,^£D st^j.	09-P-0243
/ % U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	September 23,2009
f	\ Office of Inspector General
\$SS2>$
At a Glance
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review
The Office of Inspector
General (OIG) is testing
long-term monitoring results
at Superfund sites the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has deleted
from the National Priorities
List. Jones Sanitation, located
in Hyde Park, New York, is
one of eight sites being
reviewed.
Background
Jones Sanitation received and
treated septic and industrial
wastes containing hazardous
substances. Remedial actions
included consolidating and
capping hazardous wastes.
The Site was added to the
National Priorities List in
1987 and was deleted 18 years
later in 2005. Deletion
signifies that EPA determined
that clean-up goals had been
achieved.
Independent Sampling Generally Confirms EPA's Data
at the Jones Sanitation Superfund Site in New York
What We Found
In April 2008, the OIG obtained groundwater and surface water samples from the
Jones Sanitation Superfund Site and nearby areas, and conducted a site inspection.
Our independent sampling results were generally consistent with the sampling
data that Region 2 has obtained historically. In addition, our site inspection
showed the Site was properly maintained and secured, and is consistent with
information Region 2 has obtained on the Site conditions.
Of the 113 chemical compounds that could be compared, Region 2 and OIG
sampling results differed for only 11 compounds. OIG results for 7 of those 11
compounds exceeded applicable health standards. However, four of these seven
compounds were contained within the Site boundaries and were, therefore,
controlled by the remedy. In another case, a compound (lead) is not likely to have
originated from the Site. Only sodium and nickel were found to exceed standards
in the residential wells or potentially migrate off-site at levels above standards.
Region 2 did not document a concern with these but concluded that the Site
remedy remains protective to human health and the environment. Due to
limitations in the Region's off-site monitoring activities, the Region needs to
better document the rationale for its conclusions.
Region 2's lack of monitoring to determine whether nickel exceedances in the
boundary monitoring well may be migrating off-site limits its ability to rule out
the possible off-site migration of nickel exceedances. The Region's
discontinuation of other off-site monitoring also limits its conclusions that sodium
exceedances have no implications for the protectiveness of the Site remedy.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional, Public Affairs
and Management at
(202) 566-2391.
To view the full report,
click on the following link:
www.epa.aov/oia/reports/2009/
20090923-09-P-0243.pdf
What We Recommend
We recommend that the Region 2 Regional Administrator demonstrate and
document in an Addendum to the 2006 Five-Year Review that off-site migration
of sodium, nickel, and any other compounds exceeding applicable standards are
controlled at the Site. We also recommend that the Region modify and/or
re-initiate some off-site monitoring if the Region determines it is needed to
adequately support determinations of Site protectiveness. In its response to the
draft report, EPA agreed with both of our recommendations and its proposed
corrective actions should address our recommendations.

-------