v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Main findings
Most of the ground-water
contamination has decreased to within
safe drinking-water standards.
In 1999-2000, EPA connected homes
with contaminated wells and
surrounding residences to the North
Park water supply.
Ground-water vapors were found in
some homes, but not at levels that are
hazardous.
EPA would like to continue ground-
water and vapor monitoring.
Public comment period
EPA will accept written comments on
its proposed cleanup plan during a 30-
day public comment period from July
28 to August 26, 2003. This fact sheet
includes a pre-addressed comment
form.
Availability session
EPA representatives will be available to
discuss its proposed cleanup plan one-
on-one with area residents, and accept
written comments, at an availability
session.
Date: August 19, 2003
Time: 2 p.m. - 4 p.m.
Place: Roscoe Branch Library
5562 Clayton Circle
Roscoe, 111.
Public meeting
EPA will hold a public meeting to
explain and answer questions about the
ground-water contamination and EPA's
proposed cleanup plan. We will also
accept oral and written comments at
the meeting.
Date: August 19, 2003
Time: 7 p.m.
Place: Roscoe Township Offices
5792 Elevator Rd.
Roscoe, 111.
For special needs or accommodations,
please contact Janet Pope toll free at:
(800) 621-8431, Ext. 30628.
EPA Proposes Cleanup Plan
for Ground-Water Contamination
Evergreen Manor Site
Roscoe, Illinois
July 2003
Key
Ground-Water
Contamination
Plume
, North
1 ' ftinnikinnick
/ Creek
Roscoe
Not To Scale
This map shows the area of ground-water contamination.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing using natural processes
called natural attenuation to clean up the remaining ground-water
contamination at the Evergreen Manor Superfund site.1 The ground-water
contamination extends from Route 251 and Rockton Road in Roscoe, 111.
about two miles southwest to the Rock River.
Ground-water contamination decreasing
EPA's investigations show that, due to natural processes, most of the
Evergreen Manor ground-water contamination has decreased to within safe
drinking-water standards. At Evergreen Manor, these natural processes
transport the ground-water contaminants to the Rock River where they mix
with the river water and are so diluted they become harmless to humans and
the environment.
TCE, PCE, chloroform still present
In 2000 and 2002, however, trichloroethene (also called TCE) and
tetrachloroethene (also called PCE) were still detected in ground water
slightly worse than drinking-water standards at two locations. TCE and PCE
are solvents used as degreasers that could pose a health risk to people who
drink water or breathe vapor containing these chemicals. Chloroform was
also found in the ground water slightly worse than drinking-water standards.
However, because chloroform was only found in the ground water at one
lSection 117(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
requires publication of a notice describing the proposed cleanup plan. Information supporting
the decision, such as the remedial investigation/feasibility study, must also be made available to
the public for comment. This fact sheet is a summary of information contained in the RI/FS for
the Evergreen Manor site. Please consult that document, which can be found at the Roscoe
Branch Library, for more detailed information.
-------
location in the residential area and was not found in any
other ground-water samples, EPA does not believe that this
cholorform is site-related.
Low levels of vapors found in homes
EPA tested soil vapors and indoor air at four homes located
in the area of ground-water contamination. (See "Sampling
Locations Map" below.) The testing was done to see if
contamination in the ground water is moving into the soil
and air of the homes above.
EPA found that some chemicals from the site may be
getting into area homes, but not at levels that are hazard-
ous. Hazardous levels of chemicals were found at two
homes, but the higher levels of chemicals found inside the
homes compared with the levels in the soil vapor around
the homes indicates that most of these chemicals are from
household activities — not the site.
However, EPA believes that vapor monitoring should
continue as part of the final cleanup plan. In addition, EPA
believes that vapor monitoring should be expanded to
include more homes in the area. (See "EPA's proposed
cleanup plan" on page 3.)
Sampling Locations Map
Tresemer
Subdivision
'Hononegah\'
'Forest - J
North Park wells not affected by the site
The North Park Water District obtains most of its water
from four wells located three to four miles south of Ever-
green Manor, which are not in danger of becoming con-
taminated by the site. While contaminants have been
found in two standby wells located about one-quarter mile
east of Evergreen Manor, the contamination is coming from
a coating on the well pipes and is not related to the site.
These standby wells are not in use and the contamination is
being taken care of through EPA's Safe Drinking Water
Program.
Rock River, Dry Creek not affected
None of the Evergreen Manor ground-water contaminants
were found in any of the river water or sediment samples
EPA collected from Dry Creek or the Rock River.
Risks to people and the environment
Although residents are connected to the North Park water
supply and are not drinking contaminated ground water
anymore, TCE and PCE are still present at levels worse
than drinking-water standards in some areas. Also, TCE,
PCE and other chemicals that may be site-related have
been found in soil vapors and in the indoor air of the four
homes sampled in the fall 2002, which are located above
the ground-water contamination plume.
The risks from using the ground water for
drinking and showering, and from potentially
breathing site-related chemicals found in the
indoor air of the four homes fall within EPA's
acceptable risk range.*
However, because the surrounding area gets its
water supply from ground water and some of the
ground water is still contaminated at levels worse
than drinking-water standards, and because
higher levels of vapors may be in other homes or
found at higher levels at other times of the year
(e.g., during the winter when homes are more
tightly sealed and furnaces are running), EPA
believes that it is necessary to take action to
protect public health.
Key
Ground-Water Sample
A Residential Well Sample - 2000
• Water and Sediment Sample
O Air and Soil Gas Sample
*EPA's acceptable risk range
EPA has set guidelines to measure the
seriousness of a site s health risk. Here's
one general rule of thumb: The risk is
unacceptable when contamination could
cause more than one case of cancer than
would normally be expected for every
10,000 people exposed. In this case, EPA
would require action to remove the added
risk. There are also guidelines to assess
other health-related risks.
-------
EPA's proposed cleanup plan
EPA is proposing Option 3 - monitored natural
attenuation to clean up the site. (See page 4 for the
other options considered.)
Estimated Cost: $8.5 million*
Estimated Time to Construct: 0
Estimated Cleanup Time: 15 years
The monitored natural attenuation option relies on existing
natural processes to continue to reduce the levels of the
chemicals in the ground water to safe drinking-water
levels. At Evergreen Manor, the ground-water
contaminants are carried along with the ground-water flow
into the Rock River where they mix with the river water
and become so diluted they are harmless. Eventually, the
chemicals break down into non-toxic chemicals. Mixing
with the river water also keeps the ground-water
contaminants from spreading into nearby areas. In
addition, as the levels of contaminants in the ground water
decrease, the levels of site-related contaminants in the soil
vapors and in area homes are also expected to decrease.
This alternative also includes:
Gound-water monitoring to track and evaluate the
effectiveness of the ground-water cleanup over time and to
ensure that ground-water contaminants do not threaten
area wells during the cleanup.
Vapor monitoring at about 25 homes throughout the area
four times a year (winter, spring, summer and fall) over a
one- to two-year period. After the first year, the results of
the sampling would be reviewed and the monitoring
program may be modified to add or remove homes from
the program. This vapor monitoring would continue until it
is clear that site-related soil vapors are not a threat.
Venting systems would be installed at homes with
hazardous levels of site-related vapors to eliminate any
risks.
Local government controls to restrict new wells from
being installed in contaminated areas until the cleanup is
complete.
Contingency plans to address changes in ground-water
use and/or conditions. Contingency plans include, but are
not limited to, collecting samples more frequently, installing
new monitoring wells, and evaluating whether additional
cleanup actions are necessary.
*The actual cost could be much less and will depend
on the results of additional sampling done prior to
developing the final ground-water and vapor
monitoring plans, as well as the results of the long-term
monitoring programs.
Why propose monitored natural attenuation?
The monitored natural attenuation option protects human
health and the environment by using ongoing natural
cleanup processes to return the ground water to drinking-
water levels. It also uses monitoring, local government
controls and contingency plans to protect human health and
the environment until the ground water is returned to safe
drinking-water levels.
In addition, as the levels of contaminants in the ground
water decrease, the levels of site-related contaminants in
the soil vapors and in area homes are also expected to
decrease. Because most, if not all, of the ground-water
contaminants are flowing into the Rock River, they are not
likely to spread into the ground water on the other side of
the river.
EPA estimates that the natural processes at the Evergreen
Manor site will return the ground water to safe drinking-
water levels in about 15 years. This is about twice as long
as it would take with the ground-water pump and treat
alternative. However, since homes with contaminated
wells have been connected to the public water supply and
the wells at those homes were permanently sealed, EPA
believes that the monitored natural attenuation alternative
would be just as protective as the ground-water pump and
treat alternative and that a cleanup time of 15 years would
be reasonable.
The monitored natural attenuation option is the most cost-
effective option that meets the evaluation criteria as well as
the cleanup goals.
See page 4 for a table comparing all of the options against
EPA's evaluation criteria.
Cleanup goals
EPA's cleanup goals for the Evergreen Manor site
are to:
• return the ground water to safe drinking-water
standards for TCE and PCE, and any other site-
related contaminants found at levels worse than
drinking-water standards during the cleanup, within
a reasonable time frame
• minimize the spread of ground-water contaminants
• ensure that hazardous levels of site-related vapors
are not getting into homes
• prevent people from using the contaminated
ground water
• ensure that the contaminated ground water is not
impacting the surface water and sediment as it
flows into the Rock River
-------
Summary of other cleanup options considered
Option 1 - No-Action
Estimated Cost: $0
Estimated Time to Construct: 0 years
Estimated Cleanup Time: 15 years
The no-action option does not involve any cleanup action
for the remaining ground-water contamination.
Chloroform, TCE and PCE are still expected to naturally
decrease and improve ground-water quality over time.
However, unlike the monitored natural attenuation
alternative, the no-action option does not include
monitoring, local government controls to limit or restrict
new wells from being installed in contaminated areas, or
contingency planning. EPA is required by law to evaluate
a no-action alternative to give a basis for comparison.
Option 2 - Ground-Water Pump and Treat
Estimated Cost: $25 million
Estimated Time to Construct: 6-12 months
Estimated Cleanup Time: 8 years
The ground-water pump and treat option involves installing
ground-water extraction wells to contain and capture the
remaining ground-water contaminants and treat them with
an air stripper. An air stripper works by forcing a stream
of air into the contaminants causing them to evaporate.
TCE and PCE evaporate readily when exposed to air.
The treated ground water would be discharged to the Rock
River and Dry Creek.
This option also includes ground-water monitoring, vapor
monitoring, local government controls and contingency
plans. (See EPA's proposed cleanup plan on page 3.)
the
The table below summarizes EPA's evaluation of the cleanup options against its nine evaluation criteria. (See page 7 for
an explanation of the evaluation criteria.) A more detailed analysis can be found in the feasibility study report.
Evaluation Criteria
Overall Protection of
Human Health and the
Environment
Compliance with Federal,
State and Local Laws and
Regulations
Long-Term Effectiveness
and Permanence
Reduction of Toxicity,
Mobility or Volume through
Treatment
Short- Term Effectiveness
Implementability
Cost
State Acceptance
Community Acceptance
Alternative 1
No Action
o
o
o
o
o
o
$0
Alternative 2
Ground-Water
Pump & Treat
•
•
•
•
•
•
$25 million
Alternative 3
Monitored
Natural
Attenuation
•
•
•
•
•
•
$8.5 million
Will be evaluated after the public comment period
Will be evaluated after the public comment period
Meets Criteria
O Does Not Meet Criteria
-------
Use This Space to Write Your Comments
Your input on the recommended cleanup option for the remaining ground-water contamination at the Evergreen Manor site
is important to EPA. Comments provided by the public are valuable in helping EPA select a final cleanup plan for the site.
You may use the space below to write your comments. You may hand this in at the August 19, 2003 public meeting or
availability session, or detach, fold and mail to Janet Pope. (See back page for Janet's address.) Comments must be
postmarked no later than August 26, 2003. If you have any questions, please contact Janet Pope at (312) 353-0628, or toll
free at 1-800-621-8431, Ext. 30628. Comments may also be faxed to Janet at (312) 353-1155 or sent via e-mail to:
pope.janet@epa.gov
Name
Affiliation
Address
City State_
Zip
-------
Detach, fold, stamp, and mail
Name ,
Address llace
^faff-
Here
City State" StamP
Zip
Janet Pope
Community Involvement Coordinator
Office of Public Affairs (P-19J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
Explanation of the nine evaluation criteria
EPA uses the following nine criteria to evaluate the cleanup
alternatives. A table comparing the alternatives against
these criteria is provided on page 4.
1. Overall Protection of Human Health and the
Environment. Evaluates whether a cleanup option
provides adequate protection and evaluates how risks are
eliminated, reduced or controlled through treatment,
engineering controls or local government controls.
2. Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements. Evaluates whether a
cleanup option meets federal and state environmental laws,
regulations and other requirements or justifies any waivers.
3. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. Consid-
ers any remaining risks after a cleanup is complete and the
ability of a cleanup option to maintain reliable protection of
human health and the environment over time once cleanup
goals are met.
4. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume
Through Treatment. Evaluates a cleanup option's use of
treatment to reduce the harmful effects of the contami-
nants, their ability to move in the environment and the
amount of contamination present.
5. Short-Term Effectiveness. Considers the time
needed to clean up a site and the risks a cleanup option
may pose to workers, the community and the environment
until the cleanup goals are met.
6. Implementability. Is the technical and administrative
feasibility of implementing a cleanup option and includes
factors such as the relative availability of goods and
services.
7. Cost. Includes estimated capital and annual operations
and maintenance costs as well as the present worth cost.
Present worth cost is the total cost of an alternative over
time in terms of today's dollar value.
8. State Acceptance. Considers whether the state (in
this case Illinois EPA) agrees with EPA's analyses and
recommendations as described in the remedial investigation
and feasibility study reports and EPA's proposed cleanup
plan.
9. Community Acceptance. Considers whether the local
community agrees with EPA's analyses and proposed
cleanup plan. The comments that EPA receives on its
proposal are an important indicator of community accep-
tance.
The next step
EPA, in consultation with Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency, will evaluate public comments received during the
public comment period before deciding the final cleanup
plan for the site. Based on new information or public
comments, EPA may modify its proposed option or select
another cleanup option presented in this plan or the feasibil-
ity study report. EPA encourages you to review and
comment on all the cleanup options for the ground-water
contamination. EPA will respond to the comments in a
document called a responsiveness summary. The respon-
siveness summary will be a part of the final decision
document called the record of decision that describes the
final cleanup plan selected for the site. EPA will announce
the final cleanup plan in the local newspaper and will send
a copy of the record of decision to the information reposi-
tory for the site where it will be available for public review.
(See the back page of this fact sheet for the location of the
information repository.)
After a final plan is chosen, the plan will be designed and
implemented.
About the Evergreen Manor site
In the early 1990s, ground-water contamination was
traced to an industrial area near Route 251 and Rockton
Road; however, the exact source(s) of contamination
have not been determined. The contamination was
discovered when a mortgage lender required a home-
owner to test their well. Additional sampling was
conducted to determine the extent of the contamination.
Sampling at three companies in the area, Regal Beloit,
Ecolab and Waste Management, detected low levels of
contamination. These companies agreed to pay for
EPA's cost to connect 281 homes to public water supply
in 1999-2000. The low levels of contaminants found at
the companies and the significant decreases in the site
contamination indicate that there are no more active
sources of ground-water contamination.
EPA's additional investigation from 2000 to 2003 focused
on the following three areas:
• ground water
• water and sediment in nearby Dry Creek and the
Rock River
• indoor air and soil vapor around homes above the
ground-water contamination
-------
For more information
For more information about the public comment period, public meeting, proposed cleanup plan, or any other aspects of the
Evergreen Manor project, please contact:
Janet Pope
Community Involvement Coordinator
Office of Public Affairs (P-19J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
Phone: (312) 353-0628 or
(800) 621-8431 Ext. 30628
Fax: (312)353-1155
E-mail: pope.janet@epa.gov
Karen Cibulskis
Remedial Project Manager
Office of Superfund (SR-6J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
Phone: (312) 886-1843 or
(800) 621-8431 Ext. 61843
Fax: (312)886-4071
E-mail: cibulskis.karen@epa.gov
EPA Web site
This fact sheet, previous fact sheets
and other site documents can be
found on the following EPA Web site:
www.epa.gov/region5/sites
Click on Illinois and scroll through the
list to find Evergreen Manor.
Information repository
An information repository is a file for public review
containing documents related to the project and the
Superfund program. The Evergreen Manor information
repository is located in the reference section of the:
Roscoe Branch Library
5562 Clayton Circle
Roscoe, 111.
papfosy uo paonpo-iday Vf.
uojieujiuejuoo J9jB/v\-punoj9 joj
dnueeio sesodojd Vd3 :8J!S JOUB|/\|
069S-W909 II 'o6eo!i|o
pAia uos>per v\A LL
(r6l.-d) s-neyvonqnd jo
Aoua6v
VcBI?
------- |