United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Publication 9320.7-071
Solid Waste and July 1991
Emergency Response
•&ER& Descriptions of 22 Sites
Proposed for the National
Priorities List in July 1991
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Hazardous Site Evaluation Division (OS-230)
Intermittent Bulletin
Volume 1, Number 1
This document consists of descriptions of the 22 sites proposed for the National Priorities List (NPL) in July 1991.
The size of the site is generally indicated, based on information available at the time the ate was scored using the Hazard
Ranking System (HRS). The size may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of
contamination. Sites are arranged alphabetically by State (two-letter abbreviations) and by site«™»»- within the State.
Also included as an addendum is a summary of the White Chemical Corp. site in Newark, New Jersey, proposed
on May 9, 1991 (56FR 21460).
CLEANING UP UNDER SUPERFUND
The Superfund program is managed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is
authorized by the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA),
enacted on December 11, 1980, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA), enacted on October 17, 1986: In October
1990, SARA was extended to September 30, 1994. The
Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund set up by
CERCLA as uwendet\ pays the costs not agoiTpaH by
responsible parties for cleaning up hazardous waste sites .
or emergencies mat threaten public health, welfare, or
the environment; Superfund also pays for overseeing
responsible parties conducting cleanup.
Two types of responses may be taken when a
hazardous substance" is released (or threatens to be
released) into the environment: •
• Removal actions - emergency-type responses
to imminent threats. SARA limits these actions
to 1 year and/or $2 million, with a waiver
possible if the actions are consistent with remedial
responses. Removal actions can be undertaken by the
private parties responsible for the releases or by the
Federal government using the Superfund.
• Remedial responses - actions intended to
provide permanent.solutions at uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites. Remedial responses are
generally longer-term and more expensive than
removals. A Superfund-financed *mv«fo»l
response can be taken only if a site is on the
NPL. EPA published the first NPL in September
1983. The list must be updated at least annually.
EPA's goals for the Superfund program are to:
• Ensure mat polluters pay to clean up the problems
they created
• Woik first on the worst problems at the worst
sites, by making sites safe, making sites clean,
and bringing new technology to bear on the
problem
-------
REMEDiAL RESPONSES
The money for conducting a remedial response at
a hazardous waste site (and a removal action, as well)
can come from several sources:
The individuals or companies responsible for the
problems can clean up voluntarily th EPA or
State supervision, or they can be forced to clean
up by Federal or State legal action.
• A State or local government can choose to
assume the responsibility to clean up thout
Federal dollars.
• Superfund can pay for the cleanup, then seek to
recover the costs from the responsible party or
parties.
A remedial response, as defined by the National
Contingency Plan (the Federal regulation by which
Superfund is implemented), is an orderly process that
generally involves the following steps:
• Take any measures needed to stabilize conditions,
which might involve, for example, fencing the
site or removing above-ground dnuns or bulk
tanks.
• Undertake initial planning activities to scope out
a strategy for collecting information and analyzing
alternative cleanup approaches.
• Conduct a remedial investigation to characterize
the type and extent of contamination at the site
and to assess the risks posed by that
contamination.
• Conduct a feasibility study to analyze various
cleanup alternatives. The feasibility study is often
conducted concurrently th the remedial
investigation as one project. Typically, the two
together take from 18 to 24 months to complete
and cost approximately $1.3 million.
• Select the cleanup alternative that:
- Protects human health and the environment
- Complies with Federal and State
requirements that are applicable or relevant
and appropriate
- Uses permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery
technology to the maximum extent
practicable
- Considers vie of State and public
- Is ‘cost effective’ - that is, affords results
proportional to the costs of the remedy
• Design the remedy. Typically, the design phase
takes 6 to 12 months to complete and costs
approximately $1.5 million.
• Implement the remedy, which might involve, for
example, constructing facilities to treat ground
water or removing contaminants to a safe disposal
area away from the site.
EPA expects the implementation (remedial action)
phase to average out at about $25 million (plus any costs
to operateband maintain the action) per site, and some
remedial actions may take several years complete.
The State government can participate in a
remedial response under Superfund in one of two ways:
• The State can take the lead role under a
cooperative agreen it,, which is much like a
grant in that Federal dollars are transferred to the
Stale. The State then develops a workplan,
schedule, and budget, contracts for any services
it needs, and is responsible for making sure that
all the conditions in the cooperative agreement are
met. In contrast to a grant, EPA continues to be
substantially involved and monitors the State’s
pmgi throughout the project.
• EPA can take the lead under a Superfund State
Contract, with the State’s role outlined. EPA,
generally using contractor support, manages work
early in the planning process. In the later design
and implementation phases, contractors do the
work wider the supervision of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Under both arrangements,
the State must share in the cost of the
implementation phase of cleanup.
CERCLA requires that EPA select the remedy.
2
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY.
OERR HazarUous Site Evaluator’ Division Washington. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES: LIST NPLJ
DEL AMO FACILITY
Los Angeles. California
The Del Anio Facility occupies approximately 300 acres at Del Amo Boulevard and Vermont Avenue, 12 miles south of the
center of the City of Los Angeles,. Los Angeles County, California. The site is bounded to the north by a residential
neighborhood and to the west, nárth, and east by light industrial and commercial facilities.
From 1943 through the mid-to-late, 1960s, the Del Amo site was occupied by a large industrial facility that was built by the U.S.
Government to. produce synthetic rubber during World War II. The complex consisted of a styrene plant operated by Dow
Chemical Co., a butadiene plant operated by Shell Oil Co., and a synthetic rubber plant operated by U.S. Rubber Co. and
Goodyear Tire. & Rubber Co. The styrene process included ethylene production via propane cracking, ethylbeazene production
from ethylene and benzene,.and dehydrogenation of the ethylbenzene to produce styrene. The butadiene was manufactured from
a petroleum-derived butylene mixture. The styrene and butadiene were then piped to the rubber plant, where they were mixed
to produce synthetic rubber.
Process wastestreams were directed into separator units within each facility. The sludge that settled out in the separator units
was either transported off the site or disposed of in a waste disposal area in the southern portion of the Del Amo property. This
4-acre disposal area consisted of six unlined pits and three unlined evaporation ponds. The effluent from the separator units was
discharged into a flood control channel approximately 0.5 mile east of the site.
The three plants were shut down in the mid- to late-1960s, and the disposal pits and ponds were covered with soil. The Del Amo
property was subsequently sold to developers.. Currently, most of the site is occupied by light industrial and commercial facilities.
The 4-acre former disposal area is a fenced-in vacant lot overgrown with weeds.
In 1984, a contractor to GP Holdings, the current owner, found be.niene, toluene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, and cadmium in
the sludge-like wastes in the pits and ponds, and in underlying soils. Benzene and ethylbeazene were detected in soils at 50 feet
below ground surface. Ground water beneath the Del Amo site is at approximately 60 feet below ground surface, and soils are
permeable. These conditions facilitate movement of contamina ts, thus threatening the drinking water supplied to 34,000 people.
by municipal wells within 4 miles of the site, the nearest within 2 miles of the site. Because some portions of the former disposal
area are inadequately covered, contaminants can be released into the air. An estimated 17,600 people live within 1 mile of the
site.
Supertun hazareci.3 w e Site leted ufld the Comprehereive Errwonmeiiai Resporee. Co s n. rd L biflty * a (cERQa) amenoec
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC11ON
AGENCY
OERR HazarCous Site Evajuabon Division Washir gton DC 20460
NA T1ON AL PRiORITIES UST NPL
STOKER CO.
Imperial, California
Stoker Co. operates at 3390 Dogwood Road in a sparsely populated agricultural area in Imperial, Impeiial County, California.
The company has been an aerial pesticide applicator and pest control supplier since 1966 and in 1990 employed 45 people. A
canal that runs along the southern and eastern borders of the airstrip delivers water to a residence less than 80 feet from thesite,
wetlands, and a commercial fishery. The wetland is located along the entire length of the airstrip and provides habitat for four
endangered or threatened species. The fishery produces catfish for human cqnsumption and is located 0.25 mile from the site.
Wash waters from the cleaning of pesticide application equipment are sprayed onto a 20-acre land treatment area on-site consisting
of a dirt road and landing strip. Occasionally rinse waters from the rinsing of hoppers in the aircraft and pesticide containers
were also sprayed on this area. The disposal of wash waters is permitted under Waste Discharge Requirements issued by the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) in October 1974 and June 1988. Under this permit, Stoker is
required to sample the unsaturated zone and ground water beneath the site. The requirements indicate that approximately300
gallons of pesticide rinsewater per day were disposed of in the land treatment area in the 1970s, dropping to approximately 100
gallons per day sometime prior to 1988. In 1989, Stoker submitted a closure plan for the land treatment unit to CRWQCB and
indicated that it would cease spraying wash waters on-site. Stoker later reconsidered and continues to spray wash waters on-site.
The site first came to the attention of local authorities in May 1988 when birds and fish were killed in a pond in a nearby
residence. The California Department of Fish and Game and the Department of Food and Agriculture determined that the fish
tissue was contaminated by several pesticides. The pond was subsequently closed.
Shortly after the fish were killed, a warehouse containing pesticide supplies bumed to the ground. The company subsequently
removed 300 tons of contaminated soil to a landfill regblated under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation andRecovery Act.
Also on the site is an area where empty pesticide bags and boxes were burned.
In December 1988, EPA sampled on-site soil, the nearby canal, and the pond. Analyses identified several pesticides, including
dacthal, diazinon, chlorpyriphos, and mevinphos, in the canal. Sediment and air samples EPA collected in 1989 indicated
pesticides had been released to the air and nearby wetland. Approximately 130 people live within 1 mile of the site. The plant’s
45 employees are exposed to contaminated soil. A family that formerly lived on a portion of the property moved due to the
contamination.
Although the site is located in an agricultural ares where pesticides are widely used, the levels in air, surface water, sediment,
and soil samples significantly exceed background concentrations. Due to the poor quality of ground water and surface water in
the area, most people rely on bottled water for their drinking water.
Supettund hazai doia wage site Iisteø under the Compreflensive Enwonmente Respoese, Come ion, and L btay ftC (CER .A) amended
EPA
-------
• UNITEDSTATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY,
OERR Hazardous Site EvaJua on Division WashIngton. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
WESTMINSTER TRACT #2633
Westminster, California
West ninster Tract #2633 encompasses 23 acres of a residential area near the intersection of Sowell Avenue and Golden West
Street, north of the San Diego Freewaym Wóstminster, Orange County, California. Fromthe 1930s through the 1950s, portions
of the site, originally known as the MurdyDairy,Farm, were used for disposal of sulfuric acid sludge and oil refinery wastes
in unlined surface impoundments. The sources and cpiantities of these wastes are unknown.
During the late 1950s, Hintz Development Corp. purchased the site to develop a housing tract. When development began, a “tar
sump” containing wastes once stored on-site was discovered Hmtz Development excavated the wastes and placed them into three
unlined redisposaltrenèhes also located on-site.
After the tract had been built, residents living in houses near the suspected locations of the redisposal trenches complained of
• black tar-like seeps in backyards, foul odors, and damage to fences; lawns, and patios due to unusual settling of the ground
• surface. In 1986, a resident reported that a black tarry material was oozing through cracks from the sides of her pooi. The waste
material is áppareñtl)’ gradually moving upward through the soil column from the redisposal trenches, especially at higher
temperatures. Additiotially, construction of the houses has disturbed the soils underlying the site, further encouraging the upward
movement of the wastes.
Investigations conducted by the California Departmeni of Health Services (DHS) in 1986-87 revealed extensive contamination
at the Westminster site. DHS determined that the waste seeps and some soil samples contained various organic compounds,
• including benzene, ethylbènzene, toluené, fluorine, naphthalene, and phenanthrene, as well as low levels of lead. The seeps were
highly acidic (pH 1.8 to 2.1).
Ground water beneath the Westminster site is as shallow as 7 feet below ground surface. Toluene and ethylbenzene have been
detected in ground water.collected from this upper aquifer. A lower aquifer is approximately 130 feet below ground surface.
Possible interconnection between the two aquifers is not known. Within 4 miles of the site, the lower aquifer provides drinking
water to an estimated 67,600 people. Theclosest well is less than one-quarter mile from the site. During 1987-89, DHS
excavated materials seeping to the surface in the backyards of several residences. In February 1990, DHS completed a Phase
• I remedial investigation, further characterizing the extent of wastes in the three redisposal trenches.
EPA investigated the Westminster site in 1989. The in ’estigation included a historical photographic interpretation of the facility
and sampling of wastes, soil, ground water, surface water, and air. EPA verified that the waste seeps are migrating to the surface
from the rédisposal trenches, and that soils are.contaminated with various organics and lead. In addition, contaminant migration
into a nearby flood control channel was photOgraphically documented.
Seal Beach Natural Wildlife Refuge, within 4 miles of the site, includes wetlands and is an important habitat for two endangered
species. Commercial fishing.occurs in the Pacific Ocean within 10 miles of the refuge.
SupertuAd hazardous waste site listed under the Compehensive Environmental Res orne. Compensaion, and L Ity AC (CERCLA) a$TlefldOd Rev eed
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMEN ’TAL PRO ’ CT1ON
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evatuaflon Division Washington, DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
BROWARD COUNTY - 21ST MANOR DUMP
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
The Broward County School Board formerly deposited municipal wastes in a 4.5-acre open dump in a residential neighborhood
of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. The area has been filled to grade, and 21st Manor fins thmughthe middle. The’
school board owned the site, located on the southern portion of the Meadowbroók Elementary School property, and operated it
from the 1950s to the late 1960s, when it was closed by the Broward County Health Department. The school board kept no
records of the types and quantities of wastes deposited. Unauthorized parties also deposited wastes at the site.
Investigations of the site since early 1987 by the Broward County Public Health Unit, Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation, and EPA found chromium, lead, and zinc on-site in monitoring wells, trichioroethylene off-site in two private wells,
and 1 ,2-dichloroethane off-site in Well #18 of Fort Lauderdale’s South Dixie Weilfield. The well has been taken out of service.
An estimated 166,700 people obtain drinking water from public and private wells within 4 miles of the site, ‘the nearest a ,rivate
well within less than one-quarter mile of the site.
The Biscayne Aquifer, the sole source of drinking water in southeast Florida, is comprised primarily of permeable sand and
limestone in Broward County. Ground water is shallow (9-10 feet). These conditions facilitate migration of contaminants in
ground water.
In March 1989, EPA found DDE, DDD, dieldrin, toluene, lead, chromium, and zinc in surface and subsurface soils on the site.
Over 400 students attend Meadowbrook Elementary School. An estimated 13,000 people live within I milè.óf the site.
Superfund hazardous waste ste listed under the Comprehensive Enwonmental Response, Compensation, and L bilEiy Aa (CER _A) amende i Rensed
EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Mazar ous Site EvaJua on D;vision Washington. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPIJ
PEARL HARBOR NAVAL COMPLEX
Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
The Pearl Harbor Naval Complex occupies at least 6,300 acres in Pearl Harbor on the Island of Oahu, Honolulu County, Hawaii.
Land around the complex supports agriculture, aquaculture, industry, urban, and commercial uses. The complex consists of six
facilities: Naval Shipyard, Naval Supply Center, Naval Station, Submarine Base, Public Woiks Center, and Inactive Ships.
The Pearl Harbor Naval Complex began operation in 1901 when the Navy received an appropriation to acquire land for a naval
station. After the attack by the Japanese on December 7, 1941, industrial activity at the complex skyrocketed, reaching 24,000
civilians by mid-1943. After World War II, activity declined and has fluctuated with the Navy’s requirements.
The Pearl Harbor Naval Complex is participating in the Installation Restoration Program (IRP), established in 1978 Under IRP,
• the Department of Defense-seeks to identify, investigate, and clean up contamination from hazardous materials.
In 1983, the Navy identified 30 potential hazardous waste sources within the six facilities. Subsequently, an additional source
was identified The 31 sources include unlined landfills, pesticide disposal pits, chromic acid disposal areas, PCB disposal areas,
mercury-contaminated harbor sediments, leaking underground solvent tanks, waste oil facilities, and numerous other types of
sources resulting from industrial activities at the complex Six of the sources were initially evaluated based primanly on toxicity
of contaminants present, availability of waste quantity information, sampling results, affected populations, and a documented
release of a hazardous substance.
Many investigations have found hazardous substances — including mercury, chromium, PCBs, pesticides, trichioroethylene, trans-
1 ,2-dichloroethylene, and other volatile organic compounds -. in soil in the six areas, thus exposing workers on the site (less than
100) to potential contamination. (Many of these chemicals have also been found at the remaining 25 areas identified to date.)
Tetrachloroethylene was found 15.2 feet below ground surface in one area. Soils beneath the site are permeable, facilitating
movement df.contaminants into ground water. Approximately 110,700 people obtain drinking water from wells within 2 miles
of the six sources.
In 1988, the Navy detected bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in sediment saz pIes taken from a National Wildlife Refuge that borders
on an abandoned Navy landfill The refuge contains habitat for four Federally endangered species, as well as wetlands Pearl
Harbor and nearby portions of the Pacific Ocean contain recreational and commercial fisheries, habitat for endangered species,
wetlands, and water-contact recreation areas.
The volatile organic compounds in on-site soil also create a potential for gases to be reLeased to the atmosphere.
SuDeflunc r azãrøoia w e site listed undef ttie Compwief ive Enwormentai Rm r a. Coj sra ian. a d L ttyfrd (CER A) amenoec
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site EvaluaDon Division WssPüngton, DC 20460
NAfFIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
OTTAWA RADIATION AREAS
Ottawa, Illinois
The Ottawa Radiation Areas site consists of 14 radioactively contaminated areas in or near Ottawa, LaSalle County, in north
central Ililnois. The 14 areas, many in residential neighboflioods, are within 3 miles of each other and cover approximately 25-35
acres. They are being proposed as one site because they involve the same wastes, potentially responsible patties, and media.
The contaminnijon probably originated from processing wastes and demolition debris from two companies that once operated
within four blocks of each other near the center of Ottawa — Radium Dial Co. during 1918-36 and bzminous Proéesses, Inc.
(LPI) during 1937-78. Both companies used radium-based paint to produce luminous dials for clocks and watches. In l969
the building that housed Radium Dial was demolished and removed to an unknown location. During 1985, the illinois Department
of Nuclear Safety (IDNS) dismantled the LPI building and shipjed the radioactive materials to a U.S. Department of Energy
(USDOE) facility in Hanford, Washington. Jn 1986, contaminated soil surrounding the building was sent to Hanford. This area
is not included in the site.
During cleanup of the LPI building, which cost $4 million, IDNS learned that radioactive wastes from the two companies had
I, en used as fill materials in the Ottawa area. Subsequent radiation surveys by IDNS, USDOE, and EPA identified the 14 areas
that àomprise the Ottawa Radiation Areas site. EPA tests found that radium-contaminated soils were present at both the surface
and.at depths of up to 8 feet in some areas and that access to many of the areas was unrestru ted. EPA also screened 62 buildings
for radon, identifying 4 that required immediate action.
BoththeStateandEPAhavetakenactjonatthesjte. 1ñ1986,theStateremovedcoataminatedsoilnearhomesjnoneofthe
areas and purchased a home in another area. Using CERCLA emergency fundè, EPA installed radon reduction systems in two
conffiminated homes and one business in 1988; in 1990, EPA moved a third home to an uncontaminated property owaed by the
resident.
One of the 14 contaminated areas is the old Ottawa City Landfill, portions of which are now occupied by two businesses. Soil
and sediment samples collected from the landfill in November 1989 by EPA contain elevated levels of three radioactive metals
(radium -226, lead-214, and bismuth-214). Homes of approximately 50 people are built on radioactively contaniinited soil; an
additional 84 people are potentially exjosed during recreational activities.
Superlund haiardoui a e ste teted under the Comprehensive EnvtrormentaJ Response, Compensioen. arid Li illty Ad (CERCLAI amenøeC Rsv ed
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIR6NMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR.Hazardous Site EvaJuat on Divi on Washington. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
NATIONAL ELECTRIC COIL CO/COOPER INDUSTRIES
Dayhoit, Kentucky
The National Electric Coil Co./Cooper Industries site covers 3.5 acres on “Old Route 119” adjacent to the Cumberland River
in Dayhoit, Harlan County, Kentucky. The surrounding area is generally sparsely populated, although several residences are
adjacent to the facility, which has approximately 20 workers.
In 1951, National Electric Coil Co. began operating the facility under the o ership of McGraw-Edison Co. In 1985, Cooper
Industries of Houston, Texas, acquired the facility and property when it took over McGraw-Edison. in 1987, the facility and
property were sold to Treen Land Co Currently, both are leased to National Electric Services, Inc.
Activities at this facility included rebuilding electric motors and transformers used in the coal mining industry. During 1951-87,
National Electric Coil cleaned the equipment in a 4,000-gallon vat of trichloroethylene(TCE) prior to servicing, according to
EPA: Periodically, the vat was cleaned, and the liquid solvent and oils were allowed to flow overland and/or through a drainage
system to the Cumberland River. Sludge from the vat was disposed of along the river bank. Also, PCB-laden oil was drained
from transformers on-site and allowed to flow through a piping system to the river. Waste generated by an unvented lead furnace
on-site was disposed of in unregulated landfills in the area. V
In February 1989, the Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection (KDEP) detected dichioroetbylene (DCE) and vinyl
chloride in several nearby residential/community wells. Users of the wells were then provided with municipal water. In
subsequent investigations by EPA, Cooper Industries, and Treen Land Co., the same two chemicals, as well as TCE, methylene
chloride, and PCBs, were detected on-site in ground water and soil and off-site (except for vinyl chloride) in soil. Vinyl chloride
and DCE were detected in off-site ground water. An estimated 1,750 people obtain drinking water from public and private wells
within 4 miles of the site, the nearest a contaminated private well within 300 feet of the site.
Superlund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compens ion, and Liability A (CERCLA) as amenoec Revised
V EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evaluabon Division Washinqton. DC 2O46O
N4T1ONAL PRIOR!T ES LIST NPL
NATIONAL SOUTHWIRE ALUMINUM CO.
Hawesville, Kentucky
National Southwire Aluminum (NSA) Co., a division of Southwire of Carroilton, Georgia, began aluminum reduction operations
in 1969 on a 1,100-acre site at the intersection of Kentucky Highways 271 and 334 in a rural section of Hancock County near
Hawesville, Kentucky. Two clay-lined ponds, each covering S w 7 acres, ware constructed for disposal of spent pot linings from
the aluminum reduction process (North Pond) and calcium fluoride slurry from the air quality control system (North and South
Ponds). NSA closed the North Pond and covered it with a synthetic cap and a layer of soil after the Kentucky Division of Waste
Management conducted a preliminary assessment in 1986. Currently, the pond is densely vegetated. The South Pond has been
filled to capacity, and its use ceased in 1989. A third, synthetically-lined pond, designated as the New Pond, is now used for
disposal of the calcium fluoride slurry.
In 1979, NSA determined that leaching was occurring beneath the North Pond. Cyanide, which is produced in the aluminum
reduction process and which is present in the potliners, and fluoride were found in ground water in the area of the disposal ponds.
In 1985, NSA found cyanide in one of its three production wells. At that time, the wells were providing drinking water to more
than 1,000 employees; the wells were subsequently taken out of service. Other wells that draw from the Ohio River alluvial
aquifer within 4 miles of NSA currently serve approximately 16,000 people.
In November 1989, EPA detected significait concentrations of cyanide, arsenic, lead, and nickel in on-site ground water and
sediments in the plant’s effluent ditch, which flows alon8 the west border of the plant, alongside the disposal ponds, and into the
Ohio River.
NSA currently operates under a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Since 1987, EPA has cited
NSA twice for exceeding permit limits: in August 1987 for exceeding total residual chlorine and in November 1990 for exceeding
total recoverable zinc in storm water.
Superlund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Eri ironmertta1 Response, Compen 5 ion, and Uability (CERCLA) ai amei’OeC
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OEPR Nazardcus Site EvàIuaDon Division WashinOton. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPLI
CLEBURN STREET WELL
Grand Island, Nebraska
The Cleburn Street Well is a contaminated municipal water supply well located at the intersection of Cleburn and North Front
Streets in the City of Grand Island, Hall County, Nebraska. Tests conducted in 1986 by the Nebraska Department of Health
(NDOH) detected tetrachioroethylene (PCE) in the well, which has been disconnected from the municipal water supply.
Subsequent tests by NDOI{ and EPA have repeatedly shown traces of PCE in other Grand Island municipal wells. The municipal
system, which consists of 12 wells within the city limits and 12 wells in the Platte River Island Well Field southeast of the city,
serves 38,500 people Another 1,100 residents not served by the system draw water from shallow private wells Food and forage
crops are irri ated by 333 wells within 4 miles of the Cleburn Street Well.
A soil-gas investigation conducted in September 1988 by EPA detected PCE in three areas. Four potential sources may be
assàciated with these areas: Nebraska Solvent Co. and three dry cleaners - One Hour Martinizang Dry Cleaner, Ideal Cleaners,
and Liberty Cleaners & Shirt Launderers. The four have used or stared chlorinated solvents in their operations. EPA continues
to search for additional sources of the PCE contamination of the Cleburn Street Well.
S jpe tunc r azarcoi.e wasu s e lisIed und the Compeheri w Enwn’tmertaj Ra o a, Co sr on. wid Uabd y frd (CERQ.A) ame dec Re’
EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evaluadon Division W hIngton, DC 20460
NAtrIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
SHERWOOD MEDICAL CO.
Norfolk, Nebraska
Sherwood Medical Co., a subsidiary of American Home Products Corp., has manufactured disposable medical supplies since
1962 at a plant on Highway 81 located 1.5 miles south of Norfolk, Madison County, Nebraska. The plant covers 115 acres and
is in an area with agricultural, residential, and commercial, development. As now defined, the site encompasses 160 acres,
including the plant property and nearby wells contaminated with volatile organic compounds.
On the Sherwood plant is an unlined pond where, according to the company, treated and untreated waste water has been
discharged since 1963. In 1988, EPA detected 1,1-dichioroethane (l,1-DCA), 1,1,1-trichioroethane (1,1,1-TCA), 1,1-
dichiornethylene (1,1-DCE), and tetrachioroethylene (PCE) in the discharges. From 1973 to 1986, floor drains from two plant
areas where 1,1,1-TCA was used for cleaning plastic injection molds were connected to a septic system that included a 2,000-
gallon buried tank, concrete settling basin, leach fields, and connecting piping. In 1989, liquids and, sOlids from the tank and
settling basin contained the contaminants listed above. EPA’s investigation indicated another area where drums of waste solvents
may have been buried.
The Nebraska Department of Health and EPA sampled local wells several times from October 1987 to January 1989.
Trichioroethylene, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,l-DCE, l.1-DCA, and PCE were found in Sherwood Well #5 (used for industrial pwposes)
and in the main well providing drinking water to Park Mobile Home Court (PMHC). An estimated 5,900 people currently obtain
drinking water from public and private wells within 4 miles of the site. Wells within 3 miles irrigate 1,580acres of land used
primarily to grow corn for livestock consumption. Two EPA soil gas surveys conducted in July 1988 and January 1989 indicate
that contamination is moving north/northwest in the direction of ground water flow, into PMHC’s main well and backup wells.
Using CERCLA emergency funds, EPA supplied bottled water to PMHC during Febraary 1988. EPA then installed a carbon
treatment system on the PMHC water system, ending the need for bottled water. In September 1989, Sherwood connected PMHC
to an uncontaminated well on its property.
S peftund hazarCo e wage ste I te undes’ the Comprehensive Erivuonmemai Reeponse, Compern ion. a d L dity A (cERcL*) amendec Re ec
EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site EvaluaOon Division Wmhlnqton. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
NEW HAMPSHIRE PLATING CO.
Merrimack, New Hampshire
New Hampshire Plating Co. (NHPC) formerly conducted electroplating operations on a 13.1-acre leased property on Wright
Avenue in Memmack, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire. The surrounding area is primarily used for light industrial and
commercial purposes, with some residential areas nearby. During the lifetime of the plant (1962-85), NIIPC discharged
electroplating waste water and wastes into a system of four natural lagoons in a wetland on the property. The lagoons were
unlined and had no leachAte detection or collection system.
In 1980, NHPC notified EPA that it was a huardous waste disposal facility under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). An inspection by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NH DES) and EPA in
April 1982 noted several RCR.A violations. As a result,.the New Hampshire Division of Public Health Services issued a Notice
of Violations and Order of Abatement to NHPC. In February. 1983, the State of New Hampshire filed civil suit against NHPC,
and was awarded a $600,000 attachment of property. NHPC halted operations in 1985 because it Jacked the financial resources
necessary to meet compliance standards and continue hydrogeologic investigations at the property.
In June 1987, a contractor for NH DES treated the lagoon system with lime and a sodium hypochlorite solution, removed debris,
drums, and plating tank liquids to a regulated disposal facility, and conducted a superficial cleaning of the manufacturing building.
In 1990, EPA used emergency funds to solidify the contamitilted sludge and soil at the property.
At least 12 hazardous materials are present in the lagoon system, according to sampling conducted by NH DES and EPA in 1987-
90. Among the materials are trichloroethylene, 1,1 ,l-trichloroethane, heavy metals (including arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead), and cyanide. NH DES and EPA detected many of these materials in l987 88 in on-site monitoring wells. Approximately
39,000 people obtain their drinking water from wells within 4 miles of the site, the closest a private well within 0.65 mile.
Shallow ground water beneath the site flows to the east toward the. Merrimack River and to the south toward Horseshoe Pond,
both within 1,000 feet of the site.
This site is being proposed for the NPL because the owner has demonstrated inability to finance appropriate remedial action.
Thus, the site satisfies a component of EPA’s NPLIRCRA policy.
Superfund hazardous w e ste listed urideq the Conpreflenstve EnwonmertaJ R poise, mpern n, and Liabtly (CERCLA) a7flO O Re iseC
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evaiuadon Division W hington , DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
LI TUNGSTEN CORP.
Glen Cove, New York
The Li Tungsten Corp. site covers approximately 20 acres at the intersection of Herb Hill Road, Dickson Lane, and Garvies
Point Road in an industzial area along the north bank of Glen Cove Creek in Glen Cove, Nassau County, New York. From the
1940s to the early 1980s, tungsten ores imported from around the world were smelted at the facility to produce tungsten carbide
powder, tungsten wire, and welding rods. The facility was owned and operated by Wah Chang Smelting and Refining Co. of
America, Inc., and was later operated by its wholly owned subsidiary, Li Tungsten Corp. Glen Cove Development Co. (GCDC)
purchased the property in November 1984 to develop itas a residential area. In June 1985, Li Tungsten ceased operatons and
filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the Federal bankruptcy code.
In early 1988, a consultant to GCDC took the following actions at the site: (1) inspected 50 tanks to determine whether they
were secure against rupture or leakage; (2) sampled, drained, drummed, and disposed of the content of two tanks determined
not to be secure; (3) packed identifiable laboratory chemicals and disposed of them; (4) over-packed and/or staged 108 drums
containing acids, organics, and waste oil to a secure area at the site, and subsequently disposed of them; (5) inventoried,
sampled, and removed pressurized gas cylinders; (6) removed approximately one tank truck of anhydrous ammonia from the
facility; and (7) established 24-hour security.
The consultant also sampled 10 existing monitoring wells and installed 13 new wells. Analyses of samples from these wells
identified four plumes of contaminated ground water in the Upper Glacial Aquifer. Not all plumes are associated with Li
Tungsten. One plume, around Mud Pond, contains waste processing water and heavy metals. Chlorides, sulfates, lead,
cadmium, tungsten, chromium, arsenic, barium, silver, and PCBs are present in monitoring wells in this area, according to tests
conducted in 1988. Materials leaking from the pond have scarred the surface in this area. An estimated 51,500 people obtain
drinking water from public and private wells within 4 miles of the site, the nearest within 1.2 miles.
In March 1989, the New York State Department of Environmental Control (NYSDEC) found that many problems still existed
at the Site: (1) approximately 100 drums holding liquid chemicals tentatively identified as containing cyanide, acids, and alkalis;
(2) numerous storage tanks containing unknown quantities of liquid chemicals; (3) approximately 26 pressurized cylinders
containing chemicals; (4) approximately 12 transformers, some leaking and suspected to contain PCBs; (5) waste piles with
elevated radiation levels, believed due to radium, thorium, and uranium resulting from the tungsten refining process; (6) tungsten
ore stored in wooden crates and drums, some broken; and (7) asbestos fibers from decaying tank covers and pipe-wrapping
materials.
On July 21, 1989, EPA filed an Administrative Order on Consent under CERCLA Section 106(a) requiring GCDC to undertake
certain initial cleanup actions at the site. In response, the company removed the drums, the contents of the tanks, the laboratory
chemicals, and electrical transformers. Following GCDC’s activities, EPA inspected the site during March - May 1990.
Supertunc hazardous w e Ste bsted under t e Corn prehens Enwo’mentW Resporae. Co npem ion, ni Liatety PC (CE A) amended Re sed
2#EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evaluation Division Washington, DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
CROSSLEY FARM
Hereford Township, Pennsylvania
The Crossley Farm site covers approximately 24 acres along Huff’s Church Road in Hereford Township in a rural part of Beth
County, Pennsylvania. The site is on top of Blackhead Hill and consists of several excavations. Between the mid-1960s and
the znid-1970s, an estimated 300 drums (possibly more) containing mostly liquid waste were obtained from the local plant of Bally
Case and Cooler Co. and were disposed in a pit on the Crossley Farm property. Some drums were described as having a
characteristic solvent” odor. A 1989 report by a BaBy contractor indicates the company used thchloroethylene (TCE) as a
degreaseruntil 1973. EPA has received many allegations from nearby residents that waste had been disposed on the Crossley
Farm.
in September 1983, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PA DER) detected elevated levels of TCE and
tetrachloroethylene in residential wells downgradient of the Crossley Farm site. Additional sampling by PA DER and EPA in
November 1983 confirmed TCE contamination. PA DER issued a health advisory regarding use of the contaminated wells, and
the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency provided a temporary water supply.
In response to more citizen complaints, EPA conducted additional sampling that confirmed the contamination. In the spring of
1987, EPA started a regional hydrogeofogic study that included construction and sampling of 2! monitoring wel ls and a soil gas
survey. The study identified a large plume of TCE.contaminated ground water, with the source near the crest of Blackhead 11111.
The plume continues to spread and affect more private wells. EPA has used CERCLA emergency hinds to install carbon
filtration units on 11 wells.
An estimated 4,800 people obtain drinking water from public and private wells and springs within 4 miles of the site, the nearest
a private contaminated well at 0.1 mile.
Supertund hazardous waste ste listed under the Comprehensive ErMronmental Response, Compensation, and Liability P d (CER A) as asnere Retsed
a
0:
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazardous Site Evaluaton Division WashIngton DC 20460
NA TIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
RODALE MANUFACTURING CO., INC.
Emmaus Borough, Pennsylvania
Rodale Manufacturing Co., Inc., formerly produced electrical wuing devices at a 4,000-square foot, U-shaped building at Sixth
and Minor Streets in the Borough of Einnraus, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. The plant is surrounded by industrial and
residential areas. Rodale operated the plant from the 1930s to 1975, when Square D Co. assumed control, manufacturing wiring
devices as well as electrical connectors. Operations ceased in February 1986.
According to Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PA DER) files, electroplating waste and rinse waters were
disposed of in three on-site wells from at least 1961 until 1967. Well No. 1 is 452 feet deep and cased to. 444 feet.
Electroplating wastes and solvents were disposed in the well from 1952 until appmxim ly 1967, according to a 1988 study by
aSquareDcontractor. WellNo.2,251
feet deep and cased to 50 feet, was used for disposal of trichioroethylene (TCE), other wastes, and possibly cyanide wastes. Well
No.3, 426 feet deep and cased to 400 feet, was used for disposal of TCE, oil, possibly cyanide wastes, and sodium phosphate
cleaner.
In 1981, a Square D contractor removed wastes from three wells and transported the materials to hazardous waste facilities
regulated under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Copper, zinc, chromium, nickel, and silver, which are typically found in electroplating wastes, and TCE were detected mon-site
wells and nearby monitoring wells in 1981 and 1989 by Square D contractors and in 1989 by EPA. There is a general TCE
problem in Emmaus Borough. Since 1981, seven wells of the Eminaus Municipal Water Works have showa varying levels of
TCE. Borough Well No. 5 was taken out of service in 1981 and was abandoned in December 1988 because of TCE
contamins tion. In October 1990, the Borough of Emmaus installed air strippers on three wells. The borough continues to
monitor its wells for TCE. An estimated 21,000 people obtain drinking water from public and private wells and springs within
4 miles of the site, the closest a borough well within 0.5 mile of the site. Evidence suggests that Rodale is contributing to the
TCE in at least two wells.
PA DER has conditionally approved a site investigation workplan calling for studying soil and ground water contamination,
aquifer testing, temporary ground water pumping and treatment and, if warranted, design of a ground water pumping and
treatment system and a soil cleanup plan. Work is scheduled to begin in June 1991.
Suporfund ha2ardo a wane ste hsted under the Con p erune Enwonmernal P.eeporue, pe u icn, and L bdty Ad (CERCLA) amendec
&EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERRHazardous Site Evaluation Division W hington, DC 20460’
N4TIONAL PRIORIT ES LIST NPL
WEST ‘KINGSTON TOWN DUMP/URI DISPOSAL AREA
South Kingstown, Rhode Island
The West Kingston Town Dump and the University of Rhode Island (UR1) Disposal Area occupy separate adjacent properties
on Plains Road in South Kingstown, Washington County, Rhode Island.
The West ‘Kingston Town Thump, which comprises the southern portion of the site, is east of Plains Road, 0.4 mile north of the
URJ campus. The area has been, referred to in the past as the “SOUth Kingstown Landfill #2 and the “West Kingston Landfill.”
From 1951 to 1978, the Town’ of South Kingstown operated the solid waste dump on approximately 6.5 acres that had been part
of a san4 and gravel quarry since the 1930s. In the early 1950s, the Town of Narragansett and IJRI also began using the area
for solid waste disposal.: The dump’s’operations were unregulated until a Rhode Island Department of Health (RI DOH)
inspection in 1967 noted that wastes accepied at the dump came from industrial, residential, commercial, and institutional sources.
Numerous. operational violations were.subsequently noted. In’ 1975, a study by the URI Department nf Civil Engineering and
the Rhode ‘Island Water Resources. .Board concluded that a leachate plume beneath the landfill was contaminating ground water
as faras 1,200 ‘feet to the west of’the dump.
The 12-acre URI Disposal Area, whichabuts the West Kingston Dump on the north, has also been referred to as the “URI Gravel
Bank” or the “Sherman Farm. URL used the area for solid waste disposal from 1945 to 1987. When the town dump closed
in 1978’the area began to receive most’ óf.URI’s wastes, including small quantities of empty paint cans, oil containers, and
pesticide containers. An inspection in 1987 by the Rhode Island Depariment of Environmental Management (RI DEM) found
lab equipment, machinery, closed drums, and old tanks buried on the site. Tn 1983-84, URI operated a transfer station on the
property.
In November 1987, RI DEM instructed URI to remove exposed waste from the disposal areas. By December 1987, URI had
‘removed 159 tons of materials and transported them to regulated waste disposal facilities. ‘The most recent RI DEM inspections
in September 1988 and January 1989 noted that URI was still dumping solid waste, including lab equipment, concrete scraps,
and partially filled drums.
In the fall of 1987, RI DOH detected 1,1, 1-trichloroethane, trichioroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, 1 ,2-dichloroethylene, and 1,1-
dichioroethane in private wells near the site.’ Analysis of surface water subsequently collected from the pond on-site detected
some of the same volatile organic óómpounds. In September 1989, EPA’s analysis of samples from on-site rnomtoring wells
detected var ous organic and inorgani chemicals, including lead. Three major public wells within 4 miles supply drinking water
to approximately 15,800 persons. An additional 12,000 persons are supplied by private wells, the closest approximately 1,000
feet to the northwest of the site. Three other private wells, located approximately 875 feet to the west, were closed in 1988 due
to contamination by volatile organic compounds.
The site is located along the eastern side of the Chipuxet River valley drainage basin. Hundred Acre Pond, part of the river,
is approximately 1,500 feet west of the site. The river basin is a major ground water resource.
Supertund hazardous waste site I ted under the Ccmpmhensive Ertwonmentai Res orae, ev ion, a’d Liability A (CERCLA) Revued
EPA
-------
JNTTED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC T ON
AGENCY
OERR Hazarcous S e Eva uaOor’ Diviseon Washir gtnn . DC 20460
[ AtIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL.J
ANNIE CREEK MINE TAILINGS
Lead, South Dakota
The Annie Creek Mine Tailings cover S acres in the upper reaches of Annie Creek, a tributary to Spearfish Creek in the Black
Hills National Forest 3.5 miles west of Lead, Lawrence County, South Dakota. Between 1907 and 1916, gold ore was processed
at the mine, part of the Bald Mountain-Lead mining district, by a small cyanide miLl. Buildings and two vats remain from these
past activities. The tailings fill a small head-water basin. Channels forming Annie Creek anse from the tailings and surrounding
hillsides. Annie Creek flows through the tailings and a wooden crib dani, then merges with Spearfish Creek approximately 2
miles downstream.
High concentrations of arsenic have been detected in Annie Creek water and sedimeats since the early 1980s. In 1989, EPA
detected arsenic in the tailings and in Annie Creek below the dam, which forms the downstream boundary of the tailings, and
downstream in Spearflsh Creek approximately 3 miles from the site. High concentrations of arsenic are mainly found in the
sediments of Annie Creek and Spearfish Creek. Both streams are designated as trout spawning areas, and both are used for trout
fishing. Spearfish Creek Canyon is designated a National Scenic Highway and River TheSpearfisb municipal supply system
provides drinking water to an estimated 6,000 people, approximately half of it coming from an intake into Spearfish Creek 12
stream miles from the Annie Creek Tailings.
Sup 1unø hazardo a w e silo L ted under the Compreheris&vo Err irQnmertai Res a e, Co on, aid L I #4 (CEW.A) * asT enoeO
EPA
-------
EPA
. NITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROtECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazarcous Site EvaJua on Division Wasfliriqron. DC 20460
NTIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL]
PANTEX PLANT (USDOE)
Pantex Village. TX
The’ Pantex Plant-is in Pantex Village, Carson County, Texas, approximately 17 miles northeast of Amarillo. The area is
primarily agriculturaL The plant is owned by the U.S. Department of Energy (IJSDOE) and operated under contract by Mason
and ’Hangar-Siles Mason Co. The plant itself covers 9,100 acres. In addition, there isa buffer zone consisting of a 1,077-acre
portion of Pantex Lake owned by USDOE and 3,170 acres of land leased by USDOE from Texas Technological University.
The, plant began in 1942 as an Army Ordnance Corps, facility. NucLear operations began in 1950. Current operations — which
include fabncation of nuclear weapon ammunition and assembly, testing, and disassembly of nuclear weapons — involve 141 solid
waste management units Past and present waste practices include burning of chemical wastes in unlined pits, burial of wastes
in unlined landfills, and discharging âf plant waste waters into on-site surface waters. More than 150 potential contamination
sources have resulted from these practices, of which 15 are being evaluated initially.
In 1988, a USDOE contractor detected acetone, toluene, te’trahydrofüran, trchloroethylene (TCE), brotnoform, 1,2-
dichloroethane, arsenic’, barium, chroniium, lead, mercury, and silver in waste waters discharged to unlined ditches and surface
impoundmentson the site. USDOE also detected acetone, TCE, telrthydmfuran, toluene, 1,2-dichloroethane, 2-butanone,
tétrachloróethylene,. and 1,1,1-trichloroethane in soil underlying a chemical burn ph used for evaporation and percolation of
solvenés contaminated with hig} explosives, and uranium in soil underlying firing grounds FS-4, FS-5, and FS-10.
Tolüene’ is present at 329 feet below the surface in soils underlying the pit. The Ogallala Aquifer occurs at a depth of 390 to
420 ’feet beneath the site. A zone of low permeability occurs beneath the site at a depth of 350 feet; the thickness varies from
25 to 100 feet. Contamination is documented in this zone. The aquifer serves as the primary source of domestic and municipal
water supply. Amarillo hasa blended system that pmvides.water to 160,000custoniers, approximately 36% of them from a well
field within’4 miles of Pantex; 20 domestic wells have been identified wthin I mile. Pumping by the city has created a cone
of depression, causing ground water underlying Pantex ‘to flow toward the municipal well field.
Surface water mn-off from the facility is directed into on-site playas. While some are’ used as surface impoundments, others not
receiving plant waste water are considered fresh water wetlands. Texas Tech Agricultural Research Station uses surface water
from Playa 4 for both irrigation of crops and watering of livestock.
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Assessment and Response Program, USDOE has begun characterizing and cleaning
up the most severe environmental problems and has developed an Environmental Restoration and Waste Management 5-Year Plan.
Sup uM Pia.tardo a * e st e lewd uneer lbS Ccinpcener Er,wsnrnenuj Ra. craq, Coi sr. ai. a,d L iLty Pd (CEROA) amersec
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazaraous Site Evaluaton Division Washington , DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPL
PETROCHEM RECYCLING CORP./EKOTEK, INC.
Salt Lake City, Utah
The Petrochein Recycling Corp./Ekotek, Inc., plant is located at 1628 North Chicago Street, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County,
Utah. The 6.6-acre site is bordered on the north by a junkyard, on the east and west by industrial and commercial properties,
and on the south by a residential district with approximately 50 homes.
The facility has bad many owners and operators. From 1953 to 1968, it was owned and operated as a refinery by O.C. Allen
Oil Co. In 1968, Flinco, Inc., purchased the refinery and operated ituntil 1978. During that time, Flinco changed its name to
Bonus International Corp. In 1978, Axel Johnson, Inc., acquired ownership and operated the site as a hazardous waste
storage/treatment facility and as a petroleum recycling facility through its subsidiary, Ekotek, Inc., a Delaware-based corporation;
In 1981, the facility changed ownership but retained the name Ekotek, Inc., based in Utah. Ekotek declared bankruptcy in
November 1987. Petrochem Recycling Corp. leased the facility in 1987 from Ekotek, and continued pperations until February
1988. The Ekotek bankruptcy estate remains the current site owner.
In 1980, Ekotek filed a Part A of a permit application under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and received Interim Status. In 1987, Ekotek received a RCRA Part B permit. Operations stopped in 1988 after the Utah Bureau
of Solid and Hazardous Waste and the Bureau of Air Quality issued Petroleum Recycling, a Notice of Violation. Sources of
contamination on the site include approximately 60 tanks, 1,200 drums, and 1,500 smaller containers, three surface
impoundments, an underground drainfield, numerous piles and pits of waste material, underground tanks, incinerators, and
contaminated soil. Contaminants associated with on-site sources include arsenic, chromium, lead, mercury, chlorinated solvents
and othervolatile organic compounds, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, phthalates, pesticides, PCBs (Aroclor 1260), dioxin,
and furans.
In January 1990, EPA detected 1, 1-dichloroethane, 1 ,2-dichloroethylene, 1,1, 1-trichioroethane, and vinyl chloride in shallow on-
site monitoring wells. This unconfined ground water is hydraulically connected to the underlying aquifers of the Salt Lake Valley,
which provide drinking water to an estimated 27,900 people via public wells within 4 miles of the site. In addition, wells wthin
4 miles of the site are used by commercial food-manufacturers.
In November 1990, EPA detected 2-methylnaphthalene in the atmosphere at the site, threatening the 11,400 people who live or
work within 1 mile of the site. Wetlands and endangered species (peregnne falcon and bald eagle) are within 3 miles of the site.
This site is being proposed for the NPL because the owner has demonstrated inability to finance appropriate remedial action.
Thus, the site satisfies a component of EPA’s NPL!RCRA policy.
Superfund hazwdots waste site listed under the Compreitiereive Enwoninental Respc e. Corn e ior aid Li dity frd CER AI amendec Re sed
EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY
OERR Hazarcous Site EvaJua on Dyson WashLngton, DC 20460•
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPLJ.
HAMILTON ISLAND LANDFILL (USA/COE)
North Bonneville, Washington
The Hamilton Island Landfill is in southwest Washington along the banks of the Columbia River adjacent to the Town of North
Bonneville. A former nverslougb was filled in during the mid 1970s so that what was once an island is now part of the
mainland. The site is owned and managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USA/COE).
The 240-acre unlined landfill was used to dispose of material excavated during construction of a powerhouse for the Bonneville
dam 1 mile upstream, as well as debris from the demolition of a nearby town. Approximately 19 million cubic yards of waste
were disposed of at the site from 1977 to 1982, according to COE; paints, degreasers, and other chemical wastes were apparently
also disposed of, presumably by COE contractors contraly to the terms of their contract.
A site inspection conducted by COE during 1987-89 found elevated levels of heavy metals (including arsenic and cadmium) and
various volatile and semivolatile compounds in surface soil, subsurface soil, ground water, leachate, and other discharges to the
Columbia River. Dischaiges to the river from a culvert contained levels of copper above EPA’s fresh water Ambient Water
Quality Criteria established wider the Clean Water Act. A wildlife mitigation area that receives site run-off contained elevated
levels of toluene and zinc. COE fen ód a portionof the site in 1987 to restrict public access.
Approximately 900 people obtain drinking water from wells within 4 miles of the site. The Columbia River, which eventually
receives all run-off from the site, is a. major recreation area used for fishing, boating, site-seeing, and wind-surfing. The
Columbia River contains highly productive recreational and commercial fisheries adjacent to and downstream from the site. The
site is within a Federally-designated National Scenic Area.
COE, EPA, and the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) will negotiate a formal agreement requiring COE to conduct
a thorough investigation of the site and to study various cleanup alternatives under EPA and WDOE oversight.
Supe unc hazardo a w e ste sled und the Comprw ersiva Err i,orme J Ras oiae. Cor si . or. id L ty A (CERO.A amercec
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGEI Cy
OERR Hazarcous Sire EvaJua5Or Division Wasningiori DC 20460
[ ATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPLJ
MOSES LAKE WELIFIELD CONTAMINATION
Moses Lake, Washington
The City of Moses Lake is in Grant County in central Washington. On February 16, 1988, the Washington State Department
of Health (WDOH) sampled eight Moses Lake municipal wells as part of a routine sampling effort. The samples were analyzed
for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Two of the wells contained trichioroethylene (TCE) above EPA’s Maximum Contarnin nt
Level established under the Safe Drinking Water Act. On April 4 1988, and May 23, 1988, WDOH resanapled the municipal
wells and confirmed the presence ofTCE at high concentrations (up to 9.1 ugfL). In mid-December, the Washington Department
of Ecology (WDOE), in an independent study in the Moses Lake area, detected levels up to 12 ug/L in some of the municipal
wells. The two contaminated wells are part of a blended system that provides drinking water to 5,000 people. Other area
residents depend on private wells.
WDOH and WDOE sampling only roughly defined the areal and vertical exteàt of TCE cont2rni .nstion. Based on these
preliminary results, EPA conducted a study to identify the potential source or sources of TCE groundwater contamination n the
Moses Lake area. During a review of nearby Larson Air Force Base (LAFB) maps, discussions with former LAFB employees,
and meetings with City and Port of Moses Lake personnel, EPA identified a number of potential sources, including but not limited
to, a variety of former LAFB operations and disposal facilities, the City of Moses Lake municipal waste treatment plant, an
infiltration area for the LAFB storm sewer system, and a burn pit currently used by the Big Bend Community College Fire
Training School.
‘To identify potential sources, EPAperformed the following activities: (I) inventoried many businesses near LAFB and surveyed
solvent usage; (2) collected and reviewed historical data regarding the two primary operators at LAFB, the Boeing Corp., and
the Army Corps of Engineers; (3) analyzed historical aerial photographs through the EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory; (4) collected 92 soil gas samples from the shallow subsurface along a series of transects crossing the study area
(including the potential sources previously identified); (5) collected 62 ground water samples from a number of wells throughout
the study area and analyzed for VOCs, selected ions, and other water quality parameters; and (6) collected geophysical data of
the subsurface in the area of one municipal well.
EPAs study of potential sources indicates that the area has a long history of operations that could have generated waste ICE
solvents, but no specific source area was identified by the techniques employed. The complexity of the local hydrogeology greatly
complicated attempts to correlate the available ground water sampling data to specific portions of the several aquifers underlying
the site In addition, the information generated during the soil gas and.geophysical studies was limited because ground water in
the Moses Lake area is so deep — several hundred feet in some cases. Potential sources as well as alternative cleanup remedies
will be investigated during the remedial investigation! feasibility study that typically is conducted after a site is placed on the NPL.
Supertune aiar oe w e SsO Isted under tte Comprehersve E wcnmanaJ Resparae. is n. rd Uabitfly AC (CER .A} a$ e CeC Revsec
EPA
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY
OERR kazar ous Site EvaIua Ofl Division Wash ng n _DC 20460
NATIONAL PRiORITIES LIST NPLI
TULALIP LANDFILL
Marysville, Washington
The Tulalip Landfill covers approximately 146 acres on the Tulalip Indian Reservation near Marysville, Snohomish County,
Washington. The site is bounded by Ebey Slough to the north, Steamboat Slough to the south, and Possession Sound to the west.
All these surface water bodies flow into, northern Puget Sound, a Federally-designated National Estuary. This area is highly
productive fo salmon and shellfish and provides habitat for Federally-threatened species.
In 1964, the tulalip Tribe leased the land to Seattle Disposal Co. The company accepted municipal, industrial, and hospital waste
from the greater Seattle area. The site (originally a wetland) was cleared and canals were cut into the site, allowing waste to
be barged n from Seattle. Eventually the barge canals were filled with waste. An estimated 4 million cubic yards of waste were
deposited at the site from 1964 to 1979, when the landfill was closed in accordance with a Federal consent decree.
In February 1988, EPA conducted an extensive inspection of the site and the surrounding environment. Ground water, wetland
water, and slough water contained heavy metals (including lead, copper, chromium, and cadmium) in excess of EPA’s Maximum
Contaminant Levels established under the Safe Drinking Water Act and.marine Ambient Water Quality Criteria established under
the ‘Clean Water Act An estimated 7,800 people obtain drinking water from private and municipal wells within 4 miles of the
site, the nearest within 0.9 mile.
EPA also found elevated levels of metals, volatiles (including toluene and xylene), semivolatiles, and PCBs in leachate and pooled
water on-site. Numerous.strains of opportunistic pathogens were detected in leachate, pooled water, and slough samples. These
opportunistic pathogens, due to infiltration of estuarine water rich in nutrients and dissolved oxygen, are resistant to several
antibiotics and can therefore survive for years.
In 1987, EPA issued a modified permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requiring, among
other items, the Tulalip Tribe to collect all leachate generated by the site and transport it off-site for treatment. The Tribe has
not complied. An estimated 10 million to 90 million gallons of leachate are generated per year. During a December 1990
NPDES idspection, EPA found the site was receiving demolition debris not previously approved for disposal. Logs recently
placed on-site were generating colored liquids. The Tribe has discontinued disposal of all demolition debris at EPA’s request.
Supvluric hazardc a w e sne Isied ustØ iP* C p *v n Er,warmen s RaXra.. cos n v .0 L d y ft (cERa.A) amenoec
EPA
-------
tJNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON
AGENCY -
OERR hazaraoijs Site Evaluaton Division Washington. DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST, NPL
VANCOUVER WATER STATION #4 CONTAMINATION
Vancouver, Washington
Vancouver Water Station #4 is located at 5th and Blandford Streets in Vancouver, Clark County, in the southwest portion of
Washington. Water Station #4 is one of several stations that blend their output to supply drinking water to approximately 108,000
people. The State Department of Health sampled Water Station #4 under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in 1988. The
blended water samples, which represented water delivered to customers, contained tetrachioroethylene (PCE) its e tcess of EPA ’s
Maximum Contaminant Level established under SDWA. The station was taken out of service in October 1988. Subsequent
sampling confirmed PCE contamination in the well field as well as nearby private wells, some supplying domestic water.
The city hired a consultant to investigate the nature, extent, and source of the contamination. The consultant conducted an
extensive soil gas and ground water study in the area, including installing and sampling numerous monitoring weHs Although
high levels of PCE were detected in some ground water samples front the monitoring wells, PCE w s not detected in any soil
samples collected from the monitoring well borings.
In addition to sampling, the consultant inventoried land use in the area, identified historical potential users of PCE, and identified
many potential sources of the PCE in Water Station #4. While the sampling indicated that the source(s) could be dry cleaners
in the area, they have not yet been confirmed as sources of the contamination.
Au potential sources as well as alternative cleanup remedies will be investigated during the remedial investigation/feasibility study
that typically is conducted after a site is placed on the NPL.
Supe,1un azartuus w e site i ted under the Camp,ehei Enwonm Res ors, Co srs , and L bLty A (CERQ.A) ame eeC
&PA
-------
ADDENDUM
-------
.NE STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OERR Hazaraàus Site EvaluaOon Division W hington, DC 20460
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST NPLI
WHITE CHEMICAL CORP.
Newark, New Jersey
White Chemical Corp. occupies a 4.4-acre site at 660 Frelinghuysen Avenue in a densely populated residential/industrial section
of Newark, Essex County, New Jersey. Acid chlorides and flame-retardant chemicals were manufactured on property owned
by AZS Corp. from January 1984 toJuly1990 Prior to May 1983, Lancaster Chemical Corp., a division of AZS, manufactured
chemicals on the property. White Chemical is currently in voluntary reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Federal bankruptcy
code. The site originally consisted of three major buildings, including laboratories, storerooms, and grounds. It is bounded by
an industrialcenter to the north-northeast, a feather company to the west, a sportswear manufacturer to the south-southwest, and
a Conrail line to the east-southeast.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) inspected the facility several tunes in 1989 and found
numerous violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act On March 15, 1990, NJDEP served White Chemical and
AZS an Administrative Order and Notice of Civil Administrative Penalty Assessment for the noted violations. On May 8, 1990,
NJDEP ordered White Chemical to secure the site and to pay for drum stabilization and removal. After the company failed to
comply, NJDEP began a removal operation on May 15, 1990. NJDEP’s inventory found (among other things) approximately
9,000 drums improperly stored on-site. According to the NJDEP inventory and the site owner, 915 contained scrubbing solution
(water with xylene or tzichloroethylene), 608 contained waste filter cake, 5,583 contained wastes that may be hazardous, 109
contained substances not yet classified, 1,673 were claimed to be empty, and 175 were considered to be products by White
Chemical. NJDEP observed deteriorating drums leaking into the soil or eroding the pallets on which they were placed. NJDEP
also observed spills of phosphoric acid, sulfuric acid, ethylene dichioride, and xylene. Water-reactive materials were stored
outside where rain or humidity provides conditions for the materials to be released, and incompatible materials were stored next
to each other. There were also 95 above-ground tanks of a variety of sizes. Thousands of unsegregated lab-pack-size materials
in various stages of deterioration are stored within the buildings on shelves that are also deteriorating.
By August 1990, NJDEP. had removed approximately 1,000 drums. However, cleanup was baited when NJDEP ran out of funds
(having expended approximately S675,000). The State then called EPA for assistance in completing stabilization and removal
actions at the site. Working with the bankruptcy court, EPA had the facility v ated . Subsequently, EPA overpacked fuming
drums of phosphorus tribromide for future disposal.
The most serious threats to public health and the environment would result from a release to air of substances in unstable drums
and other containers, and by fire and explosion and the associated release of contamin ts to air. Approximately 12,000 people
live and work within 1/4 mile of the site, 290,000 persons live within 3 miles of the site, and an unknown number of people work
within this 3-mile radius. Given prevailing winds, a fire and explosion at White Chemical could seriously impact Newark
International Airport, less than 1 mile to the east, the Conrail line at the site’s eastern boundary (the major eastern corridor for
Amtrak and Conrail), and U.S. Route I and 9 (between the rail line sad the airport).
EPA removal staff continues to stabilize and secure the site, which should take 6 to 12 nths. The removal action may take
up to 18 months. in addition, EPA continues to assess site conditions and the quantities and types of materials present.
On November 21, 1990, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the U.S. Public Health Service
issued an advisory waniing that the site poses a significant threat to public health because of possible releases of hazardous
substances to the air. Under Section 300.425 (cX3) of the National Contingency Plan, the Federal regulation by which CERCLA
is implemented, a site can be placed on the NPL. if (1) ATSDR has issued a public health advisory recommending that people
be removed from the site, (2) EPA determines that the site poses a significant threat to public health, and (3) EPA anticipates
that it will be more cost-effective to use its remedial authority (available only at NPL sites) than its emergency removal authority
to respond to the site.
Su e 1und hazajeota w e sne Usled undw lhe Cse prehe’sa , Er,wt ,majr j Cov n. a d L y A IcERO.A) aineneec
‘EPA
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response 1 05-230
United Stales Environmental Proleciton Agency
40lMSiree SW
Washh g1on,DC 20460
FTS-475-81a3 CML(202) 475-8103
Connecticut New Hampshire
Maine Rhode island
Massachusetts Vermont
und Branch HSL-CAN 2
John F. Ke nnedy Federal Butng
Boston,MA 02203-flu
FTS- 833-1610 CML (617) 5734610
New Jersey heilo Rico
New York Virgin islands
Emergency & Remedial Response Division
26 Federal Plaza
New Yodc, NY 10276
FTS-264.8872 CML(212) 264-5672
Region3
Delaware Pennsylvania
District or Columbia Virginia
Maryland West Virginia
Site Assessrnenl Section . 3HW13
841 Ches inulBuild lng
PhiIade hia, PA 19 107
FTS-597-3437 Cit (215) 5874437
Region 4
Alabama Mississippi
Florida Nonb Carolina
Georgia South Carolina
Tennessee
Waste Management DMslon
345 Coiutland Street. NE
AUanla GA 30365
FTS-257-3454 CML (404) 347-3454
RegionS. ....
illinois Minnesota
Indiana Ohio
Michigan Wisconsin
Remedial Response Branch 5 KS -il
23oSoulhDeazbomSueel l2thFloor
Chi go. IL 60604
FTS-886-5877 CML (312) 886-5877
Iowa Nebraska
Missouri ____
— Branch
726 M i nnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 6610i
P15-276-7052 CML (913) 551.7052
Colorado South Dakota
Montana Utah
North Dakota Wyoming
Siçerfund Remedial Branch, 8HWM-SR
999 18th Skeet. Suite 500
Denve r ; CO 80202-2405
flS-33 7630 CML (203) 29 ThX
American Samoa Guam Northern Marlanas
Ari zona Hawaii Trust Territories
Ca li fornia Nevada
Waste Management Division, H-I
75 Hawthorne SUeet
San Fran c isco , CA 94105
P19-484-1730 CIt (415) 7441730
Alaska Oregon
Idaho Washington
Si.perfund Branch, 11W-i 13
12006th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
P19-399-1987 Cit (206) 553-1987
For further intonation, call the Superfurid Hothne, toil-free
1-800-424-9346 or (703) 920-9810 in Washington, DC
meUopolitan area, or the U.S. EPA Superlund Regionat
Offices listed below.
For publications, conlact
Public Information Center, PM-21 1 B
401 MStreet,SW
Wastthglon,DC 20460
FTS- 382-2060
CML (202) 382-2080
Arkansas Oklahoma
Louisiana Texas
New Mexico
Sçerlund Management Branch Division, 6K-N
1445 Roes Avenue
Dallas, fl 75 (Q4733
- F1S-255-8740 CML (214) ° - ! °
------- |