and
PCBs, VOCs
including
TCE,
inorganiCS.
and metals
including lead
Disposal of oily
waste, sediment, and
sludge via onstte
incineration; removal
and disposal of
contaminated water
using onsite
treatment; drum
excavation with
offsite removal;
maintenance pumping;
removal and ofisite
disposal of tanks and
waste; and
installation of an
alternate water
supply pipeline
Excavation and
offstte disposal of
liquids, sludges,
asphalt piles, drums,
and contaminated soil
from lagoons and
northern wetlands;
restoration of
original site
Contours and
vegetation; and
implementation of a
S-year GW monitoring
p roy ram
Excavation and heat
addition treatment of
soil and waste
materials with onsite
disposal; GW
treatment using air
stripping; and
provision of an
alternate water supply
6W n ist meet TOC 57,672,000
limit of SO mg/l
on a 30 day
average
Not provided 2,200.000
(Phase I)
5,110.000
(Phase II)
REGION SITE NAME. ST
02 Bridgeport. NJ 12/31/84 1st — Final
02 Burnt Fly Bog. NJ 11/16/83 1St
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
Not provided
Not provided
28.000 yd 3
20,000
60. 000
48 • 000
Not provided 5,490,000
-8-
-------
FYB2-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
516 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONINETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAN OARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
02 Chemical 09/19/83 1st
Control. NJ
02 Combe Fill
North. NJ
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCS.
organics
including
PCBs.
pesticides.
and inorganics
GW and soil
contaminated
with organics
and low
levels of VOCs
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PC(
6W and soil 3.900 yd 3
contaminated
with VOCs
Removal of gas
cylinders;
reconstruction of
storm sewer catch
basins and grates;
cleaning of the storm
sewer system with
constructon of
curbing; and
decontamination of
box trailer and
vacutin truck
Capping with grading
and compacting of
disposal areas;
installation of
drainage and venting
systems; and site
fencing
RCRA capping; active
gas collection and
treatment system; 6W
and leachate pump and
treatment with
discharge to brook;
alternate water
supply; SW controls.
and fencing
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
contaminated waste.
soil, and surface
drums; RCRA capping;
and 6W pump and
treatment
Cleanup will be
monitored and
assessed in
accordance with
Drinking Water
Standards to
determine need for
addi Lional
remediat ion
REGION SITE NAME. ST
ANNUAL
0&M COSTS
I (1
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
09/29/86 1st - Final
02 Combe Fill 09/29/86 1st - Final
South. NJ
02 Olmperio 03/27/85 1st — Final
Property. NJ
Not provided 732.500 0
Not provided 10.500.000 168,000
Not provided 46.060.700 673.000
4,251,551 1.169.449
(present
worth)
-9-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
516 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COHPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAND ARDS/
GOAL S
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
02 Florence
Landfill. NJ
02 FriedlIlan
Property. NJ
06/27/86 1st - Final Gi4 and soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
heavy metals
04/30/85 1st — Final
No threat None
Q4, SW. soil.
and air
contaminated
with VOCs.
inorganics,
and organics
6W, SW. and
soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including
TCE. and
organics
including PCBs
Capping with slurry
wall containment
system; removal and
onsite disposal of
lagoon liquids and
surface debris;
leachate collection.
treatment, and
offsite disposal, gas
collection and
treatment; and
partial fencing
No action with
five-year onsite well
monitoring; and deed
restrictions
Capping with
regrading of existing
landfill slopes; gas
collection and
treatment system; 6W
pump and treatment
with discharge to
POTW or SW;
remedlatlorL of Holly
Run and Briar Lake;
SW controls; fencing;
and extension of
existing water supply
system
GW and soil flushing
with GW treatment and
reinjection into
soil; and conduction
of testing programs
to evaluate capping
and extent of drum
pit PCB contamination
Not provided 0
Discharge criteria
will be
established by the
State and are
dependent on the
point of discharge
(to be determined)
GW treatment
system will be
designed to meet
NPDES permit
limits
12,000
REGION SITE NAME, ST
Not provided
Not provided
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
‘4 ’
02 GEMS Landfill, NJ 09/27/85 1St - Final
02 Goose Farm, NJ 09/27/85 1st
Not provided
Not provided
8,021,000 170,000
27.365,000
3,014 ,000
601 .000
-10-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUHMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COHPONENETS OF STANDARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST 510 DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS 08 )4 COSTS
02 Helen Kramer. NJ 09/27/85 1st - Final Qi and SW Not provided Clay capping with Not provided 36.478.000 1.047.900
contaminated slurry wall or (year 1
with VOCs containnent system. 38.089.000 pretreatme
including gas collection and (pending onsite
TCE. treatment system; treatment) 792.100
organics. and dewatering, (complete
inorgan ics excavation, and onsite
filling of leachate treatment)
ponds and lagoons;
fencing of site and
work areas; SW
controls; and 6W and
leachate collection
and treatment with
disposal at P01W or
to SW
02 Hudson River, NY 09/25/84 1st - Final Soil and Not provided In-situ containment Not provided Not provided Not provid
river of remnant shoreline
sediments deposits; and
contaminated evaluation of
with PCBs Waterford Water
Treatment Faciflty
02 Hyde Park, NY 11/26/85 1st - Final 6W and soil 80,000 tons Extraction and The 106 cancer 17,000 Not provid
contaminated incineration of risk level will be (present worth)
with VOCS. non-aqueous phase achieved
and organics liquids; 6W pump and
including treatment using
PCBs and activated carbon, and
dioxin construction of plume
contaminant Systeflis
02 Kentucky Avenue 09/30/86 1st 6W Not provided Extension of public Remedy will attain 303,800 19,000
Well Field, NY contaminated water supply to the MCI for TCE
with VOCs private well users, S ug/l
including TCE and 6W monitoring
02 Krysowaty Farm, 06/20/84 1st - Final GW and soil Not provided Excavation and Not provided 2,164,014 145,698
NJ contaminated offsite disposal of
with VOCs, contaminated soil and
organics. and waste; and provision
pesticides for a permanent
alternate water supply
—11—
-------
1Y82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUPVIARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
516 DATE UNIT
TM RE AT/
PROBL EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDAROS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
02 Lone Pine
Landfill. N.)
Q4. SW. soil.
and sediments
contaminated
with VOCs and
heavy metals
6W. SW. and Not provided
soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
organics -
6W and soil
contaminated
with VUCs
including
toluene.
organics. and
metals
6W. SW. and
soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
pesticides.
and metals
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
soils and waste
material with filling
and grading; 6W pump
and treatment with
reinjection into
aquifer; and fencing
Capping with slurry
wall contaii aient
system; and 6W
collection and
treatment with
discharge a POTW
6W and leachate
extraction with
injection wells
within containment
system for flushing
and dewatering with
onsite pretreatment
and discharge to
POTW; and flushing of
contairwuent System
for cleansing
Multi-layer surface
sealing with slurry
wall containment
system; and GW
collection and
treatment at POTU or
onsite plant
6W treatment 2.322.000
effluent will
attain SDWA
criteria
Marginal benefits
of successive
flushing cycle and
effects of
leachate release
into GW will be
evaluated within
5 years
REGION SITE NAME. ST
6.500 yd 3
02 Lang Property. 09129/86 1st — Final
NJ
02 Lipari Landfill. 08/03/82 1st
NJ
02 Lipari Landfill. 09/30/85 2nd
NJ
09/28/84 1st - Final
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
It
Not provided 1.769.150
Not provided
Not provided
3.464.000
612.000
91 .250
7)5,000
324 • 734
Not provided 10.642.050
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COIIPONENETS OF STANDAROS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COST
02 Love Canal. NJ 05/06/85 1st SW, sedi- Not provided Removal and CX reconmends 8.929.000 - Not
ments. and dewatering of soil treatment to iz.ooo,000 provided
air contami— contaminated creek TCOD 1 ug/ky
nated with sediments; inspection
VOCs, of sewer reaches for
organics, defects, repairing of
pesticides damaged flood gate.
including and hydraulic
dioxin, and cleaning of
metals designated sewers;
dredging and cleaning
of culverts; berm
construction; interim
onsite storage of
sediments; and
installation of an
administration
building
02 Marathon 09/30/86 1st SW. 30.083 yd 3 Hydraulic dredging of Sediments will be 16,640,000 3,530,000
Battery. NY sediments, sediments with treated to a (year 1)
and biota chemical fixation and 100 mg/kg
contaminated offsite disposal, established 180.000
with metals dredging, water background (years 2-
including treatment, and concentration.
cadmium, disposal; marsh Standards for 127,000
nickel, and restoration; and site total cadmium (years 6-
cobalt access restrictions water
concentrations
include
6.6 x io mg/l
and
2.0 x io 3 mg/l
for water hardness
levels of 50 mg/l
and 200 mg/l,
respectively
—13-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
TIIREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMAI 0
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
02 Olean Well
Field. NY
Soil and GW
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCI. and
metals
including
copper,
chromium, and
lead
GW Not provided
contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
Soil
contaminated
with
organics,
VOCs, and
metals
Excavation with heat
treatment and offsite
disposal of soils;
and alternate water
supply
Reactivation of
municipal wells,
construction of two
air stripping systems
for 4 treatment with
discharge to public
water supply system;
extension of existing
Olean water lines;
inspection of McGraw
Edison industrial
sewer and analysis of
repair and
replacement opt1on ;
and recoiijuendation of
insti tutional
controls to restrict
GW usage
Limited excavation
and offsite removal
of contaminated soil,
subsurface tanks, and
drums; RCRA capping
with slurry wall
containment system
and site grading, and
GW and leachate
recovery and treatment
MCLs and State
guidelines set
action levels for
GW of TCE 5 ug/l
and PCE S ug/l.
Soil action levels
include copper
170 mg/kg.
chromiun (total)
100 mg/kg, and
lead 100 mg/kg
7,005,000
(sanitary
landfill)
or
11.735,000
(RCRA landfill)
GW will be treated 1,996,780
to ICE S ug/l
REGION SITE NAME, ST
U Metal tec/Aero—
systems, NJ
10,000 ,J3
STAN DARDS/
GOAL S
ANNUAL
O&H COSTS
It’
06/30/86 1st
09/24/85 1st
02 PAS Oswego, NY 06/06/84 1st - Final
179,000
799,040
117,000
Not provided
Not provided 1,363,700
-14-
-------
IYR,-cYMF , rrflRfl flF flFrTcTflN SIlI V4ARY TAR E
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROSI EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAN DARDS/
GOAL S
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
rti
02 Price Landfill. 09/20/83 1st
NJ
02 Rockaway Borough
Well Field. NJ
02 Sharkey
Landfill. NJ
CU and soil
contaminated
with VOCs,
organicS
including
PCBs .
pesticides.
and metals
CU and soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
organics
CU
contaminated
with VOCS
Including
TCE.
organics, and
inorgani cs
CU Not provided
contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
and PCE
6W and soils
contaminated
with VOCs
including
TCE.
inorganics,
and metals
Removal and offsite
disposal of drums and
lab packs; and
excavation and
offsite disposal of
visibly contaminated
soil with 6W pumping
and removal
Replacement and
relocation of the
water supply well
field and
transmiss ion
facilities; and
analysis of plume
management, source
control, and 6W
treatment remedies
CU pimp and onsite
pretreatment with
discharge to a POP, ,
site capping; and
fencing
CU treatment using
existing System
Capping; and 6W pump
and treatment
Extraction and
treatment will
continue until TVO
concentration
reaches 10 ug/l or
less In 6W
Municipal
treatment system
will be designed
in accordance with
SOWA standards tO
remove TCE and PCE
to 5 ug/l each
REGION SITE NAME. ST
02 Pijak Farm. NJ
09/30/84 1st - Final
ANNUAL
0&M COST
( )
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided 1,962.750
Not provided
02 Price Landfill.
NJ
09/29/86 2nd - Final
09/29/86 1st
09/29/86 1st - Final
53,600
5.070.000 Not provl
9.050.000 1.010,000
(years 1
255,000
(years 6-
0 74,800
23.173.000 330.000
Not provided
Not provided
—15—
-------
FY8Z-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
516 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBL EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
02 Sinclair
Refinery, NY
Soil Not provided
contaminated
with VOCs and
metals
6W and soil
containi nated
with
organtcs,
metals, and
I norganics
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCS.
and organics
including PCBs
Removal and offsite
disposal of 300
dri. ns; backfifling
with clean fill;
onsite consolidation
of waste from South
Landfill area with
RCRA capping; sue
fencing; and partial
river channelization
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
all drisns, lab packs.
and visibly
contaminated soil;
and site grading and
surface restoration
Capping; removal of
tanks and building
debris with oIfsite
incineration;
treatment or disposal
of tank contents with
offslte disposal of
tanks and building
debris; excavation
and offsite disposal
of buried sludge
waste area; and
excavation and
offsite disposal of
PCB contaminated soil
6W and SW will be
treated to total
organics
100 ugh.
toluene 10 ug/l,
Li. I-tr chloro-
ethane 50 ug/l,
arsenic S ug/l,
zinc 30 ug/l, and
PCBs 0.0095 ug/l.
Soil will be
removed to toluene
72 ug/kg.
trans-l .2-
dichloroethylene
325 ug/kg,
arsenic
15.000 ug/kg,
zinc 53,000 ug/kg,
and PCBS 12.1 ug/kg
In accordance
State policy.
soils will be
excavated up to
1.5 feet, which
contain PCBs
5 mg/kg
REGION SITE NAME. ST
STAN OARDS/
GOALS
09/30/85 1st
02 Spence Farm. NJ 09/30/84 1st
02 Swope Oil, NJ 09/27/85 1st
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
8.759,000 30,000
95,300
33,000
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided 845,500
with 5,590,356
-16-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUtIARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
TMREAT/
PROBLEH
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANOARDS/
GOALS
EST IMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
It’
02 Vestal liater
Supply Well 1-I.
NY
6W, soil, and
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
orgar iics
including
PCBs,
pesticides.
and metals
LW
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
LW and soil
contaminated
with PCBs
Excavation of lagoon
sediments and highly
contaminated
subsurface soils with
offsite disposal
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
surface soils; and GW
pump and treatment
6W pump and treatment
using air stripping,
alternate water
supply; and cessation
of untreated
discharge to river
Excavation and
chemical treatment of
PCB contaminated soil
with backfilling of
treatment residuals;
offsite disposal of
contaminated
asphaltic material.
and repavement of
roadways and
driveways; perched
water treatment in
sewer trench;
construction of
hydraulic barrier at
end of sewer trench.
conduction of
treatability study to
determine effective
PCO and soil
treatment; and sewage
and sediments sampling
Soil removal to
achieve PCBs
5 mg/kg, base—
neutrals
100 mg/kg. TVOs
1 mg/kg. and
numerous levels
for heavy metals.
No standards have
been set for 6W
treatment
Based on 1O
lifetime cancer
risk, media
cleanup goals for
PCBs include soil
10 mg/kg. air
1.67 ug/m 3 .
LW 100 ug/l.
and SW
7.9 x 1O ug/l
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ESTIMATEU
WASTE
QUANTITY
02 Syncon Resins. NJ 09/29/86 1st
06/27/86 1st
ANNUAL
08.11 COSTS
700 yd 3
2.000 yd 3
Not provided
Not provided
02 Wide Beach. NY
09/30/85 1st - Final
209.000
119,750
Not provided
5,600,0 00
389. 4 00
9.295,000
-17-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD Of DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPOPIENETS OF STANOARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS 3&M COSTS
( )
03 Army Creek 09/30/86 1st G.J. SW, soil. 1.900.000 yd 3 Capping, downgradient Not provided 12,030.000 o ,ooo
Landfill, DE and sediments GW pinping with or or
contaminated monitoring; and 12.340.000 3 ,ooo
with VOCs, possible upgradient (upgradient (upgradien t
inorgan ics, controls controls) controls)
and metals
03 Blosenski 09/29/86 1st Gil, SW. apd Not provided Excavation and Removal of 11.000.000 - 534.300
Landfill, PA soil removal of buried contaminated medIa 15.000.000 (years 1-2)
contaminated drums and other wil’ attain a
with PCBs, materials with RCRA 10 excess (13.000,000
VOCs oIfs lte disposal: cancer risk. CU estimated
including alternate water will initially be baseline cost)
benzene and supply; CU pumping treated to ACts,
TCE. with onsite then to levels
inorganics, treatment; capping established by
and pesticides with SW diversion and NPDES
gas venting; and
source reduction
program
03 Bruin Lagoon. PA 06/02/82 1st GW, SW. and Not provided Removal and offsite Not provided 1.456.000 oo,ooo
soil disposal of liquid
contaminated lagoon contents with
with asphalt physical
sludge, acid stabilization of
liquids, lagoons, effluent
waste oil, pond cleanup, and
resins, fly dike stabilization;
ash, coal capping; and CU
fires, diversion
sulfuric and
sul ionic
acids, and
petroleum
waste
03 Bruin Lagoon, PA 09/29/86 2nd - Final Soils and 17,500 yd 3 Stabilization! Not providcd 2,695,000 16,000
bedrock neutrali2ation of
contaminated sludge and perched
with acidic liquid zone; in-situ
sludges and bedrock treatment,
metals and capping
-18-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANOARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
03 Chisman Creek. VA 09/30/86 1st GW, soil 484.600 yd 3 Capping (2 pits); Action for nickel 14,119.000 506.000
(disposal capping and complies with the (year 1)
pits with fly upgradient CM AWQC for
ash), and SW diversion of one pit; protection of 64.000
contaminated alternate water fresh water (years 2-30
with trace supply; possible deed aquatic Ufe
metals and restrictions; and CM (88 ug/l -
inorgan ics drainage and onsite 280 ug/l) and salt
treatment water aquatic life
(I? ugh)
03 Delaware City 09/30/86 1st GW, SW. and 25.000 yd 3 Excavation and Recovery wells 1.904,000 43.000
PVC, DE soil removal of well operate until
contaminated contaminated sails concentrations of
with VOCs and sludges with VOl. EOC. and ICE
including TCE offslte disposal; reach 1 ugh.
capping; GWpunip and 0.94 ug/3, and
treatment; and 2.? ug/l.
alternate water supply respectively for 2
consecutive sample
analyses
03 Douglassvtlle. PA 09/27/85 1st Soil and Not provided Removal and Not provided 5,569,500 196,000
sediments consolidation of
contaminated contaminated soils
with VOCs, and sediments from
pesticides, the drainage ditch.
organics drainage swale,
including buried lagoon, and
PANs and drl.Mn disposal areas
PCBs. and with onsate disposal
metals under cap; capping
former sludge lagoon
area arid sludge
disposal area;
installation of
levees and dikes to
protect from 100-year
flooding event; and
soil predesigri study
to determine extent
of excavation and
capping
-19-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD Of DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANOAR DS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME, ST SIC DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS “CAPITA COSTS DaM COSTS
( )
03 Drake Chemical. 09/30/84 1st . SW. soil, Not provided Capping and grading Not provided 445,311 9,427
PA and stream of leachate stream;
sediments partial excavation
contaminated and temporary onsite
with VOCs, storage of
pesticides, contaminated
and inorganics sediments; and
construction of
conduit and a
granular drain
03 Drake Chemical, 05/13/86 2nd CU, soil, 3,900 yd 3 Incineration of Not provided 3,143.000 0
PA sludges, onsite chemicals;
buildings. 192,000 gals demolition and
and debris offsite removal of
contaminated buildings, tanks, and
with organics debris; waste water
and Inorganics pump and treatment of
lagoons; metal
recycling; and
analysis with
possible disposal of
metal decontamination
recycling fluid
03 Enterprise 05/10/84 1st - Final SW and soil Not provided Offsite disposal of Not provided 4.324,000 4.200
Avenue, PA contaminated soils which fail key
with VOCs, indicator parameter
organics. and testing levels;
metals backfilling of site
with soils which
passed parameter
test; and grading and
vegetating as a final
cover
—20-
-------
FYBZ-1Y86 RECORD D I DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
516 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STAN DARDS/
GOAL S
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
03 Fischer &
Porter. PA
05/04/84 1st — Final SW
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE
6W, SW. and
sal 1
contaminated
with VOCs.
met a is.
organi Cs
inCluding
PCBs. and
inorganics
6W and SW
cont aim nated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE
Improvements in
manufacturing
facility to prevent
release; onsite
installation of
pumping wells and
packed colum
aeration to reduce
contaminant levels in
effluents with
discharge to Sw; and
treatment of
contaminated wells
SW collection and
treatment with
offsite disposal;
removal and ofisite
disposal of
sediments, sludges.
bulk wastes, drt.sns,
and debris; 6W
extraction and
treatment with
reinjection to soil
for flushing; and
site grading with 2
foot clean soil cover
RCRA capping; SW
diversion and gas
venting systems;
conduction of a
predesign Study to
fully delineate the
source of
contamination and
determine sink-hole
activity;
construction of an
onsite treatment
facility; 6W pump and
treatment; and
extension of
municipal water main
La affected residents
Target soil and 6W 3,572,000
ACLS will be
established during
design
6W will be treated
to PCE 1.0 ug/l,
TCE
1.8 - 5.0 ugh.
vinyl chloride
2 0 ug/l,
I • I, 1—trichioro—
ethane 21.? ug/l,
and toulene
15,000 ug/l
REGION SITE NAME, ST
Not provided
ANNUAL
DM1 COSTS
Not provided Not provide
03 Harvey-Knott. DE
03 Heleva Landfill,
PA
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
09/30/85 1st - Final
03/22/85 1st - Final
44,000
62,000
7,791,000
-21-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
ThREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
HAJOR COHPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDA RD SI
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
03 Lackawanna
Refuse Site. PA
GW
contanii nated
with VOCs
SW and soil
contaminated
with VOCS.
organics. and
metals
Dwellings
contaminated
with
radioactive
materials
including
rad I tin
Dwellings and
soil
contaminated
with
radioactive
materials
including
rad 1
Soil and
debris
contaminated
with
pesticides
Provision of
alternate water
supply; and possible
GW usage restrictions
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
dams and highly
contaminated fill;
leachate collection
and surface drainage
diversion; clay
capping and
construction of gas
venting systems; and
reconstruction of
access road
Permanent relocation
of residents
Demolition and
offsite disposal of
two homes; and
excavation and
offsite disposal of
contaminated soil
Excavation.
consolidation, and
anaerobic
biodegradation of
contaminated soil;
and removal and
offsite disposal of
contaminated debris
Excavation limits 8,200,000
will be determined
by background
contaminant levels
EPA guidelines for
radiation include
ganuia 0.17 rem/yr.
radon 0.03 WL, and
soil activity
5-15 pCi/g
EPA guidelines for
radiation include
ganma 0.17 rem/yr.
radon 0.03 WL, and
soil activity
5-15 pCi/g
The target soil
level for DOT and
its metabolites is
300 ug/kg. which
is equiyalent to
the 10° car-
cinogenic risk
level
1,014.000 10,000
(year 1)
7,500
(year 2)
REGION SITE NAME. ST
03 Industrial Lane.
PA
Not provided
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
141
30,800 0
09/29186 1st
03/22/85 1st - Final
08/02/85 1st
09/22/86 2nd
03/31/86 1st - final
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
3,600 yd 3
03 Lansdowne
Radiation. PA
03 Lansdowne
Radiation, PA
03 Leetown
Pesticide, I.N
1,500,000 10,000
4.000,000 - “Minimal”
4,500.000
—22-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMHARY TABI-E
[ ST IHATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE 14AJOR COMPONENETS OF STANOARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAHE. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
( )
03 Lehigh Electric. 02/11/83 1st - Final Soil Not provided Excavation and Offsite disposal ,koi,ooo 46.000
PA contaminated removal of of soils with PC8
with VOCs and contaminated soil, concentration
PC8s transformers, and )50 mg/kg
debris with offsite
disposal of soil;
demolition of onsite
buildings; and
backuilling, grading,
and vegetation of
site to minimize
erosion and control
runoff
03 Limestone Road. 09/30/86 1st Soils, GW, Not provided Capping with grading Not provided 1,192,5 0 To be
MD SW. and and fencing determined
sediment
cofltanii nated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE. and
metals
03 Matthews 06/02/83 1st — Final GW and soil Not provided Extension of existing Not provided 662,000 292,000
Electroplating, contaminated municipal water
VA with metals system to affected
including residents
c hromi un
03 HcAdoo, PA 06/05/84 1PM GW and soil Not provided Cleaning and removal Not provided 114,500
contaminated of underground waste
with organics storage tanks;
and inorganics excavation and
offsite disposal of
visibly contaminated
soil; and evaluation
of analytical results
of soil analyses
—23—
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
TKREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
S TAN DA RD SI
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
03 McAdoo
Associates. PA
6W. SW. and
soil
contaminated
with paint
sludges.
spent
solvents.
met all Ic
sludges, acid
and caustic
liquids,
toluene,
waste
oil/water.
and solid
waste
Removal and offsite
disposal of the
onsite tank, debris.
and contaminated
soil; UmiLed
excavation of soil:
RCRA capping; SW
diversion: and site
covering
Excavation of
soil “hot spots”
which exceed
cadmium 0.2 ug/kg.
chromium 809 ug/kg.
and cyanide
33 ug/ky
03 Middletown Road.
MD
03/17/86 1st - Final
No threat None
No action
Not provided
0 0
Soils.
sediments.
and 6W
contaminated
with VOCs.
organics,
including
PCBs and
PAHs.
inorganics,
and metals
6W and SW
contaminated
with metals.
VOCs
including
TCE. and
inorganics
including
arsenic and
radioactive
materials
Excavation and onsite
consolidation of
soils under a RCRA
cap with site grading
and revegetation;
soil capping over
remaining soil; SW
management; 6W pump
and treatment; and
flood retention
system
Soil/clay capping;
erosion and
sedimentation control
measures; SW
diversion; leachate
collection,
treatment, and
discharge; methane
gas recovery and
sale;
securi ty/fenc ng
measures; and RCRA
closure
Soil cleanup goals
include PCBs
10 mg/kg, PAIlS
2.940 ug/kg. TCE
10 ug/ky, phenols
9,000 mg/kg, and
to luene
1,783 ug/kg
REGION SITE NAME, ST
06/28/85 2nd
Not provided
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
(4%
2,360,000 Not provided
03 Ilillcreek Dump.
PA
03 Moyer Landfill,
PA
05/07/86 1st - Final
09/30/85 1st - final
Not provided
Not provided
12.000,000 —
18,000,000
(15,000.000
estimated
base1ine cost)
1.763,000
(present
worth)
332.000
Not provided 6,293,500
-24-
-------
FY82-FYB ’6 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
03 Sand. Gravel &
Stone. MD
03 Taylor borough. 06/28/85 1st
PA
03 Tybouts Corner
Landfill, DE
GW. SW. soil.
and sediments
contaminated
with organics
and metals
SW, soil, and
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs
Including
TCE. and
organics
Possible GW Not provided
containinat ion
with VOCs and
metals
Soils and 6W
contaminated
with VOCS
including
ICE, and
inorganics
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
hazardous materials;
and 6W extraction and
treatment with
discharge to ponds.
aquifer, or creek
Removal and offstte
disposal of drums and
remnants; SW
collection and
treatment; excavation
and offsite disposal
of contaminated soil.
waste, and sediments
I ro ii two of the
former drum storage
areas (areas I & 2)
with backfilling and
placement of a
24-inch soil cover
over the remaining
three former drum
storage areas; and
fencing
No furtt er action
with semi-annual GW
monitoring
Excavation of waste
and soils with onsite
consolidation and
capping; and GW pump
and treatment
6W will be treated
to background
levels for heavy
metals and organic
compounds
6W will be treated
to the cancer risk
of io for
carcinogens, which
Includes TVO
100 ug/l
0 8,000
or
16, 000
PRP estimate.
315,000.000
4,600,000
(present
worth)
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
flIREAT/
PROBLEM
09/30/85 1st
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR CONPONENETS Of
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDAROS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
it i
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
it i
Not provided
Not provided
7,095.000
4,237,000
753 • 000
Not provide
of
soils,
to
levels
03 Taylor Borough,
PA
Excavation
sediments.
and wastes
background
Not provided
03/17/86 2nd - Final
03/06/86 1st - Final
Not provided
FS estimate:
$35,000,000;
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUP*IARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE T I IREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENITS OF STANDAROS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS 08.14 COSTS
( )
03 Tyson’s Dt.mip, PA 12/21/84 1st GW, SW, soil. Not provided Excavation and Not provided 5,118,000 351,000
and stream offsite disposal of’
sediments contaminated soils
contaminated and wastes,
with VOCs upgrading of the
existing air
stripping facility to
treat leachate,
shallow GW, and
surface run-on, and
excavation and
offsite disposal of
contaminated
sediments
03 Wade. PA 08/30/84 1st - Final Soil Not provided Removal and offsite Not provided 1.580,050 320,000
contaminated disposal of
with contaminated soil,
organics, tires, tankers, waste
metals, and piles, and
inorganics underground storage
tanks; demolition of
buildings, leveling
of debris. filling.
and grading of
property; and top
soil and seed capping
03 Westline Site, PA 07/03/86 1st — Final Soils 110 yd 3 Excavation and Soils will be 744,000 0
contaminated offsite incineration exc vated to a
with tars of tar deposits; 10” cancer risk
containing backfilling with level for
phenols and clean soil; and GW contaminants
PAHs verification study present onsite,
which is
CoflSiSt nt with
the 100 risk
level for GW
-26-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
04 American 09/30/85 1st
Creosote. FL
Soils, SW.
and sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
PCBs. PAHs.
and metals
Soil Not provided
contaminated
with aromatic
hydrocarbons
GW Not provided
contaminated
with VOCs
GW. soil, and
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics
including
PCP, and
metals
including
chromium
Excavation of soils,
sediments, and sludge
with onsite
contatrviient and
capping
Excavation and
consolidation of
contaminated soil
from areas both on
and off the site in
an onsite RCRA
landfill
Addition of air
stripping to existing
water treatment
system; and
operation of Miami
Spring and Preston
municipal wells
Excavatiqn of PCP
contamtnated soils
and sediments with
orisite incineration;
backfilling with
decontaminated soil;
GW recovery, storage,
and analysis;
possible onsite GW
treatment using
carbon adsorplion
with discharge to
surface
Excavation of
soils and sludges
to MCLs including
PAM 12.0 mg/kg and
benzene 0.13 mg/kg
Cleanup goals
based on EPA
primary drinking
water stand rds
and tile 10
cancer risk level
have been
identified for 50
priority
pollutants
All soils
containing PCP in
excess of 10 mg/kg
will be excavated.
GW will be treated
to levels which
comply with
Drinking Water
Standards or Water
Quality Criteria
04 A.L. Taylor, KY 06/18/86 1st - Final
ROD
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE
OPERABLE
UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COHPON(NETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
Not provided
GOALS CAPITAL COSTS
O&M COSTS
‘
Not provided 795,349
04 Biscayne Aquifer 09/16/85 1st - Final
Site, FL
04 Coleman Evans, FL 09/25/86 1st — Final
Not provid
50,000
(years 1-5
19, 000
(years 6-3
334.400
9.000 yd 3
5,678,000
5 .268.000
3 0OO,OOO -
3 800 .000
-27-
-------
FYB2-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUHMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
510 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBL EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENITS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
GOAL S
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
04 Distler
Brickyard, KY
GJ and sludge
lagoon
contaminated
with
organics, and
inorgan icS
Inc 1 ud I fl9
cyanide and
sulfide
GW and soils
contaminated
with VOCs
including
TCE, metals,
and inorganics
GI and soils
contaminated
with VOCs
Including TCE
and PCE,
metals, and
inorganics
Pond
sediments
contaminated
with
pesticides
and inorganics
Dewatering and
stabilt2ation of
sludge lagoon
contents and
placement in single
lined cell; and
capping
Excavation and
ofisite disposal of
all contaminated
soil; backfilling
with clean natural
granular soils; and
OW pimp and offsite
treatment aL P01W
with reinjection into
the aquifer
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
all contaminated
soil; backfilling
with clean natural
granular soil; and OW
ptmnp and ofisite
treatment at P01W
with reinjection of
uncontaminated water
into the aquifer
Excavation of
sediments with onsite
consolidation; RCRA
site closure; pond
water dilution with
discharge to
tributary; and
institutional controls
Cleanup goals
prevent exceedance
of drinking water
stapdards or the
l0° cancer risk
level
OW will be treated
and soil will be
excavated to
background levels
OW will be treated 11,138,400
and soil will be
excavated to
background levels
Pond water 344 .13S
dilution will meet
Ambient Water
Quality Criteria
REGION SITE NAME, ST
04 Davie Landfill,
FL
ANNUAL
0&M COSTS
3,000,000 - 100,000
3,100.000
09/30/85 1st
08/19/86 1st - Final
04 Distler Farm. KY 08/19/86 1st - Final
04 Gallaway Ponds. 09/26/86 1st — Final
TN
75,000 yd 3
8,000 yd 3
Not provided
1,600 yd 3
7,500,000
(present worth)
I ,56B,000
(years 1-2)
44.000
(years 3—30)
113,600
(years 1—10)
20,000
(years
11-30)
163,265
(present
worth)
-28-
-------
1YB2-FY86 RECORD Of _DECISIOtLSW t1AR1_IAflkE
04 Hipps Road
Landfill, FL
04 Lees Lane
Landfill, KY
04 Miami Drum 09/13/82 1st
Services. FL
6W
contaminated
with VOC5
including
TCE. and
metals
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
6W, SW, and
soil
contaminated
with VOC5,
metals, and
inorgan ics
6W and soil
containi nated
with
organics,
pesticides,
and metals
6W pump and treatment
at P01W; RCRA
Subtitle 0 landfill
closure; and
institutional controls
Excavation, aeration,
and onsite
replacement of VOC
contaminated soil;
and 6W pump and
treatment with
reinjection into the
aquifer
Removal of exposed
drums and offsite
disposal; capping of
hot spots and exposed
trash areas; gas
collection and
venting system;
possible alternate
water supply; bank
stabilization; and
institutional controls
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
soil; and treatment
of 6W encountered
during excavation
6W will be treated
to meet SOWA
requirements.
Water Quality
Criteria Human
Health Sta dards,
or the 10
cancer risk
6W cleanup goals
will be based on
the 10-6 cancer
risk level and
State Drinking
Water Standards
ACL will be 2,343,000
developed from 6W
monitoring data
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ROD
OPERABLE
THREAT/
ESTIMATED
WASTE
SIG
DATE
UNIT
PROBLEM
QUANTITY
09/03/86 1st - Final
04 Hollingsworth, FL 04/10/86 1st - Final
09/25/86 2nd - Final
MAJOR COHPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANOARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
I i
ANNUAL
0&M COSTS
I l
3,900,000 -
4,400,000
653.730
Not provided
Not provided
212,400 tons
Not provided
Not provid
364,215
127,440
Not provided
1,568,660
-29-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE TIIREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STAN DARD S/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
( ) ( )
04 Howbray 09/25/86 1st — Final Swamp soils 4.800 yd 3 ’ Excavation of Soils with 1,200 .000 - 0
Engineering. AL contaminated PCB-contaminated soil 25 mg/kg PCBs or 2,000,000
with PCBs with either onsite greater will be (offs i te
incineration, offsite excavated and incineration)
incineration. or treated (present worth)
solidification/ 0
stabilization of the 1.100.000 -
waste 1,800.000
(ons i te
incineration)
(present worth) 0
750 .000
(solidification/
stabilization)
(present worth)
04 Pepper’s Steel, 03/12/86 1st - Final G4, soil, and PCB1 mg/kg, Excavation, Soil will be 5,212.000 42.500
FL sediments approxi- solid i ficat ion/ excavated if
contaminated mately stabilization, and exceeds
with organics 48.000 yd 3 ; onsite disposal of PCB 1 mg/kg,
including lead, soil; collection and lead 1000 mg/kg,
PCBs, and 1000 mg/ks. offsite disposal of and arsenic 5 mg/kg
metals 21,500 yd : free oil; and land
arsenic, use institutional
5 mg/kg, controls
9.000 yd 3
(waste
quantities not
additive)
04 Pioneer Sand, FL 09/26/86 1st - Final Soil and pond Not provided RCRA Subtitle D Not provided 462.025 45,000
waters landfill closure. (year 1)
contaminated leachate collection.
with VOCs, treatment, and onsite 34.900
sludges, disposal; SW (years 2-301
metals, and treatment and onsite
inorganics discharge; and cover
system for sludge and
pond waste
-30-
-------
FYE2-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
04 Varsol SpFI 1 03/29/85 1st
Site. FL
04 Whitehouse waste 05/30/85 1st — final
Oil Pits. FL
6W . W.
soils, and
sediments
ontam1nated
with metals
6W
contaminated
with VOCs
including
PCE. organics
including
PAHS and
PCBs,
inorganics.
and pesticides
6W. SW. and
soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including
benzene,
metals
including
chromium, and
organics
including
phenols and
PAHs
94.000 yd 3
(soil)
20.000 yd 3
(sediments)
Excavation,
solidification/
fixation, and onsite
disposal of
solidified soil and
sediments; 6W pump
and treatment; S%4
treatment and
discharge; and
assessment of
potential
institutional controls
6W pump and treatment
with discharge to SW
No further action
Slurry wall
construction; 6W pump
and treatment;
removal of
contaminated
sediments; and RCRA
capping of the entire
site
Cleanup criteria
for indicator
chemicals were set
based on Federal
and State
standards and
risk-based levels
6W will be treated
to attain the ACL
equjvalent to
10-0 excess
cancer risk
Not provided 0
6W and SW quality
should meet State
primary drinking
water standards.
Soil and sediments
will be removed to
b.jckground or
“minimal” risk
levels
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ROD
OPERABLE
TKREAT/
ESTIMATED
WASTE
SIG
DATE
UNIT
PROBLEM
QUANTITY
04 Sapp Battery. FL 09/26/86 1st — Final
04 SCRDI/Dixlana, SC 09/26/86 1st - Final
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANOARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
t ti
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
iti
Not provided
No threat Not provided
14,318.544 25,631
751,250 2,128,100
3.049,000 96,630
Not provided
—31—
-------
FY82-FYB6 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIC DATE UNIT
05 AU Materials— 11/23/83 IRM
Greenup, IL
05 AU Materials 06/14/8t. 2nd
Company, IL
THREAT/
PROBLEM
GW and soil
containi nated
with organics
including
PCBs, metals.
and inorganics
Soil and SW
contamthated
with organics
including
PCBs. and
metals
GW
contaminated
with VOCs
including
ICE.
inorganics,
and metals
GW and soil
contaminated
with organics
including
PCBs, VOCs
including
ICE, and
inorganics
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
Removal and offsite
disposal of
contaminated tank
liquids and drum
wastes: and temporary
capping of lagoons
Removal and ofisite
disposal of all
contaminated soil.
cleaning and removal
of onsite equipment
and buildings; soil
testing beneath the
building with
disposal if above
recommended action
levels; site grading;
and removal of site
fencing
CU monitoring with
installation of
additional monitoring
wells; and
institutional controls
Provision for interim
alternate water
supply system by
installation of home
carbon treatment
units; and excavation
and ofisite disposal
of non-incinerable
wastes and
incineration of other
waste materials and
soils
STANDARDS/
GOAL S
Soil 1 mg/kg PCBs
will be removed.
Other Action
Levels for key
contaminants
include benzene
1 ug/gm, toluene
12 ug/gm,
trichl oroethyl ene
1 ug/gm, chromium
80 ug/gm, and
C adm i tWin
5 ug/gm
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
It’
PRP
Not provided responsibility
To be
Not provided determined
REGION SITE NAME, ST
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
05 AU Materials, ii 08/14/86 3rd - Final
05 Acme Solvents, IL 09/27/85 1st
ANNUAL
O&H COSTS
( )
111.000 Not provide
824 O00 Not provide
PRP
responsi -
bil i ty
To be
deL e rmi ned
— 2-
-------
FY8Z-fY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAHE, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COST
i ( )
05 Arcanum Iron & 09/26/86 1st — Final Q4, SW, soil, Onsite soils Excavation and Soil cleanup goals 9,929.000 37.000
Metal. OH and sediments with ofisite disposal of based on CUC
contaminated >500 mg/kg soil with >500 mg/kg Acceptable Daily
with lead, lead; excavation and Intake levels
inorganics 20,000 yd 3 : onsite disposa’ of including offsite
including battery casing soil with lead disposal of lead
lead, chips, between background >500 mg/kg and
antimony, and 3,800 yd 3 ; and 500 mg/kg; onsite disposal of
arsenic offsite soils removal of battery lead between
not specified casings; conduction background and
of treatability 500 mg/kg.
studies and onsite Excavation of
landfilling; and deed offsite soils will
restrictions on land be conducted until
and aquifer usage background levels
are reached
05 Arrowhead 09/30/86 1st — Final GW, SW. soil, 4.600 yd 3 Excavation and onsite Soils and 22,000,000 130,000 -
Refinery. MN and sediments (sludge) incineration of sediments will be 180.000
contaminated contaminated soil, excavated and
with VOCs. 20,500 yd 3 sediments, and treat d to achieve
organics (soil and sludge; CU pump and a 100 excess
including sediments) treatment; and cancer risk
PANs, and extension of level. GW
metals municipal water treatment will
including lead supply system to alsg achieve the
affected residents 10— level
05 Berlin & Farro. 02/29/84 1st SW, soil, and Not provided Excavation of Not provided Not provided Not provi
MI air contaminated
contaminated landfill, drum, and
with VOCs, soil areas;
and organics separation of PCB and
including PCBs non-PCB wastes with
offs ite disposal;
offsite incineration
of liquid wastes and
landfilling of solid
wastes; and
backf illing or
capping of’ site
—33-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUHMARY TABLE
ESTIMA IEO
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANOARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIC DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELEC1ED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
iS (S I
OS Burlington 06/04/86 1st — Final GW and soil 9.500 yd 3 Excavation and onsite Possible goals are 582.000 36.000
Northern. MN contaminated aerobic breakdown and to achieve
with organics transformation of detoxification of
contaminated soils soils as defined
and sludges; and by the microtox
onsite RCRA capping test and achieve
total PAIl and
benzene
extractable
concentrations in
the treatment zone
equal to or less
than
concentrations
present in the
soil left in place
05 Burrows 09/30/86 1st — Final 6W. SW. soil. 250 yd 3 Excavation . 6W cleanup based 1 .256.700 - 115.000
Sanitation. MI and sediments solidification/ on current lowest 1 .335.400
contaminated fixation, and offsite regulated (depending on
with metals disposal of metal concentrations for distance to
and hydroxide sludges; each indicator ‘ôffs’ite’RCRA
inorganics and 6W pump and chemical. facility
including treatment Criteria will be
cyanide taken from the
SOWA, Acceptable
Chronic Intake
tevels, and Health
Advisories. Soil
cleanup will be
based on the
site-specific
Endangerment
Assessment
-34-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
05 Byron/Johnson
Salvage. IL
05 Byron/Johnson 09/23/86 2nd
Salvage Yard. IL
Soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
organics
including
PCBs. and
meta is
including
lead and
arsenic
GW
contaminated
with VOCs
including
ICE, metals.
and
inorganics
including
cyanide
GW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
and organics
including PCBs
GW Not provided
contaminated
with VOC5
including TCE
and PCE
GW
contaminated
with VOCs
including ICE
and PCE
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
drums; offsite RCRA
disposal of (P toxic
soils and, if
possible.
incineration or
treatment of liquids;
and In-situ treatment
of cyanide
contaminated soil
Provision of home
carbon treatment
units and bottled
water as an interim
alternate water supply
Excavation and
offsite RCRA disposal
of 250 drums
Provision for a
permanent alternate
water supply
Plume discharge to
Lake Michigan under
natural flow
conditions; long-term
plume monitoring; and
institutional
controls on private
well installation
Remedy consists of
treatment of soil
that exceeds 100
times the drinking
water standard.
and onsite
treatment of soil
containing
71 mg/kg amenable
cyanide
Remedy wjll comply
with 10-0 cancer
risk levels for
suspected
carcinogens
Under natural flow
conditions. ICE
and PCE will meet
0.008 ugh and
0.01 ug/l,
respectively
REGION SITE NAME. ST
ROD OPERABLE TMREAT/
SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM
03/13/85 1st
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
( }
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
( 1
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
1 • 170,919
1 ljS .500
05 Cemetery Dump, MI 09/11/85 1st
05 Charlevoix. MI 06/12/84 IRIi
05 Charlevoix. MI 09/30/85 2nd - Final
6,000
165,300
Not provid
1.954.000 118.000
0 17.000
Not provided 1.883,261
Not provided
Not provided
—35—
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIC DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBL EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
GW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics
inc 1 ud I ng
PCBs, and
metals
Soil
containi nated
with VOCs
Cu
contaminated
with VOC5
Including PCE
Brook
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE,
organ ics
including
PCBs, and
metals
Soils and
sediments
contaminated
with organics
and metals
GW PLETIP and
treatment; demolition
of onsite buildings;
removal of selected
soil; and RCRA capping
Excavation and
offstte disposal of
surficial and buried
waste materials, and
visibly contan iinated
soil
CU treatment using
air stripping with
discharge to
municipal water
treatment plant and
distribution system
Excavation.
solidification, and
onsite disposal of
contaminated sediments
Excavation and
thermal treatment of
contaminated
sediments with onsite
disposal of residuals
Excavation of sludges
and sediments and
removal of aqueous
lagoon wastes with
solidification and
offsite RCRA disposal
f? 4 will be treated
to (100 ug/l total
VOC5 to meet
backgr9und levels.
or i0° cancer
risk level
Aeration treatment 1,420,000
will remove 99.6%
1 • l-dichloroethene
from Cu
Sediments will be
exc vated to a
100 excess
cancer risk or to
50 mg/kg PCBs,
whichever is
greater
Cleanup levels
will achieve an
ingestion rate of
O.lg/day of soil
for a 70 kg adult
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
05 Chem-Dyne, Oil 07/05/85 1st - Final
05 Cross Brothers. 03/25/85 IRM
IL -
05 Eau Claire, WI 06/10/85 IRK
05 Fields Brook, OH 09/30/86 1st
05 Forest Waste, MI 02/29/84 IRK
05 Forest Waste, MI 06/30/86 1st
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Il .200.000
gal/day
36,000 yd 3
16.000 yd 3
Not provided
4,000 yd 3
1)0,000 gal
11,600.000 597,000
377,728 0
195 .000
72,000
0
0
Soil
contaminated
with organics
including
PCBs
Fencing
Not provided
35.100,000
100.000
1,295.000
-36-
-------
FYR2-FYRS RETUR n (iF flFCT TflN cItie4APv IARIF
OS LaSalle 08/29/86 1st
Electrical, IL
05 taskin Poplar 08/09/84 1st
Oil. OH
contami noted
with VOCs
SW. soils.
and sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics
including
PANs, and
metals
Offsite soils
contaminated
with VOCs,
and organics
including PCBs
SW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs .
and organics
including
PCBs and PANs
GW and soil
contaminated
with VOC 5
including ICE
Provision for an
alternate water supply
Soil capping:
alternate water
supply; onsite
consolidation of
sediments; and
institutional
controls including
deed restrictions on
aquifer usage
Excavation and onsite
incineration of
offsite soils
Incineration of
contaminated waste
oil; and treatment of
contaminated waste
water
G i l pump and treatment
using air stripping;
extension of
Leflull ier water
supply system to
affected areas, and
abandonment of
contaminated wells
Remedy will reduce
cancçr threat to
0 Q risk level
Sediments with
contami9ants above
the 1O risk
level will be
excavated and
consolidated
Excavation and
incineration of
soils with greater
than 5 mg/kg PCB5
in the first 12
inches of soil and
greater than
10 mg/kg in soils
at depths below
12 inches
The goal of plume
extraction and
treatment is
consistpnt with
the iO° cancer
risk concentration
for ICE 2.8 ug/l
REGION SITE NAME 1 ST
ROD OPERABLE TMREAT/
SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM
OS Kuniner Landfill,
MN
OS Lake Sandy Jo. IN
06/12/85 1st
09/26/86 1st — Final
ESTIMATED
WASTE
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
STANDARDS/
QUANTITY
SELECTED REHEDY
GOALS
ANNUAL
0tH COST
it t
Not provided
2,500 yd 3
25,530 yd 3
Not provided
Not provided
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
(S I
1,624,850 28,440
4,147,000 63,0 0Q
26,400,000 0
(present worth)
0
aoo,ou& 70,000
05 LeHillier/Hankato, 09/27/85 1st - Final
MN
Not provided ,O43,O00
—37—
-------
FY82-FY8G RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
05 tietamora 09/30/86 1st
Landfill, MI
05 Morris Arsenic,
MN
05 New Brighton, NN
(Interim Water
Treatment)
05 New Brighton, MN
(Water Supply
Sys tern)
OS New Brighton. till
(Water Supply
System)
08/07/85 1st — Final
05 New Brighton/ 06/30/86 4th
Arden liills/
St. Anthony, MN
6W Not provided
contaminated
with VOC5
including TCE
and PCE
LW and soil
contaminated
with VOC5
including TCE
and PCE, and
metals
None None
LW Not provided
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
(14 Not provided
contaminated
with VOC 5
including TCE
04 Not provided
contaminated
with i /D Os
LW
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE, and
organics
LW treatment using
air stripping with
discharge to water
treatment system and
drinking water
distribution system
Excavation and
offsite thermal
destruction of wastes
from areas 1 and 4
No further action
Interim LW treatment
using granular
activated carbon and
air stripping
Extension of existing
public water supply
system to affected
residents
Extension of existing
public water supply
system to replace
contaminated
municipal syStem
Provision of
alternate water
supply through well
construct ion
The air stripping
system is designed
to achieve a 99.1%
removal of TCE.
88.9% removal of
PCE, and 96.1%
removal of l.i-DCE
6W and soil
cleanup targets
will be
established in the
FY88 RI/VS
Not provided 0
OS Main Street, IN 08/02/85 1st
ROD
REGION SITE NAME. ST 516 DATE
OPERABLE
UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
14 1
18,150 yd 3
ANNUAL
0tH COSTS
iti
111061000
41.500.000
(present worth)
06/24/83 IRM
09/19/83 INN
08/02/84 IRN
158 ,000
0
0
30,526
Not provide
Not provide
22,820
Not provided 150,400
Not provided 211,958
Not provided 142,090
Not provided 600 .500
Not provided
-38 - -
-------
cvM .cva orrnon flC nrrTcinu CiiiaaDv TORI r
6W, soil, and
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs ,
organics, and
inorganics
including
asbestos
6 W, soil, and
sewer
sediments
containi noted
with metals
including
chromii,an and
cadmium
6W
contaminated
with metals
including
chromium
Capping; installation
and operation of
extraction/contaiment
wells to dewater
landfill and
eliminate leachate;
onsite 6W and
leachate treatment
using biological
disc, sodium
hydroxide
precipitation, and
granular activated
carbon; onsite
consolidation of
contaminated
sediment; and fencing
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
soil and sewer line
to privately-owned
RCRA facility;
cleaning dust and
hazardous residue
from building floor,
brgaking up of 300
ft’ of floor and
drywell, sampling
soil, excavation, and
disposal of any
contaminated debris
and soil at a RCRA
Subtitle C facility,
and backlilling of
area with clean soil
6W pump and treatment
using electrocheniical
reduction,
prec ipi tat ion,
filtration, and ion
exchange with
discharge to creek;
and 6W extraction
from the sand/gravel
aqui fer
Excavation of
soils and
sediments will
meet response
objectives of
chromium 50 mg/kg
and cadmium
10 mg/kg
Treatment will
remove hexavalent
chromium from the
6W to
concentrations
below 50 ug/l and
trivalent chromium
concentrations to
below 100 ug/l
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/
SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
STAN DARDS/
QUANTITY
SELECTED REMEDY
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
Not provided 10 .198,000
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
us New Lyme 09/27/85 1st — Final
Landfill, ON
05 Northernaire, MI 09/11/85 1st
05 Novaco 06/21/86 1st
Industries, NI
Not provided
Not provided
36,000,000 gal
44,000
0
419,000
(years 1-E
75 . 0 00
540,000
-39-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECtSTD II dII*IAQY TAPIr
05 Outboard Marine
Corp., IL
05 Reilly Tar & 05/30/86 2nd
Chemical, MN
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
organ ics
including PCBs
6W. soil, and Hot provided
river
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
and organics
including PCBs
6W
contaminated
with VOCs and
organics
including
PAHs
6W and soils
contaminated
with VOCs and
organ ics
including PANs
Removal and offsite
disposal of 96
percent of soil
contam Inants; 6W
extraction and
treatment using
grandular activated
carbon; aquifer use
restrictions; and
provision of public
water supply to
residences
potentially affected
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
PCB contaminated
materials;
construction of
onsite containment
cell for moderately
contaminated PCB
material; capping; GW
diversion;
construction of
clay-lined dewatering
lagoon; and treatment
of supernatant with
discharge to harbor
6W treatment using
granular activated
carbon
GW punp and
treatment; capping
and tilling of
exposed wastes; and
discharge of
hazardous waste to
Sewer
Soils contaminated
with base/neutral
compounds will be
removed to
background, and
VOC removal wAll
be to the l0
cancer risk
level. 6W cleanup
has been ro osgd
to meet the lO
risk level
Drinking water
criteria for PANs
were developed
through State and
EPA consultations
REGION SITE NAME. ST
ROD
OPERABLE
THREAT/
ESTIMATED
WASTE
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
STANDARDS/
516
DATE
UNIT
PROBLEM
QUANTITY
SELECTED REMEDY
GOALS
Not provided
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS’
It ]
ANNUAL
OEM COSTS
at i
05 Old Mill, ON 08/01/85 1st - final
05/15/84 1st
06/06/84 1st
05 Reilly Tar, MN
Not provided
Not provided
3,911,000 45,000
21,510,000 Not provided
(present worth)
150,000 188,000
Cost Cost
estimates estimates
not fully not fully
developed developed
Not provided
800,000 -
1.000.000 Yd 3
-40-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
TN RE AT/
PROBLEM
ESTIHATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEOY
STANDARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
“ I
05 Spiegelberg 09/30/86 1st
Landfill. HI
05 Verona Well 05/01/84 1KM
Field. III
05 Verona Well
Field. HI
Soil
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics
including
PCBs. and
metals
including
chromium
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
organics. and
meta is
GW and soils
contamina Led
with VOCs.
organics. and
metals
6W and air
contaminated
with VOCs
Including TCE
and PCE
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE
101,690.000
gals
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
contaminated building
debris and sediments
with dewatering
6W extraction and
treatment with
discharge to P01W
Excavation of waste
materials with
offslte incineration
of liquid paint
sludges and offsite
disposal of solid
paint sludges
Provision for new
wells; implementation
of barrier system;
treatment of purge
water using air
stripping system; and
treatment of air
emissions using
activated carbon
adsorption
Soil treatment using
enhanced
volatilization; and
6W pump and treatment
using existing air
stripper
PCBs will be 2.088,300
removed In the
dewatering process
to below 0.5 ug/kg
Water discharge
will conform with
POTW standards
Excavation of all
materials
exceeding a io-6
excess cancer risk
It is estimated
that within 3
years. 6W
contamination will
decrease to
100 ugh VOCs
REGION SITE NAME. ST
05 Schmalz Dump. WI 08/13/85 1st
OS Seymour. IN 09/30/86 1st
3.500 yd 3
ANNUAL
O8H COST
‘( I
5.000 yd 3
10.000 yd 3
Not provided
Not provided
0
300.000 100,000
15.771.000 - 0
18,395.000
1,796.000 470,000
1.660.000 90,000
(years 1-
46.000
(years 3-
08/12/85 2nd
Not provided
—4 I -
-------
FY82 -FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUI*$ARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE IHREAI/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDAROS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
05 Wauconda Sand & 09/30/85 1st 4. SW. and Not provided Installation of Not provided 1.600.000 50,000
Gravel, IL soil leachate collection
contaminated drains; provision for
with VOCs. leachate disposal at
organics sewage treatment
including plant or at an
PCGs, and offsite hazardous
metals waste treatment
facility; reyradiny
with clean soil cover
and revegetation of
bare and eroded
areas; and fencing
05 Bayou Bonfouca, 08/15/85 1st GW. soil, and Not provided Ofisite disposal of Not provIded 903.000 173 .743
LA sediments creosote waste
contaminated
with creosote
06 Bio-Ecology 06/06/84 1st - Final Soil and SW Not provided Construction of Not provided 3,709,600 20.000
Systems. TX contaminated onsite disposal cell
with VOCs with synthetic liner.
including leachate collection
TCE. organics system, and final
including cover; stabilization
PCBs, and of waste and onsite
metals placement in cell,
elevation of site
above 100-year flood
plain; and fencing
06 Cecil Lindsey. AR 04/23/86 1st Final None Hot provided No further action Not provided 61,000 10,000
- with site access
restrictions and GW
monitoring
06 Crystal 09/17/85 NOD 2,078,000 63,000
Chemical, TX
06 Geneva 09/18/86 1st - Final GW and soils 22,500 yd 3 Excavation and Soil will be 14,990.000 532.000
Industries, TX contaminated ofisite disposal of excavated to PCBs (years 1-2)
with VOCs contaminated soil and 100 mg/kg. GW
including drums; capping; and will be treated to 483,000
TCE. and 6W pump and treatment below TCE 1 ug/l (years 3-30)
organics using carbon
including adsorption with
PAils and PCBs discharge to adjacent
flood control channel
—42—
-------
1Y82-F186 RECORD OF PECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
THREATI
PROBL EM
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
S TANDA RD SI
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
06 Highlands Acid 06/25/84 1st
Pit. TX
06 Odessa Chromium 09/08/86 1st
I, TX
06 Odessa Chromuin 09/08/86 1st
II, TX
6W, soIl, and
sludge
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics, and
metals
Soil and SW
contaminated
with organics
including PCBs
6W Not provided
contaminated
with metals
including
c h roan urn
6W Not provided
contaminated
with metals
including
chromi t n
6W and soil
contaminated
with VOCS,
pesticides,
and metals
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
waste material;
backfilllng and
seeding; and fencing
Offsite biological
treatment of
contaminated pit
water; ofisite TSCA
incineration of
organic liquids; and
offsite RCRA disposal
of sludges/Lars and
soils
Negotiating
agreements with
Odessa City to extend
water supply; and
construction of water
distribution system
Extension of
municipal water
service to affected
areas
Onsite land treatment
of heavily
contaminated soil and
sludges; onsite
contairvnent and
capping of slightly
contaminated soils;
closing and sealing
ungrouted onsite
well; GW pump and
treatment; and fluid
treatment with
ofIsite discharge
REGION SITE NAME. ST
06 MOTCO, TX
03/15/85 1st
Not, provided
Not provided
ANNUAL
0&H COSTS
( )
06 Old Inger, LA
Not
provided
2,401,000
14.100
Not
provided
42,300,000
Not provi
Not
provided
247,920
14,350
Not
provided
476,570
51,375
Not
provided
3,174,000
10,000
09/25/84 1st — Final
Not provided
-43-
-------
FYB2-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SuMMARy TAmE
06 Triangle
Chemical. TX
THREAT/
PROBLEM
GW, soil, and
SW
contaminated
with VOCs and
organics
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
150.000 yd 3
Not provided
contaminated
with organics
GW, SW. and
sediments
contaminated
with acidic
waste water.
metals, and
organics
Soil
contaminated
with VOCs
MAJOR COKPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
Excavation and onsite
incineration of
sludges and soils
with ensUe disposal
of residual ash;
banning usage of
onsite upper aquifer
during natural
attenuation; and SW
treatment, as
necessary, with
discharge to river
Diversion and diking
at two major inflow
areas; and plugging
of 66 wells
Incineration and deep
well injection of the
tank and dr n
contents; mechanical
aeration of
contaminated soils;
decontamination of
all onsite
structures; and
offsite disposal of
trash and debris
STANDARDS/
GOALS
Soil and sludges
will be excavated
to 10 mg/kg VOCs.
The upper aquifer
will b attenuated
to 10 Htmian
Health Criteria
New water supply
wil) meet the
10° cancer risk
level by attaining
1, 1-dichloroethane
0.25 ug/l,
trichloroethene
2 8 ug/l, and
tetrachi oroethene
0.9 ug/l
Soil will be
aerated to
background levels
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
( )
102.217,000 41,000
REGION SITE NAME, ST
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
ANNUAL
OAK COSTS
06 Sikes Disposal 09/18/86 1st — Final
Pits, TX
06 South Valley. NM 03/22/85 IRM
06 Tar Creek, OK 06/06/84 1st - Final
06/11/85 1st — Final
Installation of a new
water supply well
775.000
Not provided
Not provided
12, 000
5,000
Not provided 400.000
385,000 500
-44-
-------
FYBZ-f186 RECORD OF DECISiON SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
STANDAROS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
t t i
ANNUAL
OSJI COSTS
06 United
Creosoting Site 1
TX
Sot ls
contaminated
with VOCs ,
organics
including PCP
and PANS, and
inorganics
including
creosote
6W and soil Not provided
contaminated
with VOC 5 and
pest ic ides
09/30/84 2nd - Final GW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
pesticides
Demolition and
purchasing of 6 homes
with provision for
pennanent relocation
of residents; onsite
consolidation of
surface soil with
temporary capping;
excavation and
disposal of PAN
contaminated soils at
appropriate facility
or treatment, if
available;
backfilling and
covering 1 and natural
GW attenuation
Offsite disposal of
bulk liquids and
semi-solids by deep
well injection, and
onsite drainage
control
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
buried wastes and
contaminated soil;
backfilling, grading,
and seeding of the
site; expansion of
the monitoring well
network and biannual
6W testing; and
vacuuming and washing
interior surfaces,
floors, and walls of
the onsite building
Excavation and
disposal of all
soils contaminated
above PAN 100 mg/kg
Undeveloped 43,000
(interim
closure
period)
3,580,115 Not provid
(present worth)
REGION SITE MANE, ST
ROD OPERABLE TNREAT/
516 DATE UNIT PROBLEM
84 .000 yd 3
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
09/30/86 1st
08/24/83 IRM
01 Aidex, IA
07 Aidex, IA
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
3,455,115 875,000
-45-
-------
fYBZ-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTDIATEO
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDAR DS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAIIE, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS Dali COSTS
07 Des Moines TCE. 07/21/86 1st 6W Not provided 6W PumP and treatment Extraction and 1.196.000 63.000
IA contaminated with discharge to SW treatment will
with VOCs continue until
including maximum TCE
ICE, and concentration in
organics monitoring wells
is S ug/l or less.
for 4 consecutive
months
07 Ellisville. MD 07/10/85 1st Soil and SW Not provided Callahan Property : Not provided 12.000 Not provide
contaminated stabilization and
with VOCs, erosion control:
organics, and removal and disposal
pesticides of plastic cover and
cover’s hold-down
blocks; removal and
salvaging of the
barbed-wire and chain
link fences; and
gravel removal
Not provided 52.000 Not provide
Rosalie Prope i :
excavation and
offstte disposal of
contaminated soil.
drums, cans, and
other debris; and
soil testing and
analysis
07 Ellisville, MO 09/29/86 2nd Soil Not provided Excavation and onsite Not provided 20,200.000 Not provide
contaminated interim storage of (present worth)
with VOCs, dioxin contaminated
dioxins. and soil; and excavation,
metals transportation, and
offsite land disposal
of soils containing
nondioxin waste
-46-
-------
FY82-FYB6 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TARLE
ESTIMATEO
ROD OPERABLE TNREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS! ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - C S )
07 Times Beach 1 MO 01/13/84 1st Soil Not provided Transportation of Not provided 15,734 .000 Not provid
(Interim Storage contaminated highly contaminated
Facility) with dioxin soil from other sites
for storage in an
onsite interim
storage facility (to
be constructed); and
restoration of other
sites by excavation
and temporary
relocation of
affected residents
08 Denver Radium 03/24/86 1st Asphalt 38,500 yd 3 Temporary leaving of Remedy meets 30,000 Variable
Site Streets, CO contaminated contaminated material standards for
with radium in place; “Remedial Action
institutional at inactive
controls; and routine Uranium Processing
maintenance Sites ”
08 Denver Radium! 09/30/86 2nd Soil and 7,000 yd 3 Excavation and Remedy meets 1,912,400 6 .000
R0BCO, CO buildings (soil) offsite disposal of standards for
contaminated contaminated soils “Remedial Action
with radium 200 yd 3 and debris, or at Inactive
(demolished Uranium Processing
buildin9s) Excavation, Sites”
stabilization and
temporary onsite
consolidation of
contaminated soils
08 Libby Ground 09/26/86 1st Soil and GW Not provided Alternate water Not provided PRP PRP re-
water, MT contaminated supply; and responsibility sponsibiti
with institutional
inorganics controls prohibiting
including well usage
creosote, and
organ ics
-47-
-------
FYH?-FYR6 RFrflRA OF flFCTSTON SIU4MARY TARt F
08 Marshall
Landfill. CO
08 North Dakota
Arsenic
Trioxide. ND
08 Smuggler
Mountain. Co
ROD OPERABLE
SI 3 DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
6W and SW
C ont azul na ted
with VOCs
including TCE
and PCE.
organics. and
metals
6W and soil
contaminated
with metals
including
arsenic
GW and soil
contaminated
with metals
including
arsenic
6W
contaminated
with metals
including
arsenic
6W and soil
contaminated
with cadmium
and metals
including
lead
(ST IHATED
WASTE
OUANTITY
MAJOR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
Installation of a
subsurface collection
system; 6W treatment
using sedimentation.
air stripping, and
off-gas carbon
adsorption; regrading
and revegetating; and
fencing
Construction of a new
well and distribution
System; and flushing
and testing
residential plumbing
sys t. ems
Replacement of
household water
supply appurtenances;
and on-going testing
of residential
plumbing systems
Expansion and hook-up
of homes to 6W
treatment and
distrtbution system;
and evaluation of
possible
institutional controls
Excavation arid
permanent onsite RCRA
disposal of soils.
soil capping; and
alternate water supply
STANDARDS/
GOALS
Contaminated water
will be treated to
achieve removal of
benzene 0, TCE 0,
cadmium 0.6 mg/i.
and lead 4 mg/l
GW will be treated
to EPA drinking
water standards
for arsenic
0.050 mg/l
Water supplied for
domestic and
agricultural
purposes will
attain the HCL for
arsenic 25 ug/l
Excavation and
onsite isolation
of soil with lead
greater than
5.000 mg/kg.
Soils between
1.000-5.000 mg/kg
will be covered
with 6-12 inches
of topsoil. 6W
will be monitored
to comply with
SDWA Standards
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
tti
REGION SITE NAME. ST
09/26/86 1st - Final
04/14/84 1st
08 Milltown. MT
08 Hilltown , MT 08/07/85 2nd
1.819.000
262.714
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
410.000 yd 3
09/26/86 1st - Final
09/26/86 1st
Not provided Not provided
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
152. 000
4 • 238
Not provided
57. 400
30,900
2,212,600
1,816.550
-48-
-------
Fy82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&M COSTS
08 Union Pacific 09/26/86 1st GW and soil Greater th*n Rechanneling of Not provided 1.000.000 57.000
Railroad, WY contaminated 700,000 yd river; 6W pump and
with organics treatment with carbon
including adsorption with
PCBs. and discharge to river;
inorganics and slurry wall
including barrier construction
creosote
08 Woodbury 07/19/85 1st GW, soil, and Not provided Excavaton, offsite Contaminated soils 2.450.000 21.000
Chemical, CO sediments transportation, and will be treated to
contaminated incineration of 3 mg/kg and
with highly contaminated contaminated rubble
pesticides, rubble and soil with to total pesticides
metals, and disposal of residual 100 mg/kg
organics ash; and backfilling
with clean soil,
regrading, and
revegetat ion
09 Celtor Chemical 10/04/83 IRK 6W, SW, and Not provided Ofisite Not provided 340,000 Not provid
Works, CA soil transportation and
contaminated disposal of tailing
with metals piles and
and mining contaminated soil;
waste and conduction of
RI/IS
09 Celtor Chemical, 09/30/85 2nd - Final SW and soil Not provided Excavation and RCRA Action levels for 3,065.33a 7,000
CA contaminated offsite disposal of soil will be based
with metals contaminated soils on National Water
including Quality Criteria.
cadmium and SW and GW will be
arsenic based on PiCLs or
DWRs. River
criteria will be
based on standards
for the protection
of aquatic life
-49-
-------
rn o or nrricinu cID4IAQY TARIF
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
ThREAT/
PROBLEM
GW and soil
contaminated
with VOCs.
pesticides,
and metals
inc 1 ud I ng
chromi tin
SW runoff
from mountain
contaminated
with acid
mine drainage
consisting of
sulfuric acid
and metals;
fish and
sediment are
also affected
Soil
contaminated
with VOCS.
metals
includthg
lead. 2iflC,
and copper,
and organics
including PCBs
Soil
contaminated
with VOCs and
inorganics
including
sul fur
dioxide.
hydrogen
sulfide, and
arsenic
2.5 acres (to
be capped)
MAJOR COMPOHENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
Excavation and
removal of soil; 4
treatment with
discharge to P01W;
and disposal of
chromium-rich waste
brine to RCRA facility
Capping of selected
cracked and caved
ground areas: and dam
enlargement
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
contaminated soils
Excavation and
offsite disposal of
wastes and soil
STANDARDS/
GOAL S
Cleanup levels
wilt meet the
10- cancer risk
level and IICLs
under SDWA
Cleanup program
will be designed
to meet EPA Water
Quality Criteria
for Protection of
Aquatic Life for
the Nworst caseu
condition of 1978
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
( )
66,100,000
(fund-balanced
cost)
Soils containing 1.460.000
lead above
500 mg/kg will be
excavated
REGION SITE NAME. ST
ESTIMATED
WASTE
QUANTITY
700 yd 3
1,240,000
09 Del Norte, CA 09/30/85 1st - Final
09 Iron Mountain. CA 10/03/86 1st
09 Jibboom 05/09/85 1st - Final
Junkyard. CA
09 HcColl Site, CA 04/11/84 1st
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
0
4.100,000
(present
worth)
Not provided
0
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided 21,500.000
-C 0 -
-------
FY8Z-fYd6 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDAROS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS D&H COSTS
IS )
09 Mountain View! 06/02/83 1st - Fina? Soil Not provided Permanent relocation Not provided 4,432,000 0
Globe, AZ contaminated of residents; onsite
with asbestos burial of
containerized mobile
homes; and fencing
09 San Gabriel! 05/11/84 IRM GW Not provided GW punp and treatment Not provided 525 .000 38 .000
Area I, CA contaminated using air stripping;
with VOCs and conduction of
including TCE RI/ES
and PCE
09 Stringfellow 07/22183 IRM GW, SW, and Not provided Fencing; cap Not provided 2,406,000 Not provide
Acid Pits, CA soil maintenance; and (present worth)
contaminated offsite leacliate
with metals disposal
and organics
09 Stringfellow 01/17/84 2nd 6W Not provided LW pi mp and treatment Not provided 9, 189 .000 1,724,000
Acid Pits, CA contaminated with offsite
with discharge to P01W
pestic ides,
metals, and
organ; cs
09 Taputimu 12/27/83 1st - Final Air Not provided Repacking of Not provided 0
Farm/Insular contaminated chemical/pesticide
Terratories, AS with VOCs and materials stored
organics onsite;
including decontamination and
PCBs and sealing of onsite
pesticides storage facilities;
and transportation of
all waste materials
to mainland for
offsite disposal
10 Ponders Corner, 06/01/84 IRM LW Not provided 6W treatment using Not provided 1,163,000 82,000
WA contaminated air stripping; and
with VOCs and conduction of RI/ES
organics
-Si -
-------
1Y82-fY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TAbLE
[ STIMA 1 p
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE , MAJOR COMPONENETS OF STANDARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME, ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTIT’( SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&H COSTS
t }
ID Ponders Corners. 09/30/85 2nd GW and soil Not provided Continued operation The remedy will 334.970 82,000
WA contaminated of H1-H2 treatment meet the
with VOCs system; instaflaLion recomnended
including TCE of variable-frequency occupational air
and PCE controllers on wefl levels for VOCs
ptsnp metors to reduce which are based on
energy requirements; OSIIA Standards
changing of fan
drives on treatment
tower; installation
of new monitoriong
wells, upgrading of
existing wells, and
continued saiiipl Ing
and analysis of
aquifer; excavation
and ofisite disposal
of septic tanks and
drain field piping;
and placement of
administrative
restrictions on
excavation of soil
and installation and
usage of wel1s
10 Queen City 10/24/85 1st SW. soil, and 22,000 yd 3 Excavation, Not provided 3,439.000 PRP
Farms, WA sediments stabilization, and responsi-
contaminated offsite disposal of bility
with VOCs sludges, sediments.
including and soils; and capping
TCE. organics
including
PCBs. and
metals
including
chromium and
lead
10 South Tacoma 03/18/83 IRM GW Not provided GW pump and treatment Not provided 1,200,000 60,000
Channel Well contaminated using air stripping
12A, WA with VOCs
including ICE
—52—
-------
FY82-FYB6 RECORD OF DECISION SUIIARY TABLE
ROD OPERABLE
SIG DATE UNIT
THREAT/
PROBLEM
ESTIMATED
WASIE
QUANTITY
MA3OR COMPONENETS OF
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
GOALS
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS
10 South Tacoma
Channel Well
12A, WA
10 Toftdahl DrLMns.
WA
09/30/86 1st - Final
GW and soil
contaminated
with VOCS
including TCE
and PCE
None
GW and soil
contaminated
with metals
including
chromi tin
Not provided
Continue operation
of IRM: construction
of a GW treatment
system; excavation
and offsite disposal
of contaminated soil
with soil flushing.
and maintenance of
institutional controls
No further action
with GW monitoring
Excavation and
ofisite disposal of
soils; flushing of
soils above shallow
GW table; and GW pump
and treatment using
chemical reduction
and precipitation
with discharge to
POTW or SW
Specific GW
cleanup goals have
not been
established.
Att inrnent of the
10-b risk range
has been
recomnended
Not provided
The chromiwi
cleanup criteria
for the confined
aquifer is
0.05 m9/l and
10 mg/l for the
unconfined zone.
A treatment
effluent
concentration of
0.3 to 0.4 mg/i
chromium is
expected to be
maintarned
0
REGION SITE NAME. ST
05/03/85 2nd
Not provided
10 United Chrome. OR 09/12/86 1st - Final
ANNUAL
O&M COSTS
it’
350 tons
(of (site
disposal)
1.590.000 50,000
1,580,000 261,000
-53-
-------
FY82-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TADLE
ESTIMATED
ROD OPERABLE THREAT/ WASTE MAJOR COHPONENETS OF STANOARDS/ ESTIMATED ANNUAL
REGION SITE NAME. ST SIG DATE UNIT PROBLEM QUANTITY SELECTED REMEDY GOALS CAPITAL COSTS O&H COSTS
( ) it)
10 Western 08/05/84 1st GW and soil Not provided Removal and offsite Not provided 5.000.000 Not provide
Processrng. WA contaminated disposal/incineration
with VOCs of afl bulk liquids.
including drunined liquids.
TCE. waste piles, and
Inorgan ics other debris; removal
including and proper disposal
cyanide, of all transformers
pesticides, and substation
and metals equipment; demolition
including . . and offsite disposal
arsenic and of all onsite
cadmium buildings;
dismantling of’ all
onsite bulk storage
tanks; controlling
and treatment of
stoimater; and
onsite and perimeter
monitoring of air
quality
-sq-
-------
FYB2-FY86 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY TABLE
10 Western
Processing WA
GW, SW. soil. Not provided
and creek
sediments
contaminated
with VOCs,
organics
inc 1 ud I ng
PCBs and
PANS, and
metals
Soil sampling and
analysis of onsite
and offstte areas.
excavation and
ofisite disposal of
selected soils and
non-soil materials;
excavation or
cleaning and plugging
all utility and
process lines in
Area I; GW extraction
and treatment;
storn ..ater control;
excavation and onsite
disposal of selected
soils; excavation of
utility lines;
cleaning utility
manholes and vaults;
capping; performing
bench scale testing
of soil
solidification
technique; and
excavation of Mill
Creek sedime .nts; and
perfoming
supplemental remedial
planning studies if
GW contamination
migrates
All Soils
contaminated with
PCBs Over 2 mg/kg
and hot spots
• exceeding
risk level will be
excavated.
Aquatic organisms
will be protected
through MCI or ACL
goals
REGION SITE NAME, ST
09/25/85 2nd
ROD
OPERABLE
TMREAT/
ESTIMATED
WASTE
MAJOR COHPONENETS OF
SIG
DATE
UNIT
PROBLEM
QUANTITY
SELECTED REMEDY
STANDARDS/
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
GOALS
CAPITAL
(
COSTS
DM4
COSTS
( )
18.100.000 2,000.000
—55—
-------
(
SECTION V
RECORDS OF DECISION
KEY WORD LIST: FY 1982 - 1987
The ROD Key Word Ust presents the RODs approved from
FY 1982 - 1987 by major key word categones and subcategories. The
key words are a compilation of those identified for each site in the ROD
abstracts found at the beginning of this document. The first two pages of
this list provide an index of all key words and subcategories. The following
text lists those RODs associated with each key word.
-------
RECORD OF DECISION KEY WORD LIST INDEX
Listed below are major key word categories and their subcategories for
Superfund Records of Decision (RODs).
Primary Hazardous Remedy Selection
Substances Detected
Consent Decree
Acids Deed Restriction
Arsenic Fund Balancing
Asbestos Interim Remedy
Benzene Mo Action Remedy
Carcinogenic Compounds O&M
Chromium ROD Addendum
Dioxin
Inorganics Water Supply
Lead
Metals Alternate Water Supply
Mining Wastes Drinking Water
Oils Contaminants
Organics /VOCs
PAHs Site Specific
PCBs Characteristics
PCE
Pesticides Flood Plain
Phenols Seismic
Radioactive Materials Sole—Source Aquifer
Sludge Subsidence
Solvents
Synfuels Standard/Regulations
TCE Permits/Guidance
Toluene
ARARs
Contaminated Media MCLs
MCLGs
Air Action—Specific
Debris Chemical—Specific
Ground Water Location—Specific
Sediments (Creek/Riven Clean Air Act
Stream) Clean Water Act
Sludge Drinking Water Standards
Soil Institutional Controls
Surface Water Public Health Advisory
RCRA
Public Health and RCRA Closure Requirements
Environmental Threats Alternate Closure
Clean Closure
Direct Contact Landfill Closure
Public Exposure
-------
RECORD OF DECISION KEY WORD LIST INDEX
(continued)
Standard/Regulations Technology
Permits/Guidance (Continued)
(Continued)
Levees
RCRA Landfill Offsite Discharge
Specifications Offsite Disposal
RCRA Locational Offsite Treatment
Requirements Onsite Containment
Safe Drinking Water Act Onsite Discharge
State Criteria/ Onsite Disposal
Guidance/ Onsite Treatment
Advisories Plume Management
State Perrr.it Publicly Owned Treatment
Toxic Substances Works (FOTW)
Control Act Relocation
Water Quality Criteria Slurry Wall
Soil Washing/Flushing
Testing/Pilot Studies Solidification
Stabilization
Leachability Tests Surface Water
Treatability Studies Diversion/Collection
Surface Water Monitoring
Technology Temporary Storage
Treatment Technology
Aeration Venting
Air Monitoring
Air Stripping Miscellaneous
Capping
Containment Municipally—Owned Site
Decontamination Wetlands
Dredging Woodlands
Excavation
Filling Historically Significant
Granular Activated Carbon
Ground Water Monitoring ACL
Ground Water Treatment Background Levels
Incineration Deferred Decision
Land Treatment Temporary Remedial
Leachate Collection/ Measure
Treatment
-------
SUP FUND RECORDS OF DCCI S ION:
KEY WORD LIST
Listed below are major key word categories and their subcategories for Superfund Records
of Decision (RODS). Opposite each of these categories is a broad sampling of sites
whose ROD contains the listed key word. Some categories may become obsolete or new
categories may develop over time due to changes in the focus of the Superfund remedy
selection process. The Superfund managers in each Region have copies of all RODs.
KEY WORDS ASSOCIATE ) ROD SITES
(By Category)
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site. State (Region )
Acids Charles George, MA (I)*; Davis Liquid Waste. RI (I); Nyanza
Chenu.cal, MA (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I); Chertucal
Control, NJ (II); PAS Osuego, NY (II); Bruin Lagoon, PA
(III); Douglassville, PA (III); Lackäwanna Refuse Site,
PA (III); A&F Materials—LRM, IL (V); Chem—Dyne—EDD, OH (V);
Forest Waste, MI (V)*; Northside Sanitary Landfxll/
Environmental Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN
(V); Highlands Acid Pit. TX (VI); Tar Creek, OK (VI);
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Celtor Chemical Works, CA
(IX); Iron Mountain Mines. CA (IX); Strtngfellow Acid Pits,
CA (IX)*; Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD WA (X); Western
Processing, WA (X)
Arsenic Hocomonco Pond. MA (I); Industri—plex. MA (I); Nyanza
Chemical, MA (I); Chemical Control, NJ (II); D’Imperio
Property, NJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Lipari. Landfill,
NJ (II)*; Love Canal, NY (II); Sinclair Refinery, NY (II);
Spence Farm, NJ (II); Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Volney
Landfill, NY (II); Chisman Creek. VA (III); Douglassville,
PA (III); McAdoo—IRM, PA (III); Moyer Landfill, PA (III);
American Creosote, FL (IV); Davie Landfill, FL (IV); Geiger
(C&M Oil), SC (IV); Newport Dump, KY (IV); Palmetto Wood
Preserving, SC (IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (I V); Sapp
Battery, FL (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Whitehouse Waste
Oil Pits, FL (IV); Arcanum Iron & Metal, OH (V);
Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard IL (V); Chem—Dyne-EDD, OH (V);
Johns—Mariville, IL (V); Morris Arsenic, (V); New
Brighton (TCAAP), I (V)*; Crystal City Airport, TX (VI);
Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; Mid—South Wood, AR (VI);
Arsenic Trioxide, ND (VIII); Central City/Clear Creek, CO
(VIII); Militown, MT (VIII); Milltown—S, MT (VIII); Celtor
Chemical, CA (IX)*; Litchfield Airport. AZ (IX); McColl, CA
(IX); Western Processing, WA (X)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
1
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Asbestos West Virginia Ordnance, r,cJ (III ); Johns—Mariville, IL (V);
Mew Lyme, OH CV); Mountain View/Globe, AZ (IX)
Benzene Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Maviland Complex. NY (II); Vega
Alta, PR (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Kane and Lombard.
MD (III); Liquid Disposal, MI CV); Mew Brighton (TCAAP) , MN
(V)*; Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN (V); Seymour, IN
(V)*; Highlands Acid Pits, TX (VI)*; Operating Industries,
CA (IX)
Carcinogenic Compounds Charles George, MA (I); Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I);
Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Re—Solve. MA (I)*; Diamond Alkali,
NJ (II): Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II);
Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ (II); Montgomery Township. NJ
(II); Taylor Borough. PA (III ); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV);
Hollingsworth, Ft. (IV); PowersvLlle Landfill, GA (IV);
Liquid Disposal, MI (V); flew Brighton (TCAAP), MN
Morthside Sanitary Landuill/ Environmental Conservation and
Chemical Corporation. iN (V); Reilly Tar, MN (V);
Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Conservation Chemical, MO (VII);
Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); Litchfield Airport. AZ
(IX); San Fernando Area L_CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA
(IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits. CA (IX); Colbert Landfill. WA
(X); Queen City Farms-IRM/EDD. WA (X)
Chromium Hocomonco Pond. MA (I); Industri—plex, MA (I); Myariza
Chemical, MA (I); D’tmperio Property. NJ (II); Haviland
Complex, NY (II); Lang Property, NJ (II); Lipari Landfill.
NJ (II) ; Sinclair Refinery. NY (II); Spence Farm, NJ (II);
Syncon Resins, NJ (II ); Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II);
Douglassville, PA (III); Limestone Road. MD (III ); Matthews
Electroplating. VA CIII); McAdoo—IRM. PA (III); Davie
Landfill, FL (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV ); Newport Dump,
KY (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving. SC (IV); Pepper’s
Steel—EDD. FL (IV); Powersville Landfill. GA (IV); Tower
Chemical. Ft. (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV);
Burrows Sanitation. MI (V); Johns—Martville, IL (V); New
Brighton (TCAAP)P MN (V)*; Morthernaire, MI (V); Movaco
Industries, MI (V); Schzualz Dump. WI (V); Schmaltz Dump. WI
(V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL CV); Mid—South Wood. AR
(VI); Hardage/Cririer, OK (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX
(VI)*; Odessa Chromium I, TX (VI); Odessa Chromium II, TX
(VI); Central City/Clear Creek, CO (VIII); Del forte, CA
(IX); Litch.field Airport. AZ (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits,
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
2
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Chromium (continued) CA (IX); Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA (X); United Chrome,
OR (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Dioxin Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Hyde
Park—EDD, NY (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Conservation
chemical, MO (VII); Ellisville MO (VII); Ellisville Site
Area, MO (VII)*;Tirnes Beach, MO (VII)
Inorganics Auburn Road. NH (I); Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco
Pond, MA (I); Nyanza Chemical, MA (I); Picillo Farm, RI
(I); Sylvester, NH (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); Caldwell
Trucking, NJ (II); Chemical Control. NJ (II); D’Imperio
Property, NJ (II); Florence Landfill, NJ (II); Friedman
Property, NJ (II); Gfl S Landfill, NJ (II); Helen Kramer. NJ
(II); Krysowaty Farm, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Price
Landfill. NJ (II)*; Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair
Refinery, NY (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III); Bruin
Lagoon, PA (III)*; Chisman Creek. VA (III); Douglassville,
PA (III); Drake Chemical. PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III);
Leetown Pesticide, WV (III); Limestone Road. MD (III);
McAdoo—IRN, PA (III); Palmerton Zinc, PA (III); Wade, PA
(III); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV);
Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV); Newport Dump. KY (IV);
Pioneer Sand, FL (IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); A. L.
Taylor, KY (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); A&F
Materials—IRM. IL (V); A&F Materials—EDD, IL (V)*; Acme
Solvents. IL (V); Burrows Sanitation. MI (V); Cemetery
Dump, MI (V); Chem—Dyne—EDD, OH (V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*;
Industrial Excess Landfill, OH (V); Johns—Manville, IL (V);
Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); Liquid Disposal. MI (V); Northside
Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Reilly Tar, Z 24 (V); Rose Townshi.p, MI
(V); Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V); Cecil Lindsey, AR
(VI); Hardage/Criner. OK (VI); Mid—South Wood, AR (VI);
MOTCO, TX (VI); Tar Creek, OK (VI); Ellisville, MO (VII);
Libby Ground Water. MT (VIII); Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX);
Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)
Lead Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Palmerton Zinc, PA (III);
Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Johns—Mariville, IL (V);
Laskin/Poplar, OH (V)*; Gurley Pit. AR (VI); Stringfellow
Acid Pits, CA (IX)
Metals Auburn Road, NH (I); Baird & McGuire, MA (I);
Cannon/Plymouth. MA (I); Charles George. MA (I)*; Davis
Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocoinonco Pond, MA (I); Keefe
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
3
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Metals (continued) Environmental, NH (I); Myanza Chemical, MA (I); Ottati &
Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Re—Solve, MA (I); Sylvester, NH
(I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II);
Caidwell Trucking, NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ (II);
Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; D’Imperio Property, NJ (II);
Florence L 1 andfill, NJ (II); G 4S Landfill, NJ (II);
Haviland Complex, NY (II); Lang Property, NJ (II); Lipari
Landfill, NJ (II)*; Lone Pine Landfill, NJ (II); Marathon
Battery, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ (II); PAS
Oswego, NY (II); Pi)ak Farm, NJ (II); Renora Inc., NJ (II);
Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair Refinery, NJ (II);
Syncon Resins. NJ (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick
Aerospace, NJ (II); Army Creek Landfill. DE (III);
Blosenski. Landfill, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon. PA (III)*;
Chisman Creek, VA (III); Enterprise Avenue, PA (III);
Harvey—Knott, DE (III); ICane & Lombard, W (III);
McAdoo—IRM. PA (III ); Milicreek, PA (III); Moyer Landfill.
PA (III); Palmerton Zinc, PA (III); Saltville Waste
Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, MD (III);
Wade, PA (III); A. L. Taylor, KY (IV); American Creosote,
FL (IV); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC
(IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV); Hollingsworth, FL (IV);
Miami Drum Services, FL (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC
(IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD. FL (IV); Pioneer Sand. FL (IV);
Powersvtlle Landfill. GA (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV); Tower
Chemical, FL (IV); A&F Materials—IRM, IL (V); A&F
Materials—EDD. IL (V)*; Arcanum Iron & Metal, OH (V);
Burrows Sanitation, MI (V); Byron Salvage Yard, IL (V)*;
Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard. IL (V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*;
Lake Sandy J 0 . IN (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V);
Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V); Mew Brighton (TCAAP), 24
(V)*; Morthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN CV); Schznalz
Dump. WI (V); Schmalz Dump, WI (V)*; Seymour, IN (V);
Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V); Bio—Ecology Systems. TX
(VI); Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Crystal City Airport. TX (VI);
Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Hardage/Criner. OK (VI); Highlands
Acid Pit, TX (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*;
Johns—Manville, IL (VI); Odessa Chromium I, TX (VI); Old
Inger, LA (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Tar Creek, OK (VI);
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Central City/Clear Creek,
CO (VIII); Libby Ground Water, MT (VIII); Marshall
Landfill. CO (VIII); Milltown. MT (VIII); Mi].ltown—S, MT
(VIII); Smuggler Mountain, CO (VIII); Union Pacific. WY
(VIII); Woodbury Chemical. CO (VIII); Celtor Chemical
Works, CA (IX); Celtor Chemical. CA (IX)*; Iron Mountain
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
4
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Metals (continued) Mine, CA (IX); Jibboorn Junkyard. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid
Pits—IRM. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)*; Queen
City Farrns-IRM/EDD, WA CX); United Chrome, OR CX); Western
Processing, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Mining Wastes Tar Creek, OK (VI); Militown, MT (VIII); Smuggler Mountain,
CO (VIII); Celtor Chemical Works, CA (IX); Iron Mountain
Mine, CA (IX)
Oils Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); McKin, ME (I)*; Bridgeport, NJ
(II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price
E..andf ill, NJ (II); Bruin Lagoon. PA (III); Bruin Lagoon. PA
(III)*; Enterprise Avenue, PA (III); Coleman Evans, FL
(IV); Geiger (C Oil), SC (IV); Miami Drum Services, FL
(IV); Mowbray Engineering, AL (IV); A&F Materials—IRM, IL
(V); Forest Waste—IRM, MI (V); Forest Waste, MI (V) ;
Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*; New
Lyme. OH (V); Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN (V); Old Mill, OH
(V); Outboard Marine Corp.. IL (V); Reilly Tar, I CV);
Geneva Industries. TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Mid-South
Wood, AR (VI); Old Iriger, LA (VI); Ellisville, MO (VII);
Union Pacific, WY (VIII); Western Processing, WA (X)
Organics/VOCs Auburn Road. NH (I); Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Beacon
Heights. CT (I); Charles George, MA (I); Davis Liquid
Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Industri—plex, MA
(I); Keefe Environmental, NH (I); Kellogg—Deering Well
Field, CT (I); McKin—IRZI, ME (I); Nyanza Chemical, MA (I);
Ottati and Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Picillo Farm, RI (I);
Re—Solve, MA (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Sylvester, NH (I);
Tinkhaxn Garage, NH (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I);
Winthrop t..andfill—EDD, ME (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II);
Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Bridgeport, NJ (LI); Burnt
Fly Bog, NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); Chemical
Control, NJ (II); Chemical Control. NJ (II)*; Combe Fill
North Landfill, NJ (II); Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ
(II); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); D’Imperio Property, NJ (II);
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); Florence Landfill,NJ
(II); Friedman Property, NJ (II); GE Moreau. NY (II); G 4S
Landfill, NJ (II); Goose Farm. NJ (II); Haviland Complex,
NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Hyde Park—EDD, NY (II);
Kentucky Avenue Wellfield, NY (II); Lang Property, NJ (II);
Lipari Landfill, NJ (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Lone
Pine Landfill, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II);
Metaltec/Aerosysterns, NJ (II); Montgomery Township, NJ
Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
5
-------
Primary t azardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Orgariics/VOCs (continued) (II ); Olean Well Field, NY (II); PAS Oswego. NY (II); PijaJc
Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; Renora Inc., NJ
(II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair Refinery, NY
(II); Su.ffern Village Well Field, NY (II); Swope Oil, NJ
(II); Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Vestal,
NY (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ
(II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE
(III); Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon, PA
(III)*; Douglassville. PA (Eli); Drake Chemical, PA (III );
Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Industrial Lane, PA (III); Kane &
Lombard, MD (III); Leetown Pesticide, WV (III); Limestone
Road, MD (III); McAdoo—IRM. PA (III); Millc eek, PA (III);
Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, MD (III);
Taylor Borough. PA (III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III); Tyson’s
Dump, PA (III); Wade, PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance
Works, WV (III); A. L. Taylor, KY (IV); American Creosote,
FL (IV); Biscayne Aquifer Sites, FL (IV); Coleman Evans, FL.
(IV); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Distler Farm, KY (IV);
Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Geiger (C .M Oil), SC (IV); Hipps
Road Landfill, Ft. (IV); Hollingsworth. FL (IV); Newport
Dump Site, KY (IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV); Pioneer
Sand, FL (IV ); Powerville Landfill, GA (IV); SCRDI Dixa.ana,
SC (IV); Sodyeco, NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); A&F
Materials—IRM, IL (V); A&F Materiuls—EDD, IL (V) ; Acme
Solvents, IL (V); Arrowhead Refinery, *I (V); Berlin &
Farro, MI (V); Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard, IL CV); Byron
Salvage Yard. IL (V)*; Cemetery Dump, MI (V); Charlevoix,
MI (V); Charlevoix, MI (V)*; Chem—Dyne—EDD. OH (V); Eau
Claire—IRZ4, WI (V); FMC Corporation, (V) ; Industrial
Excess Landfill, OH (V); Kummer Landfill, ff4 (V);
Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH (V)*; Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Main
Street Weilfield. IN (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill. IN (V);
New Brighton/St. Anthony—IRM. ‘I (V); New Brighton/Arden
Hills/St. Anthony, MN (V)*; New Brighton—Interim Water
Treatment, MN (V)*; New Brighton (TCAPP). MN (V)*; New
Brighton—Water Supply System, MM (V)*; New Lyme. OH (V);
Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and
Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Old Mill OH (V); Reilly Tar &
Chemical, MN (V)*; Rose Township, MI CV); Seymour. IN CV);
Seymour. IN (V)*; Verona Well Field—IRM. MI (V); Verona
Well Field, MI (V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V); Bayou
Sorrel. LA (VI); Cecil Lindsey. AR (Vi); Cleve Reber, LA
(VI); Geneva Industries. TX (VI); Gurley Pit. AR (VI);
Hardage/Criner. OK (VI); Highlands Acid Pit. TX (VI);
Highlands Acid Pit. TX (VI)*; MOTCO, TX (VI); Old Inger. LA
(VI); Petro—Chemical Systems. TX (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits,
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
6
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Organics/VOCs (continued) TX (VI); South Valley—IRM, NM (VI); Triangle Chemical, TX
(VI); Aidex—IRM, IA (VII); Aidex. IA (VII)*; Conservation
Chemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE, IA (VII); Ellisville,
MO (VII); Ellisville Site Area. MO (VII)*; Libby Ground
Water, MT (VIIr); Marshall Landfill, CO (VIII); Rocky
Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); Union Pacific, WY (VIII);
Wood.bury Chemical, CO (VIII); Del Norte, CA (IX); McColl,
CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits—IRM, CA (IX); Litchfield
Airport, AZ (IX); Operating Industries, CA (IX); San
Fernando Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX);
Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA
(IX)*; Colbert Landfill, WA (X); Ponders Corner—IRM, WA
CX); Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA (X); South Tacoma,
WA (X); South Tacoma Channel—Well 12A, WA (X)*; Western
Processing, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
PAHs (Polynuclear Aromatic Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Cannon/Plymouth, MA (I); Caldwell
Hydrocarbons) Trucking. NJ (II); Renora Inc.. NJ (II); Douglassville, PA
(III); Kane & Lombard, bW (III); Milicreek, PA (III);
Taylor Borough, PA (III); Westlirte Site, PA (III); A. L.
Taylor, KY (IV); American Creosote, FL (IV); Geiger (C&Z1
Oil), SC (IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Sodyeco, NC (IV);
Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV); Arrowhead Refinery, I
(V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V); Northside Sanitary
t.and.fill/Envirorunerital Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); Laskin/Poplar
Oil, OH (V); Reilly Tar, (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical, ‘I
(V)*; Rose Township, MI (V); Bayou Bonfouca, LA (VI)*;
Geneva Industries, TX (VI); Mid—South Wood, AR (VI);
Petro-Chemical Systems, TX (VI); United Creosoting, TX
(VI); Libby Ground Water, MT (VIII); Western Processing, WA
(X)*
PCBs (Polychlorinated Ottati. & Goss/Great Lakes. NH (I); Picillo Farm, RI (I);
Biphenyls) Re—Solve, MA (I) ; Tinitham Garage, NH (I); Bridgeport, NJ
(II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II);
Chemical Control, NJ (II); GE Moreau, NY (II); Goose Farm,
NJ (II); Hudson River, NY (II); Hyde Park—EDD, NY (II);
Krysowaty Farm. NJ (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Rexiora Inc.,
NJ (II); Sinclair Refinery, NY (II); Swope Oil, NJ (II);
Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Wide Beach, NY (II); Douglassville,
PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Kane & Lombard, (III);
Lehigh Electric, PA (III); Milicreek, PA (III); Geiger (C&M
Oil), SC (IV); Mowbray Engineering, AL (IV); Newport Dump
Site, KY (IV); Peppers Steel—EDD, FL (IV); SCRDI Dixiana,
SC (IV); A&F Materials—IRM, IL (V); A&F Materials—EDD, IL
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
7
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
PCBs (Polychlori.nated (V); Acute Solvents. IL (V); Berlin & Farro, MI (V);
Biphen.yls) (continued) Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard, IL (V); Chem-Dyne—EDD , OH (V);
Forest Waste—IRM, MI CV); Forest Waste, MI (V)*; LaSalle
Electrical, IL (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH (V);
t.askin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*; Liquid Disposal, MI CV);
Morthside Sanitary Landfill/ Environmental Conservation and
chemical Corporation, IN CV); Old Mill, OH CV); Outboard
Marine Corp., IL CV); Rose Township, MI CV); Schmalz Duuo,
WI (V); Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Geneva Industries, TX
(VI); Gurley Pit, AR, (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Jibboom
Junkyard, CA (IX); Taputimu Farm, AS (IX); Queen City
Farms—IRM/EDD. A (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
PCE (Tetrachloroethylene/ Keefe Environmental, NH (I); Picillo Farm, RI (I);
Perchioroethylene) Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II);
Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II); Katonah Municipal Well,
NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ (II); Renora Inc., NJ
(II); Rockaway Borough Wellfield, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR
(II); Waldick Aerospace. NJ (II); Williams Property, NJ
(II ); Fischer & Porter, PA (III); A. L. Taylor, KY CIV);
SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Byron Salvage Yard, IL . (V)*;
Charlevoix, MI (V); Charlevoix. MI (V)*; FMC Corporation.
(V)*; Li.quid Disposal, MI (V); Main Street Wellfield, IN
(V); Mew Brightori/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, J (VP’T ‘rerona
Well Field—IRM, MI (V); Verona Well Field, MI (V)*; Geneva
Industries. TX (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Marshall
tandf ill, CO (VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); San
Fernando Area I. CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I. CA (IX );
Colbert Landfill, WA CX); Ponders Corner, WA (X)*; Queen
City Farrns-IRM/EDD. WA CX); South Tacoma Channel-Well 12A.
WA (X)*
Pesticides Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Cannon/Plymouth MA (I); Davis
Liquid Waste, RI (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I);
Chemical Control, NJ (II ); Chemical Control, NJ (II)*;
Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Krysowaty Farm, NJ (II); Lone Pine
Landfill, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Pijak Farm, NJ
(II); Renora, Inc., NJ (II); Syricon Resins, NJ (II);
Douglassville, PA (III); Drake Chemical, PA (III); Leetown
Pesticide, WV (III); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Miami Drum
Services, FL (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); SCRDI
Dixiana, SC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Chem—Dyne—EDD ,
OH (V); Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and chemical
Corporation, IN (‘I); Bayou Sorrel, L .A ( ‘II); Crystal City
Airport, TX (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Old Inger , L.A
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
8
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Pesticides (VI); Aidex—IRM, IA (VII); Ellisville, MO (VII); Woodbury
(continued) Chemical. CO (VIII); Del Norte. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid
Pits—IRM, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)*;
Taputimu Farm. AS (IX); Western Processing, WA (X)
Phenols Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Picillo
Farm, RI (I); Goose Farm, 1 TJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II);
Hyde Park—EDD. NY (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II); Lipari
Landfill, NJ (II)*; Love Canal, NY (It); Pi3ak Farm, NJ
(II); Sinclair Refinery, NY (II); Douglassville, PA (III);
Milicreek, PA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, (III);
Westline, PA (III); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V); Reilly
Tar & Chemical., I (V) ; Geneva Industries, TX (VI); Sikes
Disposal Pits, TX (VI); Conservation Chemical. MO (VII);
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Ellisville, MO (VII);
Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA (H); Western Processing. WA
(X)*
Radioactive Materials Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III); Lansdowne Radiation, PA
(III)*; Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Denver Radium Site
Streets, CO (VIII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radiuin/].lth & Umatilla, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radiuxn/l2th &
Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium ROBCO, CO (VIII)*
Sludge Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Tinkham Garage, NH (I);
Bridgeport, NJ (II); Florence Landfill. NJ (II); GE Moreau,
NY (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*;
Swope Oil, NJ (II); Bruin Lagoon, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon.
PA (III)*; Enterprise Avenue, PA (III); Lackawanna Refuse
Site, PA (III); McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*; Davie
Landfill, FL (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV); Berlin & Farro,
MI (V); Burrows Sanitation, MI (V); Forest cJaste—IRM, MI
(V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*; Laskiri/Poplar Oil, OH CV);
Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH (V)*; Liquid Disposal, MI (V); New
LyTne, OH CV); Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Curley Pitt—EDD, AK
(VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI); Mid-South Wood Products,
AR (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Old Inger, LA (VI); Sikes Disposal
Pits, TX (VI); Des Moines TCE, IA (VII); Ellisville, MO
(VII); McColl, CA (IX)
Solvents Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Keefe Environmental, NH (I);
McKin, ME (t)*; Western Sand & Gravel, RI 1; Winthrop
Land.fill—EDD, ME (I); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II); Chemical
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
9
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Solvents (continued) Control. NJ (II); Kentucky Avenue Weilfield, NY (II );
Krysowaty Farm. NJ (II); Lipari Landfill. NJ (II); Lone
Pine Landfill. NJ (II); Spence Farm. NJ (II); Solvents
(continued)Vestal. NY (II); Enterprise Avenue. PA (III);
Lackawaxina Refuse Site. PA (III); McAdoo—IRZ4, PA (III);
McAdoo Associates. PA (III)*; Mi .llcreek, PA (III); Miami
Drum Services, FL (IV); A&F Materials—IRL IL (V); Berlin &
Farro, MI (V); Charlevoix, MI (V); Cross Bros., IL (V); New
Brighton—Interim Water Treatment, MN (V)*; New
Brighton-Water Supply System. MN (V)*; New Lyme. OH (V);
Old Mill, OH (V); Verona Well FLeld. MI (V)*; Bio—Ecology
Systems, TX (VI); Old Inger. LA (VI); Conservation
Chemical. MO (VII); Ellisville, MO (VII); L.itchfield
Airport. AZ (IX); Taputimu Farm, AS (IX); Ponders
Corner—IRM, WA (X); Ponders Corner, WA (X) ; South Tacoma,
WA CX); Western Processing, WA CX)
Synfuels Western Processing. WA CX)
TCE (Trichioroethylene) Auburn Road, NH (I); Charles George. MA (I); Davis Liquid
Waste. RI (I); Keefe Environmental, Nil (I); Kellogg—Deering
Well Field, CT (I); McKin—IRM, ME (I); Re—Solve. MA (I)*;
Tinkham Garage, NH (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I);
Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II);
Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II); D’tmperio Property. NJ
(II); Goose Farm. NJ (II); Haviland Complex. NY (II); Lang
Property. NJ (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems, NJ (II); Glean
Well Field, MY (II ); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; Rockaway
Borough Weilfield, NJ (II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Vega
A]ta, PR (II); Vestal, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II) ;
Blosensici Landfill, PA (III); Fischer & Porter, PA (III);
Heleva Landfill. PA (III); Industrial Lane, PA (III);
Limestone Road, (III); Milicreek, PA (III); Moyer
Landfill, PA (III); Taylor Borough. PA (III); Dist].er
Bricicyard. KY (IV); Hollingsworth, FL (IV); A&P
Materials—EDD. IL (V); Acme Solvents, IL (V); Byron Salvage
Yard, IL (V)*; Charlevoix, MI (V); Charlevoix, MI (V)*; FMC
Corporation, MN (V)*; LeHillier/Mankato, MN CV); Liquid
Disposal. MI (V); Main Street Weilfield, IN (V);
Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN CV); Mew Brighton/St.
Anthony—IRM. MN (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony,
MN (V)*; New Brighton—Interim Water Treatment. MN (V)*; New
Brighton (TCAAP), MN (V)*; New Brighton—Water Supply
System, MN (V); Morthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Seymour, IN
(V); Verona Well Field—IRM, MI CV); Verona Well Field, MI
Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
10
-------
Primary Hazardous
Substances Detected Site. State (Region )
(continued)
TCE (Trichioroethylene) (V)*; Bio— cology Systems, TX (VI); Geneva Industries. TX
(continued) (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Des Moines TCE, IA (VII);
Marshall Landfill, CO (VII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO
(VIII); Operating Industries, CA (IX); San Gabriel/Area I,
CA (IX); Litchfield Airport, AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I,
CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX); Colbert Landfill,
WA (X); Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA (X); South Tacoma,
WA (X); South Tacoma Channel—Well l2A. WA (X)*; Western
Processing, WA (X)
Toluene Charles George. MA (I); Industri—plex, MA (I); Winthrop
Landfill—EDD, (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); Bridgeport,
NJ (II); Coinbe Fill North Landfill, NJ (II); Combe Fill
South Landfill, NJ (II); D’Imperio Property, NJ (II); Goose
Farm, NJ (II); Haviland Complex, NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ
(II); Hyde Park—EDD. NY (II); Lang Property. NJ (II);
Lipari Landfill, NJ (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Love
Canal. MY (El); Sinclair Refinery, NY (II); Blosensici.
Landfill, PA (III); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); McAdoo—IRM,
PA (III); McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*; Moyer Landfill, PA
(III); Taylor Borough. PA (III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III);
A. L. Taylor, KY (IV); American Creosote, FL (IV); Distler
Brickyard, KY (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Hi.pps Road
Landfill, FL (IV); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV); FMC
Corporation, 4I (V); New Brighton (TCAAP), (V) ; Mew
Lyme, OH (V); Seymour, IN (V); Verona Well Field, MI (V)*;
Sikes Disposal Pits, TX (VI); Triangle Chem., TX (VI);
Elligville. MO (VII); Operating Industries, CA (IX); Queen
City Farms—ERM/EDD, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Contaminated Media
Air McKin—ERM, (I); Sylvester, NH (I); Combe Fill South
Landfill, NJ (II); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); GEMS Landfill,
NJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Heleva
Landfill, P? (III); Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III)*;
Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Taylor Borough,
PA (III); Wade, PA (III); Berlin & Farro, MI (V);
Chem-Dyne—EDD, OH (V); Johris-Manvi.lle, IL (V); Outboard
Marine, IL (V); Verona Wel]. Field—IRM, MI (V); Denver
Radium II, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*;
Denver Radium/lZth & Quivas. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open
Space, CO (VIII)*; Mountain View/Globe, AZ (IX); Taputimu
Farm, AS (IX); South Tacoma, WA (X)
a Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
11
-------
Contaminated Media Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Debris Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II);
Williams Property, NJ (II); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); Tower
Chemical, FL (IV); Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Cleve Reber, LA
(VI); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radiuxn/l2th &
Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space, CO (VIII)*
Ground Water Auburn Road, NH (I); Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Beacon
Heights. CT (I); Cannon/Plymouth. MA (I); Charles George,
MA (I); Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond. MA (I);
Industri—plex. MA (I); Kellogg—Deering Well Field, CT (I);
McKin—IRM. ME (I); Nyanza Chemical, MA (I); Ottati & Goss/
Great Lakes, NH (I); Picillo Farm, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA
(I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Sylvester, NH (I); Tinkharn Garage,
NH (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I); Winthrop
Landfill—EDD, ME (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); Brewster
Well Field, NY (II)L; Bridgeport. NJ (II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ
(II); Caidweli. Trucking, NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ
(II); chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Combe Fill North
Landfill, NJ (II); Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II);
Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); D’Imperio Property, NJ (II);
Ertdicott Village Well Field, NY (II); Florence Landfill, NJ
(II); Friedman Property. NJ (II); GE Moreau, NY (II); GEMS
Landfill, NJ (II); Goose Farm, NJ (II) ; Haviland Complex,
NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Hyde Park—EDD, NY (II);
Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II); Kentucky Avenue Welifield,
NY (II); Krysowaty Farm. NJ (II); Lang Property, NJ (II);
Lipari Landfill. NJ (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Lone
Pine Landfill, NJ (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems, NJ (II);
Montgomery rownship, NJ (It); Olean Well Field, NY (II);
PAZ Oswego, NY (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill,
NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; Renora, Inc., NJ (II);
Rockaway Borough Welifield, NJ (II); Sharkey Landfill. NJ
(I’); Sinclair Refinery. NY (II); Spence Farm, NJ (II);
Suffern Village Well Field, NY (II); Swope Oil, NJ (II);
Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Vestal, MY
(II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II);
Williams Property, NJ (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III);
Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon, PA (III); Bruin
Lagoon. PA (tII)*; Chisman Creek, VA (III); Douglassville.
PA (III); Drake Chemical, PA (III); Fischer & Porter, PA
(III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Heleva Landfill, PA (III);
Industrial Lane, PA (III); Kane & Lombard, MD (III);
Limestone Road. MD (III); Matthews Electroplating, VA
(III); McAdoo—IRZI, PA (III); McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*;
Millcreek, PA (III); Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Saltville
Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, MD
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
12
-------
Contaminated Media Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Ground Water (continued) (III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III); Tyson’s Dump, PA (III);
Wade. PA (III); Westline, PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance
Works, WV (III); American Creosote, FL. (IV); Biscayne
Aquifer Sites, FL (IV); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Davie
Landfill, FL (IV); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Geiger (C&M
Oil), SC (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV); Hollingsworth.
FL (IV); Miami Drum Services, FL (IV); Newport Dump Site,
KY (IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV); Powersville Landfill,
GA (IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV);
Sodyeco, NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Varsol Spill
Site, FL (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL. (IV); A&F
Materials—IRM. IL (V); A&IF Materials—EDD, IL (V)*; Acme
Solvents, IL (V); Arcanum Iron & Metal, OH CV); Arrowhead
Refinery. Z 2J CV); Burrows Sanitation, MI CV); Byron Salvage
Yard, IL (V)*; Charlevoix, MI (V); Charlevoix, MI (V)*;
Chem-Dyne—EDD, OH (V); Eau Claire—IRM, WI (V); FMC
Corporation. J (V) ; ForestWaste, MI (V)*;
Johns—Manville, IL. (V); Industrial. Excess Landfill, OH (V);
Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); LeHillier/Mankato, J (V); Liquid
Disposal, MI CV); Main Street Well Field, IN (V);
Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V); New Brighton/St.
Anthony—IRM, Z*I (V); New Brighton/Ardert Hills/St. Anthony.
Z Q ’I (V)*; New Brighton—Interim Water Treatment, I (V)*; Mew
Brighton (TCAAP), I (V)*; New Brighton—Water Supply
System, J (V) ; New Lyme, OH (V); Northernaire, MI (V);
Morthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and
Chemical Corporation, IN CV); Movaco Industries, MI (V);
Old Mill, OH (V); Outboard Marine Corp., IL (V); Reilly
Tar, 2 ’I CV); Reilly Tar & Chemical, ? (V)*; Rose Township,
MI (V); Schxnalz Dump, WI (V)*; Seymour, IN (V); Seymour, IN
(V)*; Verona Well Field—IRM, MI (V); Verona Well Field, MI
(V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V); Bayou Bonfouca, LA
(VI); Bayou Bonfouca, L.A (VI)*; Bayou Sorrel, L.A (VI);
Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Cecil Lindsey, AR (VI); Cleve
Reber, LA (VI); Geneva Industries, TX (VI); Hardage/Criner,
OK (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI); Highlands Acid Pit,
TX (VI)*; Mid-South Wood, AR (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Odessa
Chromium I, TX (VI); Odessa Chromium II, TX (VI); Old
Inger, LA (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits, TX (VI); South
Valley—IRM. NM (VI); Tar Creek, OK (VI); United Creosoting,
TX (VI); Aidex—IRM, IA (VII); Aidex, IA (VII)*;
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE, IA (VII);
Arsenic Trioxide, ND (VIII); Central City/Clear Creek, CO
(VIII); Libby Ground Water, MT (VIII); Marshall Landfill,
CO (VIII); Milltown—S, MT (VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal,
CO (VIII); Smuggler Mountain. CO (VIII); Union Pacific, WY
(VIII); Celtor Chemical Works, CA (IX); Del Norte, CA (IX);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforce.aent Decision Document
13
-------
Contaminated Media Site, State (Region )
(continued
Ground Water (continued) Litchlield Airport. AZ (IX); McCol l, CA (IX); San Fernando
Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX); Stringfellow
ac-id Pits—IRM, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX) ’;
Colbert Landfill, WA CX); Ponders Corner-IRM, WA CX);
Ponders Corner, WA (X)’; Queen City Farms-IRM/EDD, WA (X);
South Tacoma. WA (N); South Tacoma Channel—Well IZA, WA
(X)*; United Chrome, OR CX); Western Processing, WA (N);
Western Processing. WA CX) ’
Sediments (Creek/Rxver/ Auburn Road, NH (I); Cannon/Plymouth, MA (I); Davis Liquid
Stream) Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond. MA (I); Nyanza Chemical, MA
(I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Re—Solve, MA (I) ’;
Tinkham Garage, NH (I); Caldwell Trucking. NJ (II);
Chemical Control, NJ (II) ’; Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ
(II); GflIS Landfill, NJ (II); Haviland Complex. NY (II);
Hudson River, NY (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Pijak Farm,
NJ (II); Syncon Resins, NJ (I i); Wide Beach, NY (II); Army
Creek Landfill. DE (III); Bruin Lagoon. PA (III) ’; Chasman
Creek,. VA (III); Douglassville. PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE
(III); Leetown Pesticide. WV (III ); Limestone Road, MD
(III ); Millcreek, PA (III); Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds,
VA (III); Sand. Gravel & Stone, MD (III ); Tyson’s Dump, PA
(III); Westline, PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV
(III); American Creosote, FL (IV); Coleman Evans. FL (IV);
Newport Dump Site, KY (IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV);
Sapp Battery. FL (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits. FL (IV);
Arcanuxn Iron & Metal, OH (V); Arrowhead Refinery, MN (V);
Burrows Sanitation. MI (V); Fields Brook, OH (V); Forest
Waste. MI (V)’; Lake Sandy Jo, IN ( I); Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN CV); Outboard Marine Corp.. IL CV); Sckunalz
Dump, WI (V); Seymour , IN (V); Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL
CV); Bayou Bonfouca, LA ,(VI); Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI)*;
Cecil Lindsey. AR (VI ); !Cleve Reber. LA (VI); Geneva
Industries, TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Sikes Disposal
Pits. TX (VI); Denver Radium/Card Property, CO (VIII) ;
Milltown. MT (VIII); Woodbury Chemical, CO (VIII); tron
Mountain Mine, CA (IX); Queen City Farms-IRbl/EDD, WA (X);
Western Processing, WA (N) ‘Sludge Davis Liquid Waste. RI
(I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Industri—plex, MA (I); Nyanza
Chemical, MA (I); Bridgeport. NJ (II); Swope Oil. NJ (II);
American Creosote, FL (IV); Arrowhead Refinery, MN (V);
Berlin 6 Farro. M T (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH O f) ’;
Bio—Ecology Systems. TX (Vt); Cleve Reber. LA (VI); Gurley
Pit. AR (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI); Mid—South Wood,
AK (VI); Old Inger, LA (VI); Queen City Farms-IRM/EDD, WA
C X)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decisicn
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
14
-------
Contaminated Media Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Soil Auburn Road. NH (I); Baird & McGui.re, MA (I); Beacon
Heights. CT (I); Cannon/Plymouth, MA (I); Davis Liquid
Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Industri.—plec, MA
(I); Keefe Environmental, NH (I); McKin—IRM. ME (I); Nyanza
Chemical, MA (I); Ottati. & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I);
Picillo Farm. RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*;
Tinkhani Garage. NH (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I); Bog
Creek Farm. NJ (II); Brewster Well Field, NY (II);
Bridgeport. NJ (II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II); Caldwell
Trucking, NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ (II); Chemical
Control. NJ (II)*; Combe Fill North Landfill, NJ (II);
Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II); Diamond Alkali, NJ
(II); D’Imperio Property, NJ (II); Florence Landfill, NJ
(II); GE Moreau, MY (II); GEMS Landfill, NJ (II); Goose
Farm, NJ (II); Helen Kramer. NJ (II); Hyde Park—EDD. NY
(II) ; Krysowaty Farm, NJ (II); Lang Property. NJ (II);
Lipara. Landfill. NJ (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Lone
Pine Landfill, NJ (II) ; Love Canal, NY (II);
Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ (II); PAS Oswego, MY (II) ; Pi)ak
Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II); Reriora Inc., NJ
(II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair Refinery. NY
(II); Spence Farm, NJ (II); Swope Oil, NJ (II); Syncon
Resins, NJ (II); Vestal, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ
(II); Wide Beach, NY (II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Army
Creek Landfill, DE;(III); Blosenski Landfill, PA (III);
Bruin Lagoon, PA (III); Douglassville , PA (III); Drake
Chemical, PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Enterprise
Avenue. PA (III); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); Lackawanna
Refuse Site, PA (III); Larisdowne Radiation, PA, (III);
Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III)*; Leetown Pesticide, WV
(III); Lehigh Electric, PA (III); Matthews Electroplating,
VA (III); McAdoo—I1 M, PA (III); McAdoo Associates, PA
(III)*; Millcreek, PA (III); Palmertort Zinc, PA (III);
Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Sand, Gravel &
Stone, MD (III); Taylor Borough, PA (III); Tybouts Corner,
DE (III); Tyson’s Dump, PA (III); Wade, PA (III); Westline,
PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV (III); American
Creosote, FL (IV); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Gallaway Ponds,
TN (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, Ft.
(IV); Hollingsworth, FL (IV); Miami Drum Services, FL (IV);
Mowbray Engineering, AL (IV); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV);
Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV);
Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV);
Sodyeco, NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Whitehouse Waste
Oil Pits. FL (IV); A&F Materials—IRM. IL (V); A&F
Materials—EDD. IL (V) ; Acme Solvents, IL (V); Arcanuin Iron
& Metal, OH (V); Arrowhead Refinery. ‘2’ (V);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
15
-------
Contaminated Media Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Soil (continued) Berlin & Farro, MI (V); Burrows Sanitation. MI (V);
Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard. IL (V); Cemetery Dump. MI (V);
Chem—Dyne—EDD. OH_LVI_Cross Bros., IL (V); Distler
Brickyard, KY (V); Forest Waste—IRM. MI (V); Forest Waste,
MI (V)*; Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); LaSalle Electrical, IL CV);
Laskin/Poplar Oil. OH (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*;
Liquid Disposal. MI (V); Main Street Wellfield. IN (V);
Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V); Morris Arsenic, J (V); New
I 1 yme. OH (V); Northernaire, MI CV); Morthside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Old Mill, OH (V); Outboard Marine
Corp., IL (V); Reilly Tar. CV); Reilly Tar & Chemical,
*I (V) ; Rose Township, MI (V); Schznalz Dump, WI (V);
Schmalz Dump. WI (V)*; Seymour. EN (V); Seymour. IN (V)*;
Verona Well Field, MI (V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel. IL (V);
Bayou Bonfouca, LA (VI); Bayou Bonfouca, LA (VI)*; Bayou
Sorrel, LA (VI); Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Cecil
Lindsey. AR (VI); Crystal City, TX (VI); Geneva Industries,
TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Hardage/Criner. OK (VI);
Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Old Inger. LA
(VI); Petro—Chemical Systems. TX (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits,
TX (VI); Triangle Chem., TX (VI); United Creosoting, TX
(VI); Aidex—IRM. IA (VII); Aidex. IA (VII)*; Conservation
Qiemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE, tA (VII); Ellisville,
MO (VII); Ellisville Site Area, MO (VII)*; Times Beach, MO
(VII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/lith &
TJrnatilla. CO (VIII) ; Denver Radium/l2th & Quivas, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property. CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium/Open Space. CO (V1ll)*; Denver Radium/ROBCO, CO
(VIII)*; Libby Ground Water, MT (VIII); Militown, MT
(VIII); Milltown—S, MT (VIII); Smuggler Mountain, CO
(VIII); Union Pacific, WY (VIII); Woodbury Chemical, CO
(VIII); Celtor Chemical Works, CA (IX); Celtor Chemical, CA
(IX)*; Del. Norte, CA (IX); Jibboom Junkyard.f CA (IX);
McColl , CA (IX); Mountain View/Globe, AZ (IX); Stringfellow
Acid Pits—IRM, CA (IX); Stririgfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)*;
Taputimu Farm, AS (IX); Ponders Corner—IRM, WA (X); Ponders
Corner. WA (X)*; South Tacoma, WA (X); South Tacoma
Qiannel—Well 12A, WA (X)*; United Chrome, OR CX); Western
Processing, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Surface Water Auburn Road. NH (I); Beacon Heights, CT (I);
Cannon/Plymouth. MA (I); Hocomonco Pond. MA (I); McKin—IRM.
(I); Nyanza Chemical, MA (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes,
NH (I); Re—Solve, MA (I); Sylvester, NH (I); Tinkham
Garage. NH (I); Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Burnt Fly
Bog, NJ (II); Caidwell Trucking, NJ (II); Combe Fill South
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
16
-------
Contaminated Media Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Surface Water (continued) Landfill, NJ (II); GE Moreau, MY (II); GEMS Landfill, NJ
(II); Helen Kramer. NJ (II); Hudson River, NY (II);
Krysowaty Farm, NJ (It); Lipari. Landfill, NJ (II); Lone
Pine Landfill, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Marathon
Battery, NY (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ
(II)*; Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair Refinery, NY
(II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III); Bruin Lagoon, PA
(III); Chisman Creek, VA (III); Douglassville, PA (III);
Drake Chemical, PA (III); Enterprise Avenue, PA (III);
Fischer & Porter PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Heleva
Landfill, PA (III); Lackawartna Refuse Site, PA (III);
Limestone Road, MD (III); McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*;
Milicreek, PA (III); Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Saltville
Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, MD
Surface Water (III); Taylor Borough. PA (III); Tyson’s
Dump, PA (III); Westline, PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance
Works, WV (III); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Geiger (C&Z1 Oil),
SC (VI); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV);
Tower Chemical. FL (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits. FL
(IV); A.&F Materials—EDD, IL (V); Arcanurn Iron & Metal, OH
(V); Arrowhead Refinery, ‘I (V); Berlin & Farro, MI (V);
Burrows Sanitation, MI (V); Chem—Dyne—EDD. OH (V);
Johns—Manville, IL (V); Laskin/Pop].ar Oil, OH (V);
Northside Sanitary Land.fill/Ezivironxnental Conservation and
Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Old Mi1U-OH (V) ; Outboard
Marine Corp., IL (V); Reilly Tar, *I (V); Reilly Tar &
Chemical, b ’24 (V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL CV); Bayou
Bonfouca, LA (VI)*; Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Cecil
Lindsey, AR (VI); C].eve Reber, LA (VI); Geneva Industries,
TX (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; Mid-South Wood, AR
(VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Old Inger, LA (VI); Silces Disposal
Pits, TX (VI); Tar Creek, OK (VI); Central City/Clear
Creek. CO (VIII); Libby Ground Water. MT (VIII): Marshall
Landfill, CO (VIII); Smuggler Mountain, CO (VIII); Celtor
Chemical Works, CA (IX); Celtor Chemical, CA (IX)*; Iron
Mountain Mine, CA (IX); McCall. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid
Pits—IRM, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)*;
Western Processing, WA (X)*
Public Health and Site. State (Region)
Environmental Threats
Direct Contact Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Industri—plex, MA (I);
Re—Solve, MA (I); Winthrop Landfill—EDO, ME (I); Diamond
Alkali, NJ (II); Hudson River, NY (II); Katonah Municipal
Well, NY (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Montgomery Township, NJ
(II); Pijak Farm. NJ (II); Renora Inc., NJ (II); Spence
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
17
-------
Public Health and Site, State (Region)
Environmental Threats
(continued)
Direct Contact Farm. NJ (II); Vega Alta. PR (II); Volney Landfill. NY
(continued) (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II); Williams_Property. NJ
(II); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); West Virginia Ordnance
Works, WV (III); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Powersville
Landfill, GA (IV); Sodeyco. NC (IV); FMC Corporation. MN
(V)*; Forest Waste—IRM, MI (V); Industrial Excess Landfill,
OH CV); Johns—Marwille, IL (‘I); Liquid Disposal. MI (V);
Marion/Bragg Landfill. IN (V); New Brighton (TCAAP); MN
(V)*; Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN CV); Rose
Township, MI (V); Schmalz Dump, WI (V); Seymour. IN (V)*;
Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI)*; Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Crystal
City Airport. TX (VI); Gurley Pit. AR (VI); Hardage/Criner.
OK (VI); Petro—Chemical Systems. TX (VI); Conservation
Chemical, MO (VII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII) ; Denver
Radiuxn/llth & Umatilla, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/l2th &
Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII) ;
Litchfield Airport, AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX);
Stririgfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)
Public Exposure Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Burnt Fly
Bog, NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Diamond Alkali,
NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosysteu’is, NJ
(II); Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III); Milicreek, PA (III);
Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Powersville
Landfill. GA (IV); Sodeyco. NC (IV); Johns-Manville, IL.
(V); Industrial Excess Landfill, OH CV); Liquid Disposal.
MI (V)rNorthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN (V); Rose
Township. MI (V); Seymour, IN (V)*; Verona Well Field—IRZI ,
MI CV); Crystal City Airport, TX (VI); Denver Radium III.
CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/lith & Uinatilla, CO (VIII);
Denver Radiuzr/l2th & Quivas. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card
Property, CO (VIII) ; Denver Radium/Open Space, CO (VIII)*;
Litchfieid Airport. AZ (IX); McColl. CA (IX)
Remedy Selection
Consent Decree Winthrop Landfill-EDD, ME (I); Hyde Park-EDD, NY (II);
Fischer & Porter, PA (III); A&F Materials Company—EDD. IL
(V); Chem—Dyne—EDD. OH (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical. MN (V)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
18
-------
Remedy Selection Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Deed Restriction Winthrop Landfill—EDD, ME (:L); Friedman Property, NJ (II);
Chisrnari Creek, VA (III); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV
(III); Powersville Landf ill, GA (IV); Arcanum Iron & Metal,
OH (V); Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN
(V); Morris Arsenic, I (V); !‘Iorthside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Seymour. IN (V)*; Reilly Tar &
Chemical, I (V); Mid—South Wood, AR (VI); South Tacoma
Channel—Well 12A, WA (X)*; Western Processing, WA (X)*
Fund Balancing Outboard Marine Corp., IL CV); Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX)
Interim Remedy Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Kane & Lombard, MD (III);
Palmerton Zinc, PA (lit); Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds,
VA (III); New Brighton (TCAAP), 2’I (V)*; Central City/Clear
Creek. CO (VIII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radiuxn/llth & Umatilla, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radiuzri/l2th &
Quivas. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*;
Litchfield Airport, AZ (IX); Operating Industries. CA (IX);
San Fernando Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX);
Stringfellow Acid Pits. CA (IX)
No Action Remedy Cooper Road. NJ (II); Friedman Property, NJ (II); South
Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II)*; Suffern Village Well Field,
—NY (II); Middletown Road, MD (III); Presque Isle, PA (III);
Taylor Borough. PA (IIl)*; Tn-City Conservation, FL (IV);
Varsol Spill. FL (IV); Morris Arsenic, I (V); Cecil
Lindsey. AR (VI); Highlands Acid Pit. TX (VI)*; Toftdahl
Drum, WA (X)
0 & M Auburn Road, NH (I); Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Davis Liquid
Waste, RI (I); Industri.—plex, MA (I); Kellogg—Deening Well
Field. CT (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Re—Solve.
MA (I); Re—Solve, MA (t)*; Tinkham Garage, NH (I); Winthrop
Laridfill—EDD, ME (I); Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Burnt
Fly Bog, NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); Combe Fill
North Landfill, NJ (II); Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ
(II); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); D’Imperio Property. NJ (II);
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); Florence Landfill, NJ
(II); GE Moreau, NY (It); Haviland Complex, NY (II); Hyde
Park—EDD, NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II);
Kentucky Avenue Welifield, KY (II); Krysowaty Farm, NJ
(II); Lang Property, NJ (II); Love Canal, NY (II); Marathon
Battery, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ (II);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
19
-------
Remedy Selection Site. State (Region )
(continued)
o & M (continued) PAS Osuego, NY (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill.
NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; Reriora Inc., NJ (II);
Rockaway Borough Wellfield. NJ (II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ
(It); South Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II)*; Spence Farm, NJ
(II); Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Vestal,
NY (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ
(II); Williams Property. NJ (Ii); Army Creek Landfill, DE
(lit); Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon, PA
(III); Bruin Lagoon, PA (III)*; Chisman Creek, VA (III);
Drake Chemical, PA (III); Heleva Landfill, PA (III); Kane &
Lombard, (III); Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III)*;
Limestone Road, (III); Matthews Electroplating, VA
( III); Milicreek, PA (III); Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds,
VA (III); Tybouts Corner Landfill, DE (III); West Virginia
Ordnance Works, VA (III); A. L. Taylor, KY (IV); Distler
Brickyard, KY (IV); Distler Farm, KY (IV); Gallaway Ponds,
TN (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV); Newport Dump Site,
KY (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC (IV); Pioneer Sand,
FL (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sapp Battery, FL
(IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Sodyeco, NC (IV); Whitehouse
Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV); A&F Materials—EDD, IL (V); Arcanum
Iron & Metal, OH (V); Arrowhead Refinery, I (V); Burrows
Sanitation, MI (V); Byron/Johnson Salvage Yard, IL (V);
Byron Salvage Yard, IL (V)*; Charlevoix, MI (V);
Chern-Dy’ne-EDD . OH (V); Eau Claire—IRM, WI (V); FMC
Corporation, I (V) ; Johns—Manville, IL (V); Lake Sandy
Jo, IN (V); Liquid Disposal. MI (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill,
IN (V); New Brighton (TCAAP), I (V) ; Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Cons rvation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Old Mill, OH (V); Reilly Tar, ‘I CV);
Reilly Tar & Chemical, (V) ; Rose Township, MI (V);
Schmal Dump. WI (V)*; Seymour, IN CV); Seymour, IN (V)*;
Verona Well Field—IRM, MI CV); Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI)*;
Bayou Sorrel, LA (VI); Bio—Ecology Systems. TX (VI); Cleve
Reber, LA (VI); Crystal City Airport. TX (VI); Geneva
Industries, TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Hardage/Crirxer,
OK (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; Mid—South Wood, AR
(VI); Odessa Chromium I, TX (VI); Odessa Chromium II, TX
(VI); Old Inger, LA (VI); Petro—Chernical Systems. TX (VI);
Sikes Disposal Pits, TX (VI); Tar Creek. OK (VI); United
Creosoting, TX (VI); Aidex, IA (VII)*; Conservation
Chemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE, IA (VII);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
20
-------
Remedy Selection Site. State (Region )
(continued)
o & M (continued) Ellisville Site Area. MO (VII)*; Arsenic Trioxide, ND
(VIII); Central City/Clear Creek, CO (VIII); Denver Radium
III, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/lith & Umatilla, CO (VIII)*;
Denver Radium/l2th & Quivas. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card
Property, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space, CO (VIII)*;
Denver Radium/RCBCO, Co (VIII) ; Libby Ground Water, MT
(VIII); Milltown. MT (VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO
(VIII); Smuggler Mountain. CO (VIII); Union Pacific, WY
(VIII); Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX); Litchfield Airport, AZ
(IX); Operating Industries, CA (IX); San Fernando Area I.
CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid
Pits, CA (IX)*; Colbert Landfill. WA (X); Ponders
Corner—IRM, WA (X); South tacoma Channel-Well 12A, WA (X)*;
Toftdahl Drum, WA CX); United Chrome. OR (X); Western
Processing. WA (X)*
ROD Addendum Sylvester, NH (I); Milltowri, MT (VIII)
Water Supply
Alternate Water Supply Auburn Road. NH (I): Charles George, MA (I); Davis Liquid
Waste. RI (I); Winthrop Landfill—EDD, (I); Bridgeport,
NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); Combe Fill South
Landfill, NJ (II); GE Moreau. NY (II); Haviland Complex, NY
(II); Kentucky Aveni Well Field, NY (II); Krysowaty Farm.
NJ (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems, NJ (II); Montgomery
Township. NJ (II); Olean Well Field, NY (II); Price
Landfill, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Williams Property,
NJ (II); Blosenski Landfill. PA (III); Chisman Creek, VA
(III); Fischer & Porter. PA (III); Industrial Lane, PA
(III); Matthews Electroplating, VA (III); Palmetto Wood
Preserving, SC (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Acme
Solvents, IL (V); Arrowhead Refinery, I (V); Byron Salvage
Yard, I L . (V)a; Charlevoix, MI (V); Eau Claire—IRM, WI (V);
Industrial Excess Landfill, OH (V); Kummer Landfill, I
(V); Lake Sandy J 0 , IN (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St.
Anthony. I (V)*; New Brighton—Water Supply System, MN
(V)*; Old Mill, OH (V); Reilly Tar, MN (V); Verona Well
Field—IRM. MI (V); Odessa Chromium I, TX (VI); Odessa
Chromium II, TX (VI); South Valley—IRM, NM (VI); Arsenic
Trioxide, ND (VIII); Libby Ground Water. MT (VIII);
Milltown, MT (VIII); Smuggler Mountain, CO (VIII); Colbert
Landfill, WA (X)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
21
-------
Water Supply Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Drinking Water Auburn Road, NH (I); Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I);
Contaminants Kellogg—Deering Well Field, CT (I); Brewster Well Field, NY
(II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); Combe Fill South
Landfill, NJ (II); Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); GE
Moreau, NY (II); Haviland Complex, NY (II); Kentucky Avenue
Well Field, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosysterns, NJ (II);
Montgomery Township, NJ (II); Rockaway Borough Well Field,
NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Vestal, NY (II); Williams
Property, NJ (II); Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Chisrnan
Creek, VA (III); Fischer & Porter, PA (III); Industrial
Lane. PA (III); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Hipps Road
Landfill, FL (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sodyeco,
NC (IV); Arrowhead Refinery. b 4 (V); Byron Johnson Salvage
Yard. IL (V)*; FMC Corporation, I (V) ; Eau Claire—IRM, WI
(V); Industrial Excess Landfill, OH (V); Lake Sandy J 0 , IN
(V); Main Street Welifield, IN (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill,
IN (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, MN (V)*; New
Brighton (TCAAP), MN (V)*; Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical, MN (V);
Seymour, IN (V)*; Tower Chemical. FL (V); Verona Well
Field—IRM, MI (V); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Odessa Chromium
I, TX (VI); Odessa Chromium II, TX (VI); South Valley—IRM.
NM (VI); Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE,
IA (VII); Arsenic Trioxide, ND (VIII); Libby Ground Water,
MT (VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); Smuggler
Mountain, CO (VIII); Litchfi.eld Airport, AZ (IX); San
Fernando Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX);
Colbert Landfill, WA (X)
Site Specific Charac-
teristics
Flood Plain Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Tinkham Garage. NH (I); Chemical
Control, NJ (II)*; Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Florence
Landfill, NJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Renora Inc., NJ
(II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Bruirt Lagoon, PA (III)*;
Drake Chemical, PA (III); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Mipps
Road Landfill, FL (IV); A&F Materials. IL (V); A&F
Materials—EDD, IL (V)*; FMC Corporation. MN (V)*;
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
22
-------
Site Specific harac— Site, State (Region)
teristics
(continued)
Flood Plain Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V);
(continued) Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI); Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI)*; Cleve
Reber. LA (VI); Geneva Industries. TX (Vt); Gurley Pit, AR
(VI); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV); Highlands Acid Pit, TX
(VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; MO ’ICO, TX (VI); Sikes
Disposal Pits, TX (VI); Triangle Chemical, TX (VI); Denver
Radium/lith & Tjmatilla, CO (VIII) ; Denver Radium/Open
Space, CO (VIII)*; Celtor Chemical, CA (IX)*
Seismic McColl, CA (IX)
Sole—Source Aquifer Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Price Landfill, NJ (II);
Rockaway Borough Welifield, NJ (II); Biscayne Aquifer
Sites, FL (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV)
Subsidence McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*; Taylor Borough, PA (III);
Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)
Standards / Requlat ions/
Permits/Guidance
ARARs
MCLs á isLiquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA1T)*; Endicott
Village Well Field, NY (II); GE Moreau, MY (II); Haviland
Complex, NY (II); Montgomery Township, NJ (II); Renora
Inc., NJ (II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Palmetto Wood
Preserving, SC (IV); FMC Corporation, MN (V)*; Liquid
Disposal, MI (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, MN
(V)*; New Brighton (TCAAP), MN (V)*; Morthside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN (V); Rose Township. MI (‘1); Schmalz Dump,
WI (V)*; Seymour, IN (V)*; Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*;
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO
(VIII); Litchfield Airport. AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I,
CA (IX)
MCLGs Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and
Chemical Corporation, IN (V)
Action—Specific Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH
(I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Diamond
Alkali, NJ (II); Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II)*;
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
23
-------
Standards/Regulations/
Permits/Guidance Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Action—Specific GE Moreau, NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II); Renora
(continued) Inc., NJ (II); South Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II)*; Vega
Alta, PR (II); Montgomery Township, NJ (II); Volney
Landfill, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace. NJ (II); Williams
Property. NJ (II); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); Palmertori
Zinc, PA (III): Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds. VA (III);
Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV): Newport Dump Site, K (IV);
Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA
(IV); Sodeyco, NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); FMC
Corporation. 4 (V) ; Johns-Manville, IL (V); Laskin/Poplar
Oil, OH (V)*; Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Marion/Bragg
Landfill, IN (V); Mew Brighton (TCAAP), (V) ; Northside
Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN (V); Rose Township. MI (V); Schinalz Dump.
WI (V) ; Seymour. IN (V)*; Bayou Bori.fouca. LA (VI)*; Bayou
Sorrel, LA (VI); Cleve Reber. LA (VI): Crystal City
Airport. TX (VI); Gurley Pit. AR (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK
(VI); Mid—South Wood Products. AR (VI); Petro—Chemical
System, TX (VI); Conservation Chemical. MO (VII); Central
City/Clear Creek. CO (VIII); Denver Radium/llth & Umati.lla,
CO (VIII) ; Denver Radium/l2th & Quivas CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium III. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*; Litchfield
Airport. AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel
Area I. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX)
Chemical—Specific Davis Liquid Waste. RI (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes. NH
(I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Diamond
Alkali, NJ (II); Eridicott Village Well Field. NY (II); GE
Moreau, NY (II); Maviland Coniple , NY (II); Katonah
Municipal Well. NY (II); Montgomery Township. NJ (II);
Reriora Inc., NJ (II); Suffern Village Well Field. NY (II);
Vega Alta, PR (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick
Aerospace, NJ (II); Williams Property. NJ (II); Saltville
Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); West Virginia Ordnance
Works, WV (III); Geiger (C&M Oil). SC (IV); Palmetto Wood
Preserving. SC (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV);
Sodyeco. NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Tn—City
Conservation. FL (IV); Johns—Manville, IL (V); Liquid
Disposal. MI (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, MN
(V)*; New Brighton (TCAAP), MN (V)*; FMC Corporation. MN
(V)*; Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Rose
Township, MI (V); Schmalz Dump. WI (V); Seymour. IN (V)*;
Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
24
-------
Standards IRequlations/
Permits/Guidance Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Chemical—Specific Bayou Bonfouca. LA (VI)*; Hardage/Criner, OK (VI);
(continued) Mid—South Wood Products. AR (VI); Petro-Chemical Systems.
TX (VI); Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Central
City/Clear Creek, CO (VIII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*;
Denver Radium/lith & TJmatilla, CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium/l2th & Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space.
CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO (VIII) ; Rocky
Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); Litchfield Airport. AZ (IX);
San Fernando Area I. CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX);
Colbert Landfills, WA (X)
Location—Specific Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical
Control, NJ (II)*; Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Waldick
Aerospace, NJ (II); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV (III);
Geiger (C&M Oil). SC (IV); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV);
Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V);
Rose Township, MI (V); Bayou Bonfouca, LA (VI)*; Bayou
Sorrel. LA (VI); Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Gurley Pit. AR (VI);
Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; Central City/Clear Creek. CO
(VIII); Denver Radium III. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card
Property, CO (VIII)
Clean Air Act Re—Solve. MA (I)*; Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II);
Johns—Manville, IL (V)7La 1cin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*; New
Brighton (TCAAP). I (V) ; Seymour. IN (V)*; Gurley Pit, AR
(VI); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX)
Clean Water Act Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical
Control, NJ (II)*; Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II);
Havilarid Complex, NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II);
South Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II); Vega Aita, PR (II);
Volney Landfill, NY (II); Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds,
VA (III); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); FMC Corporation. ‘J (V);
Liquid Disposal. MI (V); Rose Township, MI (V); Crystal
City Airport, TX (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*;
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA
(IX); Colbert Landfill, WA (X)
Drinking Water Standards GE Moreau, NY (II); Rockaway Borough Welifield, NJ (II);
Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Old Inger, LA (IV); Tn-City
Conservation, FL (IV); Burrows Sanitation. MI (VI); New
Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, i (V) ; Northside
Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
25
-------
Standards / Regulat ions /
Permits/Guidance Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Drinking Water Standards Corporation, IN (V); South Valley—IRM, NM (VI); Militown,
(continued) MT (VIII); Colbert Landfill, WA CX); (Jruted Chrome, OR CX)
Institutional Controls Beacon Heights, CT (I); Re—Solve. MA (I)*; Winthrop
L andfill—EDD, (I); Friedman Property, NJ (II); GE
Moreau, NY (II); Marathon Battery, NY (II); Olean Well
Field, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace. NJ (II); Chisman Creek,
VA (III); Industrial Lane, PA (III); Saltville Waste
Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III); West
Virginia Ordnance Works, WV (III); Biscayne Aquifer Sites,
FL (IV); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL
(IV); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD , FL
(IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV);
Tower Chemical, FL (IV); A&F Materials—EDD, IL (V); Arcanum
Iron & Metal, OH (V); Arrowhead Refinery. (V);
Charlevoix, MI (V)*; FMC Corporation, 1 (V) ;
Johns-Manville, IL (V); Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); Marion/Bragg
Landfill, IN (V); Morthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Old Mill, OH
(V); Reilly Tar & Chemical, I (V) ; Seymour, IN (V)*;
Mid—South Wood Products; AR (VI); Odessa Chromium I, TX
(VI); Odessa Chromium II, TX (VI); Old Inger, LA (VI);
United Creosoting, TX (VI); Conservation Chemical, MO
(VIL); Arsen-ic-—Trioxide. ND (VIII); Denver Radium Site
Streets. CO (VIII); Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*;
Libby Ground Water, MT (VIII); Ponders Corner, WA (X)*;
South Tacoma Channel—Well 12A, WA (X)*; Western Processing,
WA (X)*
Public Health Advisory Lansdowne Radiation. PA (III)
RCRA Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II);
Love Canal, NY (II); South Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II)*;
PAZ Oswego. NY (II); Volney Landfill. NY (II); Williams
Property, NJ (II); Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds, VA
(III); Biscayne Aquifer Sites. FL (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil),
SC (IV); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV); Palmetto Wood
Preserving. SC (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV);
Sodyeco. NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Arcanuin Iron &
Metal, OH (V); Burrows Sanitation, MI (V); Laskin/Poplar
Oil, OH (V)*; Marion/Bragg Landfill. IN (V); Old Mill, OH
(V); Seymour, IN (V)*; Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Crystal City
Airport, TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Aidex, IA (VII)*;
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
26
-------
Standardz/Requlations/
Permits/Guidance Site, State (Region )
(continued)
RCRA Ellisville Site Area, MO (VII)*; Central City/Clear Creek,
(continued) CO (VIII); Litchfield Airport, AZ (IX); San Fernando Area
I, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits. CA (IX) Ponders Corner.
WA (X)*
RCRA Closure Requirements Winthrop Landfill—EDD, (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*;
Bridgeport, NJ (II); Combe Fill North Landfill, NJ (II);
Renora Inc., NJ (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III);
Blosenski. Landfill, PA (III); Enterprise Avenue, PA (III );
Kane & Lombard, MD (III); Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Tyson’s
Dump, PA (III); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL
(IV); Lake Sandy Jo, IN CV); Liquid Disposal, MI (V); Rose
Township. MI CV); Bayou Sorrel, LA (VI); Conservation
Chemical, MO (VII); Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); South
Tacoma, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Alternate Closure Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Kane & Lombard, MD (III);
Johns-Mansville. IL (V)
Clean Closure Renora Inc., NJ (II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Bayou
Bonfouca, LA (VI)*
Landf ill Closure Johns—Mariville, IL (V); Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Ché T al
Corporation, IN (V); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI)
RCRA Landfill Picillo Farm, RI (I); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); Lang
Specifications Property, NJ (II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Drake
Chemical, PA (III); Tyson’s Dump, PA (III); American
Creosote, FL (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV); Spiegelberg
Landfill, MI (V); Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Western
Processing, WA (X)*
RCRA Locational Tyson’s Dump. PA (III); Berlin & Farro, MI (V)
Requirements
Safe Drinking Water Act Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Endicott
Village Well Field, NY (II); GE Moreau,
NY (II); Haviland Complex, NY (II); Montgomery Township, NJ
(II); Renora Inc., NJ (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II);
Williams Property. N.]’ (II); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC
(IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sodyeco, NC (IV);
Tower Chemical. FL (IV); FMC Corporation, (V) ;
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
27
-------
Standards/Regulations /
Permits/Guidance Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Safe Drinking Water Act t’Jew Brighton (TCAAP), I (V) ; Northside Sanitary
(continued) Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN (V); Rose Township. MI (V); Schxnalz Dump,
WI (V)*; Seymour. IN (V)*; Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI)*;
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Litchfield Airport, AZ
(IX); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX); Colbert Landfill, WA CX)
State Criteria Davis Liquid Waste. RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Brewster
Well Field, NY (II); Bridgeport. NJ (II); Diamond Alkali,
NJ (II); D’Imperio Property. NJ (II); Endicott Village Well
Field, NY (II); GE Moreau. NY (II); Goose Farm. NJ (II );
Haviland Complex. NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well. NY (II);
I
-------
Standards/Regulat ioas/
Permits/Guidance Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Water Quality CriterLa Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical Control. NJ (II)*; Endicott
Village Well Field, NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY
(II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Army Creek Landfill, DE
(III); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); FMC Corporation, I (V)*;
Johns-Manville, IL (V); New Br ghton-Water Supply System,
*I (V) ; Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation. IN (V); Verona Well
Field—IRM, MI (V); Crystal City Airport. TX (VI);
Conservation Chemical, MO (VII); Litchfield Airport, AZ (IX)
Testing/Pilot Studies
Leachability Tests Re—Solve, MA (I)
Treatability Studies Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Winthrop
Landfill—EDD, ME (I); Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Reriora
Inc., NJ (II); Pairnerton Zinc, PA (III); Sal.tville Waste
Disposal Ponds, VA, (III); Leetown Pesticide, WV (IV);
Sodyeco, NC (IV); Arcanum Iron & Metal, OH (V); Seymour, IN
(V)*; Old Inger. LA (VI); Central City/Clear Creek,
CO (VIII)
Technology
Aeration McKin, ME (I); Ottati & Coss/Great Lakes, NH (I);
Hollingsworth, FL (IV); Triangle Chem., TX (VI); San
Fernando Area I, CA (IX)
Air Monitoring Johns—Manville, IL CV); Operating Industries, CA (IX)
Air Stripping Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Industri—plex, MA (I);
Kellogg—Deering Well Field, CT (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*;
Brewster Well Field, NY (II); Caidwell Trucking, NJ (II);
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); GE Moreau, NY (II);
} aviland Complex, NY (II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II);
Lang Property. NJ (II); Olean Well Field, NY (II); Price
Landfill, NJ (II)*; Vega Alta, PR (II); Vestal, NY (II);
Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II); Williams Property, NJ (II);
Tyson’s Dump, PA (III); Biscayne Aquifer Sites, FL (IV);
Hollingsworth, FL (IV); Eau Claire—IRM, WI (V);
LeHillier/Mankato, I (V); Liquid Disposal, MI CV);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
29
-------
Technology Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Air Stripping Main Street Well Field, IN (V); New Brighton (TCAAP),
(continued) (V)*; Rose Township, MI (V); Seymour. IN (V); Seymour, IN
(V)*; Verona Well Field—IRM, MA (V); Verona Well Field, MI
(V)*; Des Moines ICE. IA (VII); Marshall t..aridf ill. CO
(VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII); Litchfield
Airport, AZ (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX); Ponders
Corner—IRM, WA CX); Ponders Corner, WA (X)*; South Tacoma,
WA (X); South Tacoma Channel-Well 12A, WA (X)*
Capping Beacon Heights. CT (I); Charles George. MA (I)*; Hocomonco
Pond. MA (I); Iridustri—plex, MA (I); Myanza Chemical. MA
(I); Ottati & Coss/Great Lakes. NH (I); Re—Solve, MA (I);
Sylvester. NH (I); Winthrop Landfill—EDD, ME (I); Bog Creek
Farm, NJ (II); Combe Fill North Landfill. NJ (II); Combe
Fill South Landfill, NJ (II); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II);
D’Iinperio Property, NJ (II); Florence Landfill, NJ (II); GE
Moreau. NY (II); G 1S Landfill, NJ (II); Goose Farm. NJ
(II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II); PAS
Oswego, NY (II); Sharkey Landfill, NJ (II); Sinclair
Refinery. NY (II); Suope Oil, NJ (II); Volney Landfill, NY
(II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III); Blosenski Landfill. PA
(III); Bruin.Lagoon. PA (III)*; Chisman Creek, VA (III);
Douglassville. PA (III); Drake Chemical, PA (III);
Enterprise Avenue. PA (III); Heleva Landfill, PA (III);
Kane & Lombard, (III )----Lackawanna Refuse Site, - PATIII);
Limestone Road. (III); Matthews Electroplating, VA
(III); McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*; Milicreek, PA (III);
Moyer Landfill. PA (III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III); Tyson’s
Dump. PA (III); Wade, PA (III); A. L. Taylor, KY (IV);
Dane Landfill, FL (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV);
Newport Dump Site. KY (IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV);
Sodyeco, MC (IV); Whitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV);
Chem-Dyne-EDD. OH (V); Johns-Manville. IL CV); Liquid
Disposal, MI (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill, MI (V); New Lyme,
OH (V); Morthside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, EN (V); Schinalz
Dump. WI (V)*; Seymour, IN (V)*; Bio—Ecology Systems Site,
TX (VI); Cleve Reber. LA (VI); Crystal City Airport, TX
(VI); Geneva Industries, TX, (VI); Gurley Pit, AR, (VI);
Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Mid-South Wood. AR (VI); Old
Inger , LA CVI); United Creosoting, TX (VI); Aidex, IA
(VII)*; Conservation Chemical. MO (VII); Denver Radium III.
CO (VIII)*; Denver Radiuni/lZth & Quivas. CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*; Smuggler Mountain, CO
(VIII); Iron Mountain Mine, CA (IX); Mountain View/Globe,
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
30
-------
Technology Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Capping (continued) AZ (IX); Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA (X); South Tacoma
Channel—Well 12A, WA (X); Western Processing, WA (X)*
Containment Hudson River, NY (II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (tI)*; Drake
Chemical, PA (III); New Lyme, OH (V); Outboard Marine
Corp., IL (V); Bayou Sorrel. LA (VI); Times Beach, SO (VII)
Decontamination Diamond Alkali, NJ (II)
Dredging Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Hudson River, NY (II); Love Canal,
NY (II); Marathon Battery, NY (II); Outboard Marine Corp.,
IL (V); Tar Creek, OK (VI)
Excavation Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Beacon Heights, CT (I); Davis
Liquid Waste. RI (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I);
Hocomonco Pond. MA (IL Nyanza Chemical, MA (I); Picillo
Farm. RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Tinkham Garage, NH (I);
Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); Bridgeport, NJ (II); Burnt Fly
Bog, NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking, NJ (II); D’Imperio
Property, NJ (II); GE Moreau, NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ
(II); Krysowaty Farm, NJ (II); Lang Property, NJ (II); Love
Canal, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems, NJ (II); PAS Oswego,
NY (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Renora Inc., NJ (II); Swope
Oil, NJ (II); Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Waldick Aerospace. NJ
(II); Wide Beach, MY (II); Williams Property. NJ (II);
Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Douglassville, PA (III);
Drake Chemical. PA (III); Kane & Lombard, MD (III); Leetown
Pesticide. WV (III); Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III)*; Lehigh
Electric, PA (III); McAdoo—IRM, PA (III); McAdoo
Associates, PA (III)*; Milicreek, PA (III); Sand, Gravel &
Stone, MD (III); Taylor Borough, PA (III); Tyson’s Dump, PA
(III); Tybouts Corner, DE (III); Westline, PA (III); West
Virginia Ordnance Works, WV (III); American Creosote, FL
(IV); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Distler Brickyard. KY (IV);
Distler Farm, KY (IV); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Geiger (C&M
Oil), SC (IV); Hollingsworth, FL (IV); Miami Drum Services.
FL (IV); Mowbray Engineering, AL (IV); Palmetto Wood
Preserving, SC (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV); Tower Chemical,
FL (IV); A&F Materials—EDD, IL (V); Acme Solvents, IL (V);
Arcanurn Iron & Metal, OH (V); Arrowhead Refinery, MN (V);
Berlin & Farro, MI CV); Burrows Sanitation, MI (V);
Byron/Johnson Salvage, IL (V); Cemetery Dump. MI (V);
Ohem—Dyne—EDD, OH (V); Cross Bros., IL (V); Forest Waste,
MI (V)*; Lake Sandy Jo, IN (V); LaSalle Electrical. IL (V);
Northernai.re. MI (V); Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN (V); Old Mill, OH (V); Outboard Marine
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
31
-------
Site. State (Region )
Technology
(continued)
Excavation (continued)
Filling
Corp., IL CV); Rose Township. MI (V); Schmalz Dump, WI CV);
Seymour. EN (V)’; Bayou Bon.Eouca. LA (VI); Bayou Bonfouca.
LA (VI) Bayou Sorrel. LÀ (VI); Cleve Reber. LA (VI);
Geneva In dustries, TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI);
Hardage/Criner , OK (VI); Highlands Acid Pit. TX (VI);
Mid-South Wood. AR (VI); MOTCO. TX (VI); Petro—Chemical
Systems. TX (VI); Old Inger. LA (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits,
TX (VI); United Creosoting, TX (VI); Ai.dex, IA (VII)*;
Ellisville. MO (VII); Ellisville Site Area. MO (VII)*;
Times Beach. MO (VII); Denver Radium Site Streets. CO
(VIII); Denver Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/lith &
Umatilla. CO (VIII)*; Denver Radiuxrt/l2th & Quivas, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO (VIII) ; Denver
Radium/Open Sapce , CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/ROECO. CO
(VIII)*; Rocky Mountain Arsenal. CO (VIII); Smuggler
Mountain. CO (VIII); Woodbury Chemical. CO (VIII); Celtor
Chemical Works, CA (IX); Celtor Chemical. CA (IX)*; Del
Morte, CA (IX); Jibboom Junkyard. CA (IX); McColl. CA (IX);
Ponders Corner, WA (X)*; Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD. WA CX);
South Tacoma, WA CX); South Tacoma Channel-Well 12A, WA
(X)*; United Chrome, OR (X); Western Processing. WA (X)*
Lehigh Electric, PA (III); Taylor Borough. PA (III); Wade.
PA (III); Coleman Evans, Ft. (IV); A&F Materials—EDD. IL
(V)*; Cleve Reber, LA-(VI);--Tar-Creek, OK (VI)4_Woodbury
Chemical. CO (VIII)
Granular Activated Carbon
Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Rockaway Borough Welifield.
Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony. I (V) ; New
Brighton—Interim Water Treatment. I (V) ; New
CV); Reilly Tar, I (V); Reilly Tar & Chemical.
Old Inger, LA (VI); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO
L.itchfield Airport. AZ (IX); San Fernando Area
San Gabriel Area 1. CA (IX); Stririgfellow Acid
CA (IX)*
NJ (II); Mew
Lyme, OH
MM (V)*;
(VIII);
I, CA (IX);
Pits.
Ground Water Monitoring
Auburn Road, NH (I); Baird & McGuire. MA (I); Beacon
Heights, CT (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Industri—plex, MA
(I); ICellogg—DeerLng Well Field, CT (I); McKin. ME (I);
Nyanza Chemical. MA (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I);
Pici.llo Farm, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Tinkham Garage, NH
(I); Winthrop Landfill—EDD, ME (I); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II);
Caldwe].l Trucking. NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ (II)*;
Diamond Alkali, NJ (II ); Endicott Village Well Field. NY
(II); Friedman Property, NJ (II); GE Moreau. NY (II);
Haviland Complex. NY (II); Hyde Park—EDD. NY (II); Katonah
Municipal Well, NY (II); Kentucky Avenue Well Field, NY
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
32
-------
Technology Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Ground Water Monitoring (II); Krysowaty Farm. NJ (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems. NJ
(continued) (II); Montgomery Township. NY (II); PAS Oswego. NY (II );
Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; South
Brunswick Landfill, NJ (II)*; Suffern Village Well. Field,
NY (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II);
Waldick Aerospace, NJ (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE (III);
Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Bruin Lagoon, PA (III)*;
Chisman Creek, VA (III); Drake Chemical, PA (III); Kane &
Lombard, MD (III); Limestone Road, MD (III); Millcreek, PA
(III); Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Saltville Waste Disposal
Ponds. VA (III); Taylor Borough, PA (III)*; Tybouts Corner,
DE (III); Gallaway Ponds, TN (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL
(IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV); Pioneer Sand, FL (IV);
Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV); A&F
Materials-EDD, IL (V)*; Arcanum Iron & Metal, OH (V);
Burrows Sanitation. MI (V); Byron Salvage Yard. IL (V)*;
FMC Corporation. *I (V) ; Johns-Manyille. IL (V); Lake
Sandy Jo, IN (V); Marion/Bragg Landfill, IN (V); Mew
Brighton (TCAAP), (V) ; New Lyme, OH (V); Northside
Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, IN (V); Movaco Industries, MI (V); Reilly Tar
& Chemical, ‘I (V)a; Schmalz Dump, WI (V)*; Seymour, IN
(V)*; Bayou Sorrel, LA (VI); Bio—Ecology Systems. TX (VI);
Cecil. Lindsey, AR (VI); Cleve Reber, LA (VI); Geneva
Industries, TX (VI); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI); Highlands
Acid Pit, TX (VI)*; Mid—South Wood, AR (VI); Sikes Disposal
Pits, TX (VI); Aidex, IA (VII)k; Conservation Chemical, MO
(VII); Ellisville Site Area, MO (VII)*; Arsenic Trioxide,
ND (VIII); Marshall Landfill, CO (VIII); Rocky Mountain
Arsenal, CO (VIII); Smuggler Mountain, CO (VIII); Union
Pacific, WY (VIII); Woodbury Chemical, CO (VIII);
Litchfield Airport. AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX);
San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX); Colbert Landfill, WA (X);
Queen City Farms—I M/EDD. WA (X); Toftdahl Drum, (X)
Ground Water Treatment Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I);
Industri—plex, MA (I); Kellogg—Deering Well Field. CT (I);
McKin, (I); Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Re—Solve,
MA (I)*; Sylvester, NH (I); Sylvester—S. NH (I); Tinkham
Garage, NH (I); Winthrop Landfill—EDD, (I); Brewster
Well. Field, NY (II); Cornbe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II);
Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); D’Imperio Property, NJ (II);
Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); GE Moreau, NY (II);
G S Landfill, NJ (II); Goose Farm, NJ (II); Haviland
Complex, NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Hyde Park—EDD. NY
(II); Katonah Municipal Well, NY (II); Lang Property, NJ
(II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II)*; Olean Well Field. NY (II);
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
33
-------
Technology Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Ground Water Treatment PAS Oswego. NY (II); Price Lan f ill, NJ (II)*; Rockaway
(continued) Borough Weilfield. NJ (II); Shárkey Landfill, NJ (II);
Syncon Resins, NJ (II); Vega A ta. PR (II); Vestal, NY
(II); Williams Property, NJ (Ii); Blosenski Landfill, PA
(III); Harvey—Knott. DE (III); Heleva Landfill. PA (III);
Leetown Pesticide, WV (III); Millcreek. PA (III); Tybouts
Corner, DE (III); Coleman Evans. FL (IV); Distler
Brickyard. KY (IV); Hipps Road Landfill, FL (IV);
Hollirigsworth. FL (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC (IV);
SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV); Sodyeco. NC
(IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); cJhitehouse Waste Oil Pits.
FL (IV); Arrowhead Refinery, 2’ 1 (V); Chem—Dyne—EDD , OH (V);
FMC Corporation, Z’2J (V)*; LeHillier/Mankato, ‘I (V); Liquid
Disposal, MI (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, J
(V)*; New Brighton (TCAAP), I (V) ; New Lyme. OH (V);
Novaco Industries, MI (V); Old Mill, OH (V); Rose Township,
MI (V); Seymour, IN (V); Verona Well Field, MI (V)*; Cleve
Reber, LA (VI); Geneva Industries, TX (VI); Conservation
Chemical, MO (VII); Des Moines TCE. IA (VII); Marshall
Landfill, CO (VIII); Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO (VIII);
Union Pacific. WY (VIII); Del Norte. CA (IX); Litchfield
Airport, AZ (IX); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX); San Gabriel
Area I. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits. CA (IX); Colbert
Landfill, WA (X); Ponders Corner. WA (X)*; South Tacoma
Channel—Well ].2A, WA (X)*; United Chrome, OR-(X); Western
Processing. WA (X)*
Incineration Baird & McGuire. MA (I); Davis Liquid Waster RI (I);
Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II);
Bridgeport. NJ (II); Hyde Park—EDD, NY (II); Swope Oil, NJ
(II); Williams Property. NJ (II); Drake Chemical. PA (III);
Lackawazina Refuse Site, PA (III); Westlirie, PA (III);
Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Mowbray
Engineering. AL (IV); Soydeco. NC (IV); Tower Chemical. FL
(IV); Acute Solvents, IL (V); Arrowhead Refinery. b’2’I (V);
Berlin & Farro, MI (V); Fields Brook, OH (V); LaSalle
Electrical. IL (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V);
Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*; Metamora Landfill. MI (V); Rose
Township. MI (V); Spiegelberg Landfill, MI (V); Bayou
Bonfouca, LA (VI)*; Cleve Reber. LA (VI) ; Gurley Pit, AR
(VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); MOTCO. TX (VI); SAkes
Disposal Pits, TX (VI); Triangle Chem., TX (VI); Woodbury
Chemical. CO (VIII); Western Processing, WA (X)
Land Treatment Re—Solve. MA (I)*; Renora Inc., NJ (II); Palmertozi Zinc, PA
(III); Old Inger. LA (VI)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
34
-------
Technology Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Leachate Collection! Beacon Heights, CT (I); Charles George. MA (I)*; Pi.cillo
Treatment Farm, RE (I); Combe Fill South Landfill, NJ (II); GEMS
Landfill, NJ ( II); Helen Kramer. NJ (II); Lipari. Landfill,
NJ (II)*; Price Landfill, NJ (II)*; Volney Landfill, NY
(II); Moyer Landfill, PA (III); Newport Dump Site, KY (IV);
PLoneer Sand. FL (IV); Mew Lyme, OH (V); Northside Sanitary
Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation, EN (V); Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL (V);
Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); Petro—Chemical Systems, TX (VI);
United Chrome, OR (X)
Levees Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Doug] .assville. PA (III); Old
Iriger, LA (VI)
Offsite Discharge Ottati. & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); GE Moreau, NY (II);
Katonah Municipal Well, NY; Vega Alta, PR (II); FMC
Corporation. MN (V)*; Conservation Chemical, MO (VII);
Central City/Clear Creek, CO (VIII); Litchfield Airport,” AZ
(IX); Sari Fernando Area I. CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits.
CA (IX)
Offsite Disposal Cannon/Plymouth, MA (I); Keefe Environmental, NH (I);
McKin—IRM. (I); McKin, (I) ; Re—Solve, MA (I); Burnt
Fly Bog, NJ (II); Chemical Control, NJ (II); D’Imperio
Property, NJ (II); ICrysowaty Farm. NJ (II); Lang Property.
NJ (II); Marathon Battery, NY (II); Metaltec/Aerosystems.
NJ (II); Pijak Farm, NJ (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II)*;
Renora Inc., NJ (II); Spence Farm, NJ (II); Swope Oil, NJ
(II); Syncori Resins, NJ (II); Vega Alta, PR (II); Waldick
Aerospace, NJ (II); Williams Property. NJ (II); Bruin
Lagoon, PA (III); Enterprise Avenue, PA (III);
Harvey—Knott. DE (III); Lackawanna Refuse Site, PA (III);
Larisdowne Radiation, PA (III)*; Leetowri Pesticide, WV
(III); Lehigh Electric, PA (III); McAdoi —IRM, PA (III);
McAdoo Associates, PA (III)*; SaltvilleWaste Disposal
Ponds, VA (III); Sand, Gravel & Stone, MD (III); Taylor
Borough, PA, (III); c4estline, PA (III); West Virginia
Ordnance Works, WV (III); Distler Brickyard, KY (IV); Miami
Drum Services, FL (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC (IV);
Pepper’s Steel—EDD. FL (IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV);
Soydeco, NC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); A&F
Materials—IRM, IL (V); A&F Materials— D, IL (V)*; Acme
Solvents, IL (V); Arcanurn Iron & Metal, OH (V); Berlin &
Farro, MI CV); Burrows Sanitation, MI (V); Byron/Johnson
Salvage Yard, IL (V); Cemetery Dump, MI (V); Chem—Dyrie—EDD,
OH (V); Cross Bros., IL (V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*;
Johns—Manville, IL (V); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*;
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
35
-------
Technoloqy Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Offsite Disposal Northernaire, MI (V); Old Mill, OH (V); Outboard Marine
(coninued) Corp., IL (V); Rose Township. MI (V); Schnalz Durnp,WI CV);
Seytz our, IN (V)*; Wauconda Sand & Gravel, IL. (V); Bayou
Bonfouca, LA (VI); Bayou Sorrel, LA (VI); Cecil Lin4sey, AR
(VI); Geneva Industries, TX (Vi); Highlands Acid Pit. TX
(VI); MOTCO. TX (VI); Triangle Chem., TX (VI); Aidex-IRM,
IA (VII); Aidex, IA (VII)*; Ellisville, MO (VII);
Ellisville Site Area, MO (VII)*; Denver Radium Site
Streets, CO (VIII); Denver Radium III , CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radiurn/llth & Umatilla, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/l2th &
Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Card Property, CO
(VIIt)*; Denver Radium/Open Space. CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radiuni/ROBCO, CO (VIII)*; Woodbury Chemical, CO (VIII);
Celtor Chemical Works. CA (I X); Celtor Chemical, CA (IX)*;
Del Norte CA (IX); Jibboom Junkyard. CA (IX); McColl. CA
(IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits—IRM. CA (IX ); Ponders Corner,
WA (X)*; Queen City Farms—IRM/EDD, WA CX); South Tacoma
Channel—Well 12A, c IA (X)*; United Chrome, OR (X); Western
Processing, WA (X); Western Processing. WA (X)*
Offsite Treatment GE Moreau, NY (II); Renora Inc., NJ (II); Volney Landfill,
NY (II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Sodyeco, NC (IV);
Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Laskirt/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*
Onsite Containment Re—Solve, MA (I); GE Moreau, NY (II); Enterprise Avenue, PA
(III); Kane & Lombard, (III); Milicreek, PA (III); Davie
Landfill. FL (IV); Tower Chemical, FT.. (IV); Lake Sandy Jo,
IN (V); Liquid Disposal, MI (V); New Lyme, OH (V); Outboard
Marine Corp., IL (V); Bio—Ecology Systems, TX (VI); Gurley
Pit. AR (VI); United Creosoting, TX (VI); Ellisville Site
Area. MO (VII)*; Times Beach, MO (VII); Western Processing.
WA (X)*
Onsite Discharge Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Endicott
Village Well Field, NY (II); Haviland Complex, MY (II);
Williams Property, NJ (II); Liquid Disposal, MI (V)
Onsite Disposal Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I); Picillo
Farm, RI (I); Tinkham Garage, NH (I ); Caldvell Trucking, NJ
(II); Chemical Control, NJ (II)*; Love Canal. NY (II);
Drake Chemical. PA (III); Enterprise Avenue, PA (III);
American Creosote, FL (IV); Ga] .laway Ponds, TM (IV); SCRDI
Dixiana. SC (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV); Arcanum Iron &
Metal. OH (V); LaSalle Electrical, IL (V); Liquid Disposal.
MI (V); Northside Sanitary Landfill/Environmental
Conservation and Chemical Corporation, IN (V); Schxnalz
Dump, WI (V)*; Bayou Bonfouca, LA (VI)*; Crystal City
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
36
-------
Technoloqy Site. State (Region )
(continued)
Onsite Disposal Airport, TX (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Hardage/Cririer OK
(continued) (VI); Petro—Chertucal Systems, TX (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits,
TX (VI); Az dex, IA (VII)*; Denver -Rad um III, CO (VIII)*;
Smuggler Mountain, CO (VIII); Mountain View/Globe, AZ (IX);
Western Processing, WA (X)*
Onsite Treatment Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*; Chemical
Control, NJ (II)*; Endicott Village Well Field, NY (II); GE
Moreau. NY (II); Haviland Complex, NJ’ (II); Katonah
Municipal Well, NY (II); Renora Inc., NJ (II); Vega Alta,
PR (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Waldick Aerospace, NJ
(II); Williams Property, NJ (II); Palmerton Zinc, PA (III);
Saltville iste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Geiger (C&M Oil),
SC (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC (IV); Sodyeco, NC
(IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV); Laskin/Poplar Oil, OH (V)*;
Liquid Disposal. MI (V); New Brighton/Arden Hills/St.
Anthony, 24 (V) ; New Brighton (TCAAP), I (V) ; Northside
Sanitary Landfill/Environmental Conservation and Chemical
Corporation. IN CV); Seymour, IN (V)*; Cleve Reber,
(VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI); San
Fernando Area I, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA (IX);
Colbert Landfill, WA (X)
Plume Management GE Moreau, NY (II); Haviland Complex, NY (II); Hyde
Park—EDD, NY (II); Price Landfill, NJ (II); Burrows
Sanitation, MI CV); Seymour, IN (V): Verona Well Field—IRZI,
MI (V); Cleve Reber, LA (VI); San Fernando Area I, CA (IX)
Publicly Owned Treatment Tinkham Garage, NH (I); Gfl S Landfill, NJ’ (II); Helen
Works (POTW) Kramer, NJ (II); Katon h Municipal Well, NY (II); Lipari
Land.f ill, NJ (II)*; Vega Alta, PR (II); Tybouts Corner, DE
(III); FMC Corporation, J (V); Seymour, IN (V); Del Morte,
CA (IX); San Gabriel Area I, CA (IX); Stringfellow Acid
Pits, CA (IX)*; Western Processing, WA (X)
Relocation Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III); Lansdowne Radiation, PA
(III)*; Petro—Chemical Systems, TX (VI); United Creosoting,
TX (VI); Times Beach. MO (VII); Mountain View/Globe, AZ (IX)
Slurry Wall Sylvester, NH (I); Diamond Alkali, NJ (II); Florence
Landfill, NJ (II); GE Moreau, NY (II); Helen Kramer, NJ
(II); Lipari Landfill, NJ (II); Lone Pine Landfill, NJ
(II ); PAS Oswego, NY (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Kane &
Lombard, (III); W’hitehouse Waste Oil Pits, FL (IV);
Liquid Disposal, MI CV); Schmalz Dump, WI (V) ; Bayou
Sorrel, LA (VI); Geneva Industries, TX (VI); Union Pacific,
WY (VIII)
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
37
-------
Technology Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Soil Washing/Flushing Re—Solve. MA (I)*
Solidification Chemical Control, NJ (tI)*; Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV );
Moubray Engineering, AL (IV); Pepper’s Steel, FL (IV); Sapp
Battery, FT.. (IV); Burrows Sanitation, 1I (V); Fields Brook.
OH (V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*; Liquid Disposal,. MI (V);
Cleve Reber. LA (VI); Queen City Farms, WA (X)
Stabilization Re—Solve. MA (I); Marathon Battery, NY (II); Bruin Lagoon.
PA (III); Bruin Lagoon. PA (III)*; Geiger (C&24 Oil), SC
(IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDO, F L. (IV ); Tower Chemical, FL (IV);
Gurley Pit, AR (Vt); Mid—South Wood. AR (VI); Denver
Radium/ROECO, CO (VIII); Queen City Farns-IRM/EDD, WA (X)
Surface Water Diversion! Charles George, MA (I)*; McKin, (I)’ ; Myanza Chemical,
Collection MA (I); Blosenski Landfill, PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE
(III); Heleva Landfill. PA (III); Kane & Lombard. MD (III);
Leetown Pesticide, WV (III ); Moyer Landfill, PA (III);
Saltvxlle Waste Disposal Ponds, VA (III); Taylor Borough,
PA (III); Tower chemical. Ft. (IV); Stringfellow Acid Pits,
CA (IX); Queen City Farms-IRM/EDD, WA (X)
Surface Water Monitoring Johns—Manville, IL (V); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI}*
Temporary Storage Petro-Chemical Systems. TX (VI); Minker Stout/Romaine
Creek, MO (VII); Minker Stout/Stout, MO (VII); Denver
Radium III, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/lith & Umatilla, CO
(VIII)*; Denver Radium 12th & Quivas, CO (VIII)*; Denver
Radium/Card Property, CO (VIII)*; Denver Radium/Open Space
Property, CO (VIII)a; Denver Radium ROECO, Co (VIII)*
Treatment Technology Baird & McGuire, MA (I); Davis Liquid Waste. RI (I);
Ottati & Goss/Great Lakes, NH (I); Re—Solve, MA (I)*;
Tinkham Garage, NH (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II);
Bridgeport. NJ (II); Caldwell Trucking. NJ (II); Chemical
Control, NJ (II)*; Goose Farm, NJ (II); Marathon Battery,
NY (II); Metaitec/Aerosysterns. NJ (II); Reriora Inc., NJ
(II): Syncon Resins. NJ (II ); Wide Beach, NY (II); Williams
Property. NJ (II); Bruin Lagoon. PA (III)*; Leetown
Pesticide, WV (III); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV
(III ); Coleman Evans, FL (IV); Geiger (C&14 Oil), SC (IV);
Mowbray Engineering, AL (IV); Palmetto Wood Preserving, SC
(IV); Pepper’s Steel—EDD, FL (IV); Sapp Battery, FL (IV);
Sodyeco, NC (IV ); Tower Chemical, Ft. (IV); Arrowhead
Refinery. ? (V); Bayou Bonfouca, L.A (VI); Burrows
Sanitation, MI (V); Forest Waste, MI (V)*; LaSalle
Electrical, IL (V); Laskin/Poplar, OH (V)*; Liquid
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDO Enforcement Decision Document
38
-------
Technology Site, State (Region )
(continued)
Treatment Technology Disposal, MI (V); Seymour. IN (V)*; Oil Mid—South Wood. AR
(continued) (VI); MOTCO, TX (VI); Sikes Disposal Pits, TX (VI);
Triangle Chemical. TX (VI); Stringfellow Acid Pits, CA
(IX)*; United Chrome, OR (X); Western Processing, WA(X)*
Venting Beacon Heights, CT (I); Charles George, MA (I)*; GEMS
Landfill. NJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); Heleva Landfill,
PA (III); Moyer Landfill. PA (III); New Lyme, OH CV); Bayou
Sorrel, LA (VI); Hardage/Criner, OK (VI)
Miscellaneous
Municipally—Owned Site Winthrop Landfill—EDD, (I); Rockaway Borough Weilfield,
NJ (II); Volney Landfill, NY (II); Army Creek Landfill, DE
(III); Enterprise Avenue. PA (III); Newport Dump Site, KY
(IV); Powersville Landfill, GA (IV); Crystal City Airport.
TX (VI); Denver Radium Site Streets, CO (VIII)
Wetlands Davis Liquid Waste, RI (I); Hocomonco Pond, MA (I);
Industri—plex, MA (I); Iyanza Chemical, MA (I); Re—Solve,
MA (I)*; Tinkham Garage. NH (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II);
Bridgeport. NJ (II); Burnt Fly Bog, NJ (II); Combe Fill
South Landfill, NJ (II); Helen Kramer, NJ (II); PAZ Oswego,
NY (II) ; Renora Inc., NJ (II); Wide Beach, NY (II); Chisman
Creek, VA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Milicreek, PA
(III); Westline, PA (III); West Virginia Ordnance Works, WV
(III); Geiger (C&M Oil), SC (IV); Tower Chemical, FL (IV);
Arrowhead Refinery, ? 4 (V); Burrows Sanitation, MI CV);
Reilly Tar & Chemical, (V) ; Rose Township, MI (V);
Schmalz Dump, WI (V); Schznalz Dump, WI (V)*; Cleve Reber,
LA (VI); Gurley Pit, AR (VI); Old Inger , LA (VI); Tar
Creek. OK (VI)
Woods Tirikham Garage. NH (I); Lansdowne Radiation, PA (III);
Palmertori Zinc, PA (III); Old Inger, LA (VI)
Historically This category represents key words that will not be
Significant highlighted for Records of Decision signed after Fl 1986.
ACL Sylvester, NH (I); Western Sand & Gravel, RI (I); Winthrop
t.andfill—EDD, (I); Bog Creek Farm, NJ (II); D’Imperio
Property, NJ (II); Goose Farm, NJ (II); Blosenskj Landfill,
PA (III); Harvey—Knott, DE (III); Newport Dump Site, KY
(IV); SCRDI Dixiana, SC (IV); Highlands Acid Pit, TX (VI);
Aidex, IA (VII)*; Old Mill, OH CV); Western Processing,
WA (X)*
* Subsequent Record of Decision
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
39
-------
! iistorically
Significant
(continued)
Background Levels Nyanza Chemical, MA (I); Industrial Lane, PA (III); Sand,
Gravel & Stone, MD (III); Taylor Borough, PA (III); Distler
Brickyard, KY (IV); Distler Farm, KY (IV); Reilly Tar, ‘ X
(V); Triangle Chemical, TX (VI); Aidex, IA (VII)*; Arsenic
Trioxide, ND (VIII); Toftdahl Drum, WA CX)
Deferred Decision •Cannon/Plymouth , MA (I); Lipari Landfill. NJ (II)*; Swope
Oil, NJ (II); Douglassville, PA (III); McAdoo Associates,
PA (III)*; Taylor Borough, PA (III); Tyson’s Dump, PA
(III); American Cresote, FL (IV); Davie Landfill. FL (IV);
New Brightort/Arden Hills/St. Anthony, b (V)*; Bayou
Bonfouca, L.A (VI); Ponders Corner. WA (X)*; South Tacoma
Channel-Well ].2A, WA (X)*
Temporary Remedial Hudson River, NY (II); Byron Salvage Yard, IL (VI)*; Denver
Measure Radiuxn/ROBCO, CO (VIII); Denver Radium/Card Property, CO
(VIII)*; Union Pacific, WY (VIII)
* Subsequent Record of Deci iorx
S Supplemental Record of Decision
EDD Enforcement Decision Document
40
------- |