Revised
Community Involvement Plan
Tremont City Barrel Fill Site
2015
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION i
Describes the purpose of this Revised Community Involvement Plan.
COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS 4
Summarizes what community members are concerned about, the questions they asked and what
they told U.S. EPA.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT GOALS AND ACTIVITIES 20
Highlights U.S. EPA's goals, activities and timeline for conducting site-specific activities to keep
residents and local officials informed and involved during the cleanup process.
THE COMMUNITY 26
This section describes the composition of Tremont City, German Township, Springfield and Clark
County and the history of community involvement with the site. All communities are located in
Clark County, Ohio.
THE SITE 36
This section presents a description and history of activities at the site.
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Glossary - Initials - Acronyms: Lists the definition of key words, initials and A-1
acronyms (words are in bold throughout the document).
Appendix B - Community Resources: Identifies places where community members can find B-1
more information about the site and possible meeting locations.
Appendix C - List of Contacts: Provides a list of federal, state, and local agencies and interested C-1
groups.
Appendix D - Community Engagement and the Superfund Process: Gives an overview D-1
of the step-by-step process the U.S. EPA follows to determine the best way to clean up a
contaminated site and opportunities for community involvement throughout the process.
Appendix E - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Fact Sheets: Includes E-1
ATSDR ToxFact fact sheets on contaminants of concern affecting the site and a fact sheet on the
Superfund Alternative Approach.
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
Describes the purpose of this Revised Community Involvement Plan.
Goals of U.S. EPA's
community outreach
program:
• Assist the public in understanding
the decision-making process
during project design and
cleanup and the community's
role in that process.
• Give the public accessible,
accurate, timely and
understandable information
about the project as it moves
forward.
• Ensure adequate time and
opportunity for the public to
give informed and meaningful
input and for that input to be
considered.
• Reflect community concerns,
questions and information needs.
• Respect and fully consider public
input throughout the entire
process.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prepared
this revised Community Involvement Plan to
engage and support the community affected by the
Tremont City Barrel Fill Superfund Alternative
site located in Clark County Ohio. U.S. EPA's
community involvement effort is committed to
promoting effective and meaningful communication
between the public and the Agency. U.S. EPA wants
to make sure the community's current concerns and
information needs are considered as activities at the
site progress.
The initial CIP was developed in 2009 with
interviews that were conducted in 2004. That plan
noted that primary concerns expressed by those
interviewed included health concerns, specifically
leukemia; ground and surface water contamination;
drinking water contamination; being on bottled
water; informational needs; property values; public
safety; how contaminants would be controlled
during the cleanup; and paying for the cleanup.
This revised CIP was prepared to support
environmental and cleanup activities at the Tremont
City Barrel Fill site. U.S. EPA used several information
sources to develop this plan, including research,
discussions with community members, information
(Words in bold are defined in Appendix A.)
Community Involvement Plan
1
-------
"Community Involvement
is all about listening!'
- Ginny Narsete
U.S. EPA Community
Involvement Coordinator
gathered at meetings and community interviews.
Interviews were conducted November 12 - 15, 2014
with residents and local officials interested in the site
activities and cleanup efforts. U.S. EPA spoke with
over 80 people, including students from Wittenberg
University, in order to develop this plan.
This revised CIP describes U.S. EPA's plan for
addressing concerns, keeping residents informed and
letting them know how they can participate in the
decision-making process during cleanup activities at
the site. U.S. EPA will use this document as a guide to
involve and communicate with residents, businesses
and local government in Tremont City, German
Township, Springfield arid Clark County.
If you are interested in submitting comments or have
questions or suggestions concerning the revised CIP,
please contact:
Ginny Narsete
Community Involvement
Coordinator
U.S. EPA Region 5
312-886-4359
narsete.virginia@epa.gov
The photo above shows the current state of the site of the barrel fill. The inset shows some of
the buried barrels.
The CIP is a working document that will evolve as the investigation and
cleanup process continues and input is received from the community. It is
intended to be flexible, adaptable and used as a guideline for U.S. EPA's
communication with the community.
2
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Community Engagement is Essential to the
Success of Superfund Cleanups
Ongoing input and involvement by the
community is essential to U.S. EPA's efforts to
provide effective community engagement.
U.S. EPA has learned that its decision-making
ability is enhanced by actively seeking input
and information from the community.
Community members need to be involved
in all phases of the cleanup so that the
contamination is addressed in a way that
protects people and the environment - now
and in the future.
Residents, former site workers, business
owners and local government officials may
be able to provide valuable information
about a hazardous site that can help U.S.
EPA determine the best way to clean it up.
Information can help determine the location
of contamination, how people may be
exposed to the contamination and perhaps
sources of the contamination.
Local residents and officials of Tremont
City, German Township, Springfield and
Clark County educated U.S. EPA about
their community. They told U.S. EPA about
past activities at the site and explained their
concern for the sole-source aquifer that
provides water for everyone in the community President of the environmental group People for Safe Water, Marilyn
.... r , . Welker, proudly holds a map of the area sole-source aquifer, which
as well as the importance ot clean water tor ' , ' . , ,J ., , , , ... . ....
1 many people interviewed described as one oj the best aquijers in Ohio
the area economy. if not in the world.
An aquifer is a geological formation that is capable of yielding a significant amount of water
to a drinking water well or spring. The Greater Miami Buried Aquifer located near the barrel
fill is designated as a sole-source aquifer, which means that it is an underground water supply
designated by U.S. EPA as the "sole or principal source" of drinking water for an area. Tlie
aquifer consists of two components - an upper sand and gravel aquifer and a lower aquifer
called a carbonate "bedrock" aquifer.
Greater Miami Sole Source Aquifer
Community Involvement Plan
3
-------
COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS
Summarizes what community members are concerned about, the questions they asked and what
they told U.S. EPA.
What U.S. EPA Heard
This section focuses on the concerns and issues that U.S. EPA heard from community members about the site.
To learn about concerns, questions and informational
needs related to the Tremont City Barrel Fill site, U.S.
EPA conducted interviews with over 40 residents, local
officials and other interested community members and
spoke with over 40 Wittenberg students in November
2014. Postcards were mailed to residents near the
barrel fill site announcing the interviews and asking
them to schedule an interview to talk with U.S. EPA
about their concerns. Other interviews were scheduled
by direct phone calls. Pages 6 to 18 explain the
following concerns and comments expressed.
Primary concerns:
The primary concerns raised by the community are:
> Disagree with remedy
• Liner(s) not protective
• Need to protect sole-source aquifer
• Proposed landfill was not approved
• Want all hazardous waste removed
> Potential groundwater contamination
> Distrust of U.S. EPA
• Is in cahoots with Waste Management
• Was disrespectful
• Has not done its job
• Is perceived as the enemy
> Lack of communication
• Conveying information
• Listening
> Cost
• Were the costs calculated correctly?
• Should cost matter?
• Isn't it cheaper to do it right the first time?
> Business/economic effects
> Do not want to be "sold" on U.S. EPA's selected
remedy
> Dense non-aqueous phase liquids, or DNAPL,
concerns
> National Priorities List, or NPL, placement
> Ohio EPA position on the remedy
> Health concerns
> Missing and false data
> Real estate values
> Potential surface water contamination
> Sense of urgency
> Landfill and barrel fill operation
> Barrel contents
> Compliance with Clean Water Act
> Conflict mediation
Additional comments:
> Private well testing
> Solidification effectiveness
> Barrel recycling
> Incineration
> Moving the contamination off site
> Potentially responsible party, or PRP involvement
> Reverting to the state
> Jobs
> Need to know U.S. EPA will be there
4
Community Involvement Plan
-------
History of the selection of the cleanup plan
In order to fully understand the community's
comments and concerns about the barrel fill, it
is important to understand the history about the
selection of the site's cleanup plan.
In a proposed plan released in June 2010, U.S.
EPA recommended Alternative 4a (described
on Page 40), one of 11 cleanup alternatives
considered for the barrel fill site. At that time,
U.S. EPA held a public comment period on the
alternatives. During the public comment period,
Waste Management, a PRP, proposed a new
alternative, which U.S. EPA modified to develop
Alternative 9a (described at right and in more
detail on Page 40). After evaluating Alternative
9a against the other cleanup alternatives using
the Superfund remedy selection criteria (see
Evaluation Criteria box on Page 39), U.S. EPA
has determined that Alternative 9a offers the best
balance of the criteria.
Because the changes to the preferred alternative
could not have been reasonably anticipated by the
public based on the information then available
to the public, U.S. EPA issued a new (revised)
proposed plan for the new recommended
Alternative 9a, and opened a second public
comment period in 2011. After evaluating
comments, U.S. EPA selected Alternative 9a as
the final cleanup plan for the site. However, the
community did not then, nor does it now, agree
with U.S. EPA's recommendation.
Both Alternatives 4a and 9a include the
following elements:
• Fencing and signs placed around the site.
• Institutional controls such as prohibiting
certain future land uses and the use of site
groundwater.
• Long-term groundwater monitoring.
• Contingency planning in case officials must
take action if unexpected conditions occur.
Alternative 4a
Excavate liquid and hazardous waste and
transport it off site for treatment and disposal;
consolidate nonhazardous solid waste and
contaminated soil in an onsite waste cell for
nonhazardous solid waste.
Cost: $56.9 million
Alternative 9a
(This is U.S. EPA's recommended cleanup option)
Excavate all waste and transport liquid waste
off site for treatment and disposal. Build a
double-lined engineered waste cell with a liquid
collection system. Consolidate hazardous and
nonhazardous solid waste and contaminated soil
in the waste cell. Place a cap over the cell and
install a bottom liner and a slurry wall around the
cell along with a liquid collection system.
Cost: $27.7million
Note to readers: This section is intended to faithfully record and reflect the issues
and concerns expressed to U.S. EPA by residents; officials and others interviewed
during the community interviews. By necessity this is a collection and summary of
thoughts and observations and, in some cases, opinions. Please be cautioned that
the statements contained in this section may or may not be factual and that the
opinions and concerns expressed may or may not be valid.
Community Involvement Plan
5
-------
Disagree with remedy
The biggest issue raised during community
interviews was that people said they did not agree
with U.S. EPA's selected remedy - Alternative 9a.
Many people stated that support for Alternative
4a was the consensus of the entire community and
noted that the consensus crosses party lines. They
said they wanted to make it clear that the opposition
to Alternative 9a is not just a bunch of "crazy left
wingers." One public official said, "There is no
opposition to the position we are taking." The reasons
people gave for their opposition to U.S. EPA's selected
remedy (Alternative 9a) include:
> They do not believe the liner(s) will be
protective. Virtually everyone U.S. EPA
interviewed stated that they did not think the
liner(s) would be protective in the (not so long)
long run. People said that adding a second liner
did not convince them of the protectiveness.
Most stated that they understood that the liners
were only guaranteed for about 50 years, which
they did not think was long enough. They said
they were sure the liner(s) would fail and then
the hazardous waste left would contaminate the
aquifer. One official stated, "50 years is not a
permanent solution." Several people interviewed
said that they thought it is "scary" because the
liner(s) are not fool proof. These individuals
further said that, in the description of the liners,
they are called "threads," which they said does not
"People have lived in the
area for generations and
want to see the city thrive!'
- Local official
sound protective. A local official said, "No matter
how you dress up a pig, it is still a pig - even with
two liners!" He said the community is not buying
the double liner and that he believes U.S. EPA is
in for a long fight.
> They want to protect the sole-source
aquifer - their water supply. Everyone U.S.
EPA interviewed said that they wanted all of
the hazardous waste removed. A resident living
near the site stated that not removing everything
would just be a band aid and could contaminate
the sole-source aquifer. Many public officials said
the barrel fill was on top of a sole-source aquifer,
which provides water to over 80,000 people. They
went on to say, "Springfield is the 12th largest city
in Ohio, yet U.S. EPA is going to allow this $@*!
to be put back in on top of our water supply" They
said that Springfield does not have a secondary
well system and the pumping station off North
68th is within a mile of the site. People also said
the aquifer recharges quickly and that Dayton also
pulls water from it. They told U.S. EPA they did not
believe it was worth the risk. One public official
said that the people want Alternative 4a and are
not going to "roll over." When U.S. EPA asked him
about a compromise, he explained that Alternative
4a was a compromise! He went on to say that, for
the community, the concept is simple - "don't put
hazardous waste over a sole-source aquifer."
> The proposed sanitary landfill next to the
site was not approved. Most people interviewed
questioned how U.S. EPA could be proposing
to allow hazardous waste to be stored at the site
when Ohio EPA did not approve of the placement
of a sanitary landfill right next to the site. One
official said that legally, Ohio EPA does not allow
placement of a landfill on top of an aquifer and
that in this case there are two big aquifers that
lie underneath. He pointed out that, therefore,
implementing Alternative 9a will be breaking
6
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Ohio law. Several people U.S. EPA spoke with
said Alternative 9a is basically building a new
hazardous waste landfill without meeting Ohio's
regulations for a hazardous waste landfill. One
official pointed out that if Alternative 9a were
proposed as a new site, it would not be approved.
> They want all of the hazardous waste
removed. Virtually everyone said they want to see
all of the hazardous waste removed. Several people
said that they understood about half of the material
in the barrels is a gel and would be considered a
solid and therefore would be left on site. Those
individuals said that was not acceptable. One local
official said, "We want it hauled out and hauled
out now!" He said he does not care what U.S. EPA
thinks - it is what the people want. He went on to
say that everyone wants the original remedy and
that there is no excuse for all of this runaround!
Tlte future generation matters! The residents that live near
Tremont City enjoy raising their children in rural Ohio,
Area residents said
they want to preserve
the water for future
generations.
Community Involvement Plan
7
-------
Potential groundwater contamination
Everyone interviewed expressed concern about
the potential for groundwater contamination.
Groundwater is an environmental term for
underground supplies of water. A couple of residents
living near the barrel fill said they were very concerned
about their well water since they live so close to the
site. Several people interviewed said they already drink
bottled water. One official interviewed said the key is
that so many people draw their water from the aquifer
underneath the barrel fill. He said there were nine
wells from the city of Springfield that could potentially
be affected and that the "water goes all the way to
Dayton." Her number one concern was that the water
supply is protected now and in the future. She was
worried that the site had already gotten worse.
Several local officials said they have an official
responsibility to the people to ensure the quality of the
water. They said that the potential for groundwater
contamination in the future is a "significant risk - one
they don't want to take." A resident said that a lot of
good earnest people have worked hard for what they
have and don't expect anything to be given to them,
but they also do not want something taken away. He
said, "Water is the sustenance of life." He questioned,
"What is the value of our water? It is the legacy we leave
behind." He said that the barrel fill (and potential for
future groundwater contamination) was like a "ticking
time bomb." This interviewee said, "I do not want this
to be another Chernobyl where people can't grow
crops and don't have clean water." He said he wants to
make sure there is safe water for the children. Another
resident said, "If it goes 'south' it will affect many!" He
stated, "You can't maintain life without water!"
Many people interviewed stated that they want to
make sure the monitoring wells are put in the right
place. One individual said that he would like to be sure
that the carbonate aquifer is monitored. He stated that,
according to the documents, it did not look like the
water in the carbonate aquifer had been tested.
Groundwater monitoring wells like the one shown above
surround the barrel fill, (See map on Page 38 for the
monitoring well locations.)
8
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Distrust of U.S. EPA
Everyone U.S. EPA interviewed stated that they did
not trust the way the Agency has handled this site.
People specifically talked about the following:
> They said it looked like U.S. EPA was in
"cahoots" with Waste Management. Several
local officials said that a former member of
Congress suggested that Waste Management
got to U.S. EPA. Although the officials are aware
that this might not be the case, they indicated
that it looks questionable. They stated that the
community is being put at risk because U.S.
EPA is not willing to take a stand against the
potentially responsible parties, or PRPs. Another
group of people interviewed stated that it looked
"suspicious" the way U.S. EPA changed the
remedy after everyone had already agreed - Ohio
EPA, the community, and even U.S. EPA at first.
Many interviewees said that all parties were in
agreement on Alternative 4a and then, out of the
blue, U.S. EPA changed to Alternative 9a and no
one knew why. They said, "All we could see was
that it was cheaper. So, it looked like U.S. EPA
was in cahoots with Waste Management." One
resident said, "To me, it shouts payoff." Another
local official said that he thinks someone at U.S.
EPA is getting money under the table. He said he
is "convinced money changed hands." Another
individual said there was a "rat someplace."
One official questioned how often U.S. EPA has
changed its selected remedy based on a public
comment. He said that Waste Management was
not involved in the process until the company
came in at the last minute with a comment and
then got what they wanted. The official went on
to say that people think that Waste Management
has gotten to U.S. EPA. He said that community
members have called him saying they were
concerned as to how U.S. EPA picked this remedy
and questioning who influenced U.S. EPA.
> U.S. EPA was disrespectful. Many people U.S.
EPA spoke with said that U.S. EPA staff had
treated them disrespectfully and spoke to them
in a condescending manner. An official told U.S.
EPA that a former U.S. EPA staff member had
"alienated" the community. Several local officials
interviewed stated that U.S. EPA was arrogant
and had "brushed them off."
> U.S. EPA has not done its job. Several people
interviewed said U.S. EPA has not done its job. One
official said that everyone assumed that the cleanup
would have been done right, but that U.S. EPA has
not done what it should to make it safe. He said
"You [U.S. EPA] have been taking care of the big
guys for 20 years and now kids are going to die." He
said the local community has been fighting this for
20 years, and that the site could have been cleaned
up by now with all the money that has been spent.
He further stated that "it is becoming a joke" and "is
a waste of tax dollars!" He said, "It is U.S. EPAs fault
- Ohio EPA agrees with us."
> U.S. EPA is perceived as the enemy. During
the community interviews, many people talked
about U.S. EPA as if the Agency were the
"enemy." When asked about that, the people said
that it was because U.S. EPA is supposed to be
protecting them and that is not what people see
them doing. One resident said, "Until people
see you want what is best for them, they are not
going to trust you." One resident said, "The villain
needs to have a face, which needs to be the PRPs,
but, until U.S. EPA flips that around, the Agency
will be the enemy." A couple people said it was
because U.S. EPA "has all of the power."
Community Involvement Plan
9
-------
Photo Source: People for Safe Water FacebookPage
The environmental group People for Safe Water reaches out to the community holding a public meeting at
Wittenberg University.
Lack of communication
Virtually everyone interviewed stated that the lack of
communication with U.S. EPA has been frustrating -
both with conveying information as well as listening.
> Conveying information. One of the biggest
communication issues raised by virtually
everyone was the fact that U.S. EPA did not
come out and really talk to people after U.S. EPA
changed the selected remedy. They said they were
aware of the comment period and meeting, but
did not feel U.S. EPA really tried to explain how
and why the Agency changed its recommended
remedy. They pointed out that even the fact sheet
that U.S. EPA published explaining Alternative
9a, the Agency's recommended alternative in
2011, looked virtually identical to the fact sheet
published in 2010 explaining Alternative 4a, U.S.
EPAs original recommended alternative. Finally,
people said that when U.S. EPA made their final
cleanup decision, community members were
informed by email.
"This is the most U.S. EPA
has listened to us in 14
years."
- Local resident
Many community members said U.S. EPA needs
to fully explain why the Agency changed its
selected remedy and why the Agency believes the
new remedy [Alternative 9a] is better.
> Listening. Several people talked about how U.S.
EPA has not listened to the community. One
resident said, "The fact of the matter is that no
one listened until we screamed!" This resident
questioned, "If it doesn't matter what we say, what
is the point of talking to you [U.S. EPA] ?" She
went on to say that communicating alone doesn't
accomplish anyt hing if no one listens. She said, "You
10
Community Involvement Plan
-------
can be the government that talks or you can be the
government that listens." She felt that it is was not
a matter of them not understanding U.S. EPA, it
was a matter of not agreeing with the Agency. One
official interviewed said, "People from the big city
[Chicago] think we 'hicks' don't understand, but
we do!" Several people said they don't think U.S.
EPA has any idea how the people of Tremont City
and German Township around the landfill really
feel. One resident said, when referring to the
community interviews being conducted, "This is
the most U.S. EPA has listened to us in 14 years."
Cost
Many people U.S. EPA spoke with questioned the
costs presented by the Agency. The cost question
came from several fronts:
> Were the costs calculated correctly? Many
people questioned if the costs were calculated
correctly. One group said, "Don't tell us that
digging it up and taking it somewhere else is
more expensive than doing [Alternative] 9a and
fixing it later when the liners leak." They further
questioned why it wouldn't be cheaper just to
haul the waste away since it will have already
been dug up, the liquid would be drained, and the
barrels would be crushed. A few questioned if the
operation and maintenance costs were calculated
in.
> Should cost matter? Several interviewees said
they felt that this decision should not be based on
finances. One person said he believed it should
be a moral decision because the choice of a few
will affect the lives of many. This interviewee said
that someone from one of the Agencies [U.S. EPA
or Ohio EPA] said something along the lines of,
"Essentially, sometimes it is too expensive." To
that, the interviewee responded, "It is not going
to get any cheaper!" One resident questioned,
"How do you clean up an aquifer? He said, "I am
sure it is not cheap. Just clean it up before it does
contaminate the aquifer." Another community
member felt that "the end goal should be to
protect people." A couple of people said the
community believed if money were not a factor,
U.S. EPA would prefer Alternative 4a.
> Isn't it cheaper to do it right the first time?
Many people stated that they thought it would be
cheaper to clean the site up right the first time.
One group of people said that they feel that,
while Alternative 4a is a lot of money, it would
be cheaper in the long run. They said that they
want see U.S. EPA use foresight. They stated,
"It is Midwestern common sense - do it right
the first time." They further stated that, by not
removing everything now, it is just like kicking
the can down the road and that is not a risk the
community can take. One resident said that he
thought digging up the waste [barrels], draining
the liquid and putting it back is a waste of money.
"The end goal should be
to protect the people!'
- Local resident
Community Involvement Plan
11
-------
Business/economic effects
Approximately half of the people interviewed
expressed concern about the potential adverse impact
the barrel fill could have on attracting businesses to
the area. Several people talked about how the city of
Springfield would like to attract breweries, orange
juice businesses, etc., but they are having trouble
doing so. According to these individuals, a few years
ago, the city of Springfield marketed the city to
businesses dependent on water. With the good and
plentiful water, they thought they should be able to
attract the businesses, but these businesses need to
know that the water will stay clean.
The interviewees stated that the fear of potential
future contamination of the aquifer is already a
huge economic problem. They said that this fear
of potential groundwater contamination is already
affecting business decisions. According to the people
interviewed, Dole Fresh Vegetables, who came
to the area in 1997 and provides 700 jobs, is very
concerned that they will not be able to count on the
availability of clean water in the future. Interviewees
also said that Reiter Dairy, another large business
in the area, also needs to be able to count on having
good water. They said that having clean water as
a natural resource for development significantly
impacts the city of Springfield and surrounding areas.
These interviewees stated that water is worth the
investment and that it is an extremely important asset
in attracting industry.
In addition, the interviewees said that the city of
Springfield was working on a contract to sell its water
to the city of Yellow Springs, but Yellow Springs
just voted it down. One official said that the fact
that someone is bottling local Springfield water and
selling it "speaks volumes."
Another business/economic concern expressed by
a couple of people was that Waste Management will
go after the other smaller businesses to help pay for
the cleanup, which could be "devastating" to those
smaller businesses.
Ginny Narsete, U.S. EPA Community Involvement Coordinator for the Tremont City Barrel Fill site (second from left) talks
with city of Springfield officials about their concerns regarding the site.
12
Community Involvement Plan
-------
DNAPL concerns
Virtually everyone U.S.
EPA talked to pointed out
that the city is named
"Spring"field for a reason.
Do not want to be "sold" on U.S. EPA's
selected remedy
Many people U.S. EPA interviewed said that they did
not want U.S. EPA to come in with a "slick sales job"
trying to sell them on Alternative 9a. One resident
said, "We don't want a slick document - it doesn't
matter what it looks like. If more money is spent on
some document that doesn't matter, then we don't
want it." She went on to say, "Stop spending money
on useless things and do the cleanup! You are not
going to change our minds!" Several people said that
they don't know what new information is going to
come from the interviews to change their mind and
they would just like this all to come to a close. One
official explained that his concern was that everyone
had agreed on Alternative 4a. He said, "Politely,
we don't want to be communicated with more on
how good Alternative 9a is. Everyone had already
agreed on [Alternative] 4a." Several people said,
"One would expect U.S. EPA to be on our side - our
'PROTECTION' agency. But, U.S. EPA is trying to
convince us of Waste Management's plan!" These
individuals said that they will not be convinced.
Many people interviewed said that they understand
the remedy and they want Alternative 4a to be
implemented. Several public officials stated that they
understand, but they don't agree and that "PR" will
not solve the problem. They continued to say, "All the
communication in the world will not change things!"
Several people said that they "had already gone down
the rabbit hole with all of the technical stuff."
Many people interviewed expressed concern about
the DNAPL (dense non-aqueous phase liquid) at
the site. These individuals said about one third of
50 barrels had DNAPL. However, the interviewees
said U.S. EPA stated that there was no DNAPL
found in the sampling. The interviewees said that
does not make sense. They questioned if U.S. EPA
had downplayed the presence of DNAPL. The
interviewees expressed concern about the DNAPL
because it is heavy and can sink into the carbonate
aquifer. DNAPLs are a group of substances, such as
chlorinated solvents (solvents containing chlorine),
creosote-based wood-treating oils, coal tar wastes
and pesticides. They are more dense than water and
do not easily dissolve in water. So, when in water,
DNAPLs tend to sink to the bottom.
NPL placement
During the interviews, community members were
told that U.S. EPA is likely pursuing placing the site
on the NPL. Many community members reacted to
this by saying that it sounded like U.S. EPA is trying
to push forward on Alternative 9a. They went on
to say that the community did not want U.S. EPA
to use NPL placement to push forward U.S. EPA's
agenda to implement Alternative 9a. Several people
questioned what recourse they would have if U.S.
EPA moves forward with implementing Alternative
9a. They said they do not want U.S. EPA to order
Waste Management to do the cleanup if the cleanup is
Alternative 9a.
Community Involvement Plan
13
-------
Ohio EPA position on the remedy
Several officials said that initially Ohio EPA was
opposed to Alternative 9a, and now Ohio EPA is
changing its stance, but not based on fact. These
officials stated that they believed Ohio EPA was
changing its stance because the Governor told them
to "shut up." One person interviewed stated that he
did not think it would be credible to anyone if Ohio
EPA changed their position on the selected remedy
now. This individual said that he believed the people
would just believe that U.S. EPA pressured Ohio EPA
into changing its position.
Health concerns
Several people interviewed expressed concern
about health problems in the community that they
believed may have been caused by the site. One
local official said that he knew of four children with
Down syndrome; two-to-three with Leukemia; and
one with brittle bone disease. One resident said that
there was a lot of cancer in the area and that some
had died from the cancer. She believed that it is
related to the site. She estimated that she knew of
more than 10 people that had or are battling cancer.
Another woman pointed out that several people in
the area have Leukemia, including her grandson
who was diagnosed at 2 V2 years old. She also said
that she knew of over 10 people who had gotten
cancer. Another resident talked about a neighbors
dog getting tumors and said he thought it might be
related to the site.
Missing and false data
Several individuals stated that they believe some of
the data is false and more testing needs to be done.
A few people pointed out that groundwater samples
had not been taken from the carbonate aquifer and
they said that they believed that groundwater samples
should be taken from that aquifer. Another person
interviewed said, "To think that U.S. EPA formulated
a plan with uncertain data is frightening."
Real estate values
Several people interviewed were concerned about the
effect that the site is having on real estate values in the
area. A couple of realtors stated that they are having
trouble selling homes in Tremont City. They believed
that it was either because of the fear of the potential for
future groundwater contamination or the perception
that there is already groundwater contamination. The
realtors said that they get "hits" on their website, but
no one will come out and go through the home(s).
A few residents and local officials said that the barrel
fill site is "killing" their property values. One official
pointed out that the county appraiser is lowering
appraisals of the homes, which he believed was
because of the proximity to the barrel fill.
//
*
Residents need confidence that their water is now and will
remain safe"
- U.S. EPA official
14
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Potential surface water contamination
Sense of urgency
Several residents expressed concern about the
potential for contamination of the surface water
in the area. A couple of people said that they were
especially concerned about potential contamination
of the Mad River, which flows into the Miami River.
Another resident said that her dog was playing in the
Chapman Creek and within a couple of days he died.
She said that she did not know if it was related to the
barrel fill, but she now wonders if it was. She further
stated that there was a story told in the area about the
barrel fill having caused a fish kill in Chapman Creek.
Several interviewees spoke to U.S. EPA regarding
the sense of urgency in the community about the
cleanup. One person said that he thought it was
because of the loss of business, not health - yet.
A few people said that they believe the feeling of
urgency may be coming from the fact that, if the
groundwater were to become contaminated, it could
affect 80,000 people. Another individual interviewed
said that she thinks the sense of urgency comes from
the perception that there is already groundwater
contamination. She said that people think there are
already problems.
^y ^
Ginny Narsete interviews area residents about the barrel fill
Community Involvement Plan
15
-------
Landfill and barrel fill operation
Several people interviewed expressed concern
about how the landfill and barrel fill were operated.
One resident said that people are "mad" at Danis
Corporation, a PRP, and how they ran the landfill. He
further stated that, at one point, Danis Corporation
had offered to buy out the whole town. He said he
witnessed the operators of the landfill dig a trench
and dump waste directly on the ground in the trench
and then just cover it up with soil. He also recalled
that when they would get a large rain, the runoff
would be "all sorts of colors - blue/green/purple."
He said the retention pond is not catching anything.
Another resident said that after the landfill was
supposed to have been closed, she would still see
trucks going in and oat at night including semis and
tankers. A local official talked about how people have
been threatened. He said he felt that there had always
been "bad vibes" with Danis Corporation. Several
people said that the companies are "very much like
the mafia - very shady." Another resident said that
people don't trust the PRPs because they know how
they have operated over the years. She said she has
been involved since 1979 when there was a chlorine
leak and that over the years many things transpired.
She said, "A lot has gone down over the years, so
people are very tired." She said that people are very
jaded. This resident said she has a lot of files and
photos of those years.
U.S. EPA Remedial Project Manager Jena Sleboda Braun reviews Figure 20 of the Remedial Investigation, or RI, Report
showing groundwater sampling results.
16 Community Involvement Plan
-------
Barrel contents
Several residents stated that they were either
personally aware of bad practices at the landfill/
barrel fill or had grown up hearing stories about
bad practices. (These comments can be found under
the previous comment,"Landfill and barrel fill
operation.") These residents as well as other people
interviewed expressed concern about the contents
of the barrels and said that they worried about what
really might be in them. They said that they did not
believe U.S. EPA knows exactly what is in the barrels.
Compliance with Clean Water Act*
A couple of people interviewed questioned why, with
a sole-source aquifer potentially being affected, no
one seems to be following the Clean Water Act. These
individuals said they understood that a sole-source
aquifer should be regulated by the Clean Water
Act. One person said it felt like that point is being
"intentionally brushed under the rug."
"People need to know that
U.S. EPA will be there in the
long run."
- Local resident
* In researching this comment, it seems
as though people were actually referring
to the Safe Drinking Water Act. The
Safe Drinking Water Act has a program
designated to protect sole-source
aquifers called the Sole Source Aquifer
Protection Program. This program is one
tool to protect drinking water supplies
in areas where there are few or no
alternative sources to the groundwater
resource and where, if contamination
occurred, using an alternative source
would be extremely expensive.
The designation protects an area's
groundwater resource by requiring U.S.
EPA to review certain proposed projects
within the designated area.
All proposed projects receiving federal
funds are subject to review to ensure that
they do not endanger the water source.
This doesn't mean that the Sole Source
Aquifer Protection Program can delay
or stop development of landfills, roads,
publicly owned wastewater treatment
works or other facilities. Nor can it
impact any direct federal environmental
regulatory or remedial programs, such
as permit decisions. The Sole Source
Aquifer Protection Program's review
authority extends only to projects funded
with federal assistance that are to be
implemented in designated sole source
aquifer areas.
Community Involvement Plan
17
-------
Conflict mediation
Several people interviewed said that the consultant
hired by U.S. EPA Headquarters to mediate/facilitate
a solution/remedy did not work in a collaborative
manner. (See Page 19 for description of the
mediation/facilitation.) They said it was clearly the
mediators agenda to support U.S. EPA's selected
remedy. One official talked about how the local
people were treated like observers at the facilitated
meetings.
Several of those interviewed said that the consultant
hired by U.S. EPA Headquarters as a mediator/
facilitator was also disrespectful to them. They said
that the consultant had treated them poorly and that
he had his back to them in meetings.
Additional comments
Private well testing
A couple of residents interviewed said no one
is doing any private well testing. Both of these
residents said that they would like to see private
wells tested.
Solidification effectiveness
A couple of people stated that they did not think
that solidification would be effective if used. One
official said that solidification is not as good as
taking it out.
Barrel recycling
A few people interviewed questioned why the
barrels would not be recycled.
Incineration
Some people U.S. EPA spoke with stated that they
thought that all of the waste should be removed
and incinerated.
Moving the contamination off site
One person interviewed stated that he believed
that moving the contamination to another
location would simply be a problem for another
community in the future. He was in support of
incineration.
PRP involvement
One person U.S. EPA spoke with said that he
would like to see all of the PRPs get involved in
discussing the cleanup plans, or at least more than
just Waste Management. He said that he thought
Waste Management was acting as if it was the
only PRP actively involved and that the others are
dragging their feet. This interviewee said that he
would like all of the PRPs to come and speak to
area residents and officials.
Reverting to the state
One resident interviewed expressed concern that,
after the cleanup, the oversight will revert to the
state of Ohio.
Jobs
One local official U.S. EPA spoke with said that
the people of Tremont City need jobs and that the
residents would like to be a part of the cleanup.
Need to know U.S. EPA will be there
One person interviewed said that people also need
to know that U.S. EPA will be there in the long
run.
18
Community Involvement Plan
-------
U.S. EPA Conflict Prevention and Resolution
Center Assistance
Due to conflict that had developed between U.S. EPA,
Ohio EPA, the community and PRPs surrounding
the selection of the site cleanup plan, the U.S. EPA
Region 5 office, urged by Senator Browns office,
reached out to the Agency's Conflict Prevention and
Resolution Center for assistance. The center helps
U.S. EPA regional offices in evaluating the need for
a neutral third party and identifying and retaining a
professional facilitator/mediator. These professionals
are experienced in environmental conflicts and help
with facilitating discussions with the various people
involved. A neutral third party, such as a mediator
or facilitator, can often be helpful in preventing and
resolving conflict. Neutral third parties play a variety
of roles, including facilitating discussions, providing
parties with a "reality check" on the merits and
value of their claims, assisting with creative problem
solving and writing agreements that reflect the needs
of the parties.
For assistance with conflict resolution at the Tremont
City Barrel Fill site, the Agency hired engineer
and attorney, Joseph McMahon of Collaborative
Processes from Denver Colorado to act as a neutral
facilitator/mediator to assist U.S. EPA in resolving the
site conflicts.
Mr. McMahon conducted interviews with
community members in April 2014 and has
facilitated several technical meetings in an attempt to
bring the various parties together. The interviewees
consisted primarily of local and state officials, staff
of federal elected officials, members of two active
environmental groups and the PRPs. Attendees at
the technical meetings have included representatives
from a local environmental group, a local official,
Ohio EPA, U.S. EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey and
the PRPs and their contractors.
An initial technical meeting was held to determine
what the primary areas of disagreement were.
The group decided that there were two areas of
disagreement:
1. The groundwater flow and geology beneath
the site.
2. How the costs were calculated.
The group has since held one technical and one
general meeting to discuss these issues. This process
is currently wrapping up as of May 2015.
Collaborative Processes published an assessment
report summarizing the community interviews. The
primary issues described in the report are:
• U.S. EPA has a poor relationship with the
community, which has created a lack of trust
in the Agency.
• The community does not agree with how
and/or why U.S. EPA made the decisions it
has at the site particularly with regard to the
selecting the cleanup remedy.
• U.S. EPA has a poor relationship with Ohio
EPA when it comes to the Tremont City
Barrel Fill site.
• The community and Ohio EPA do not agree
with the all of the site technical data.
• The community and Ohio EPA question the
legality of the remedy U.S. EPA selected for
the site.
• The full assessment report and documents
summarizing the technical meetings can be
found on U.S. EPA's website:
www.epa.gov/ region5 / cleanup/tremont
Community Involvement Plan
19
-------
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT GOALS AND
ACTIVITIES
Highlights U.S. EPA's goals, activities and timeline for conducting site-specific activities to
keep residents and local officials informed and involved during the cleanup process.
When establishing the objectives for a site-
specific community involvement program, U.S.
EPA considers several factors, including federal
requirements and U.S. EPA policy that assess
the nature and extent of known or perceived site
contaminants and known community concerns and
requests.
To be effective, the community involvement program
must be designed to meet the community's need
to know, give information in a timely manner
and accommodate the community's interests and
its willingness to participate in decision-making
processes. U.S. EPA must also share information in
language the public can understand.
To meet the needs of the community and to respond
to information obtained during community
interviews and meetings and to meet federal
requirements, the following objectives have been
established for community involvement efforts:
> Enlist the support, coordination and involvement
of local Tremont City, German Township,
Springfield and Clark County officials and
community leaders.
> Enlist the support, coordination and involvement
of Ohio EPA.
> Monitor community interest in the site and
respond accordingly.
> Keep the community well informed of ongoing
and planned site activities.
> Explain technical site activities and findings in an
understandable format for residents.
> Get public input on key decisions.
> Change planned activities, where warranted,
based on community input.
> Update U.S. EPA's website regularly and provide
useful information on it for the community.
> Update Tremont City, German Township,
Springfield and Clark County officials on a
periodic basis even if no activities are occurring
at the site.
> Hold public meetings, when necessary,
within the community to give all residents an
opportunity to attend.
U.S. EPA has or will put in place the activities
described on the following pages to meaningfully
and actively engage the community in decisions
regarding the cleanup of the Tremont City Barrel Fill
site. The following plan is intended as opportunities
for communication between the community and
U.S. EPA and to address key concerns and questions
raised during the community interviews and
meetings conducted in November 2014.
20
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Specific Community
Involvement Activities
To address community concerns and questions
described in the Community Concerns section, U.S.
EPA has conducted (or will conduct) the activities
described on the following pages. Through these
activities, it is the Agency's goal to inform, involve
and engage the community during site cleanup
decisions and efforts. As the needs of the community
change, U.S. EPA will modify the community
involvement strategies to address them.
• Maintain point of contact. Ginny Narsete is
the primary liaison between U.S. EPA and the
Tremont City, German Township, Springfield and
Clark County communities. Ms. Narsete serves
as the point of contact for community members
and fields general questions about the site. For
technical site issues, Ms. Narsete coordinates with
U.S. EPA's remedial project manager, or RPM,
for the site - Jena Sleboda Braun.
U.S. EPA will include current contact information
for the project staff on all written and electronic
information and will notify the community of
any contact information changes.
U.S. EPA has designated the following people
as primary site contacts for local residents:
Ginny Narsete
Community Involvement Coordinator
312-886-4359
narsete.virginia@epa.gov
Jena Sleboda Braun
Remedial Project Manager
312-886-0272
sleb oda. j ena@ ep a.gov
They can also be reached weekdays toll-free at
800-621-8431 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30p.m.
EH
• Establish a toll-free number for residents to
ask questions and receive information. Ms.
Narsete (ext. 64359) and Ms. Sleboda Braun (ext.
60272), are located in the Chicago office and can
be reached using the toll-free number listed in
the box at left. Ask for them by name or use the
telephone extensions listed in the box on this
page. Residents can call this number as questions
or concerns arise instead of waiting for a public
meeting or to receive written information. U.S.
EPA provides this toll-free number periodically
in local newspaper advertisements and includes
the toll-free number in all fact sheets and all
other U.S. EPA communications with the public.
• Maintain communication with local officials,
agencies and community residents. U.S.
EPA interviewed local officials from Tremont
City, German Township, Springfield and Clark
County. They indicated that they would like
to be contacted with updated site information
on a periodic basis so that they can update
their constituents. U.S. EPA will continue to
maintain communication with the local officials
throughout the remainder of the cleanup process.
US. EPA also interviewed community residents
and will continue to update residents on the
progress at the site.
Community Involvement Plan
21
-------
Share site information on the Internet.
Information onsite activities and past
communications for the site are provided on the
following U.S. EPA website and will be updated as
events occur:
www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/tremont
Update and maintain the site mailing list.
A mailing list of local residents, organizations,
businesses and officials has been established for
the site. This list will be used for mailing fact
sheets, site updates, invitations to public meetings
and events and other site-related information
mailed to the community. The list will be updated
regularly to reflect address changes and changes
in elected officials and to add new people
interested in site activities.
U.S. EPA uses a site mailing list and email list
to distribute written information such as fact
sheets and meeting notifications. This is a way to
ensure that those that do not have access to the
Internet or other information sources still have a
way to receive information directly about the site
and are notified about important meetings. The
lists are for U.S. EPA use only and are not shared
with outside entities. If a community member is
interested in being placed on either list they can
contact Ginny Narsete, CIC.
*8*
Sg-
Photo Source: Clark County Public Library Website
Clark County Public Library,
Prepare and distribute fact sheets and site
updates, Fact sheets, letters and site updates
summarizing current information about the
site and describing upcoming activities may be
prepared and distributed to those on the site
mailing and email lists. These documents are
written in non-technical language and typically
done to coincide with important site activities.
U.S. EPA uses these types of documents to
give the community detailed information in a
relatively quick, simple and easy-to-understand
manner. In addition to being shared with
individuals on the site mailing list, fact sheets and
site updates are also placed in the information
repository and posted on U.S. EPA's website:
www.epa.gov/ regions/cleanup/tremont.
Establish and maintain a site-specific
information repository. U.S. EPA has set up
a local information repository for the site at the
following location:
Clark County Public Library
Reference Services
201 S. Fountain Ave.
Springfield, OH 45506
22
Community Involvement Plan
-------
The repository is a reference collection of site
information available to the public for reading
and photocopying. Documents include fact
sheets, technical reports, the CIP, general
Superfund information and other documents.
U.S. EPA adds new documents about the site as
the documents become available. Information
repositories give residents local access to site
information in forms that can be easily read
and photocopied for future use. An online
information repository is also available on the
site's web page www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/
tremont for the community to access information
electronically.
• Establish and maintain the administrative
record. A copy of the Administrative Record
for the site can be found at the library listed on
Page 22 and at the U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund
Record Center in Chicago (see Appendix B).
U.S. EPA will update the Administrative Record
as necessary. The Administrative Record gives
residents a paper trail of all documents U.S. EPA
relied on, or considered, to reach decisions about
the site cleanup.
• Conduct public meetings, hearings and
information sessions. A public meeting is
an opportunity for U.S. EPA to present specific
information and a proposed course of action.
U.S. EPA staff is available to share information
and answer questions. A public meeting is
not a formal public hearing where testimony
is received. Instead, it might be a meeting to
exchange information or comments. In addition,
U.S. EPA may hold an informal open-house style
meeting, called an availability session, where
residents can meet U.S. EPA experts one-on-
one to discuss the activities at the site. Either
type of meeting allows community members
an opportunity to express their concerns and
ask questions of the Agency, state or local
government officials. Public meetings or
availability sessions can be held at various times
throughout the investigation and cleanup process.
A meeting is typically scheduled when there
are technical milestones or the community has
expressed an interest in having a meeting.
A public hearing is a formal meeting wherein
the U.S. EPA officials hear the public's views and
concerns about a U.S. EPA action or proposal.
There are specific regulations about when the
Agency is required to consider such comments
when evaluating its actions. Public hearings
are recorded by a professional transcriber and
become part of the administrative record. The
comments are also posted on the Web.
U.S. EPA will consider conducting additional
meetings at different times and different locations
throughout the community to give all residents
an opportunity to attend as needed.
A Community Advisory Group is made up of representatives of diverse community interests.
Its purpose is to provide a public forum for community members to present and discuss their
needs and concerns related to the Superfund decision-making process. A CAG can assist
U.S. EPA in making better decisions on how to clean up a site. It offers U.S. EPA a unique
opportunity to hear-and seriously consider-community preferences for site cleanup and
remediation. However, the existence of a CAG does not eliminate the need for the Agency to
keep the community informed about plans and decisions throughout the Superfund process.
Community Involvement Plan
23
-------
• Educate the community on tools such as
community advisory groups, or CAGs,
technical assistance services for communities,
or TASC, and technical assistance grants, or
TAGs. U.S. EPA will educate the community about
the community involvement tools available to
communities. CAGs are made up of local residents
and provide a formal mechanism for community
members to have a voice in decisions and are
explained in more detail below. The TASC program
supplies communities with technical help so they
can better understand the science, regulations
and policies of environmental issues and U.S. EPA
actions. TAGs provide money for activities that
help communities participate in decision making at
eligible Superfund sites. An initial grant up to $50,000
is available to qualified community groups so they
can contract with independent technical advisors
to interpret and help the community understand
technical information about their site. TAGs are
available at Superfund sites that are on the NPL or
proposed for listing on the NPL, and for which a
response action has begun.
• Assist the communities in forming a community
advisory group. A CAG is made up of local
residents and provides a formal mechanism for
community members to have a voice in decisions.
The U.S. EPA encourages the formation of CAGs.
CAGs are eligible for technical assistance and funding
to help residents more fully understand the technical
aspects of environmental investigations, sampling
data and interpretation of results and potential
health risks. CAGs assist the U.S. EPA in making
decisions on how to clean up sites. More information
on CAGs can be found at www.epa.gov/superfund/
community/cag. U.S. EPA will hold a meeting to
present information on how to form a CAG.
• Write and distribute news releases and
public notices. U.S. EPA will prepare and release
announcements to the local newspaper such as
The Springfield News-Sun to share information
about events such as significant site investigation
findings, completion of major milestones, significant
scheduling information and other pertinent site-
related information. U.S. EPA will also provide this
information to Tremont City, German Township,
Springfield and Clark County for posting on their
respective websites.
News releases allow U.S. EPA to reach large
audiences quickly. They will also be posted on
U.S. EPAs website, www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/
tremont. U.S. EPA typically publishes news releases
and public notices to announce major events such
as comment periods, public meetings and major
milestones such as the selection of a cleanup plan.
U.S. EPA will issue news releases and public notices
as site activities progress. Copies of the news releases
and public notices will also be available in the site
information repository.
• Evaluate community involvement and outreach
efforts and make adjustments as warranted.
This CIP was designed to consider site- and
community-specific factors as well as to comply with
federal requirements. Community concerns, the
objectives of the community involvement program
for the site and specific activities to address these
concerns in this CIP were based to a large extent
on information obtained during interviews with
local residents and county, township, village and city
officials. U.S. EPA recognizes that changes in areas
such as community perceptions, information needs
and population demographics can occur over time
and that such changes may necessitate a revised
approach to conducting community involvement
activities. For this reason as well as to determine
whether the activities in this plan are achieving
their intended objectives, periodic reviews will be
done to determine whether additional activities are
warranted or whether changes to current methods
of conducting the activities outlined in this plan are
necessary. As the needs of the community changes,
U.S. EPA will modify the community involvement
strategies to address them in a CIP revision.
The following page presents the status of the activities
above.
24
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Status of Community
Community Involvement Activities
Maintain point of contact
Establish a toll-free number
Conduct community interviews and develop
Community Involvement Plan
Involvement Activities
Status
Maintain communication with local officials,
agencies and community residents
Share site information on the Internet
Update and maintain site mailing and email list
Prepare and distribute fact sheets and site
updates
Establish and maintain a site-specific
information repository
Establish and maintain the administrative
record
Conduct public meetings, hearings and
information sessions
Assist the communities in forming a
Community Advisory Group
Write and distribute news releases and public
notices
Evaluate community involvement and outreach
efforts and make adjustments as warranted
o
Ginny Narsete
312-886-4359
narsete.virginia@epa.gov
800-621-8431, Ext. 64359
Community Involvement Plan
2009 (interviews in 2004)
Revised Community Involvement
Plan 2015 (interviews in 2014)
Ongoing
www.epa.gov/ region5 / cleanup/
tremont
Completed - updated as needed
April 2000 - Investigation Begins
October 2000 - Initial Investigation
May 2001 - Phase III Investigation
June 2010 - Proposed Plan
May 2011 - Proposed Plan
Prepared as needed
Clark County Public Library
201 S. Fountain Ave.
Springfield
Clark County Public Library
201 S. Fountain Ave.
Springfield
June 2010
June 2011
As requested by the community
o
Ongoing
^ Ongoing
Community Involvement Plan
25
-------
THE COMMUNITY
This section describes the composition of Tremont City, German Township, Springfield and Clark
County and the history of community involvement with the site. All communities are located in
Clark County, Ohio.
Community Profile
Village of Tremont City
Tremont City is a village in German Township in
northern Clark County near the Champaign County
line. It was established in 1836 and has a population
of 166 residences, which are spread across 0.3 square
miles. A handful of small businesses call the village
home. Tremont City is a historic village which adds
to its small town charm. Tremont City is a vibrant
part of the community, and its residents value
keeping their homes beautiful, maintaining their
strong beliefs, and protecting their children.
The intersection of Mulberry and Main Streets in
Tremont City.
The village of Tremont City has a council-manager
form of government. The mayor and council
members are elected and they, in turn appoint a
nonpartisan city manager. The mayor and council
set policy and the city manager manages the day to
day activities of the village including developing and
managing the budget.
Tremont City Municipal Building.
's Jim/www
t MM
ifr A|-:||k \\ .
if WELCOME
TO
TREMONT CITY
WE CHERISH OUR CHILDREN
PLEASE DRIVE CAREFULLY
Governmental structure
26
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Demographics
According to the 2010 Census, the population of
Tremont City is 375 people with a median age of 39.4.
The racial make-up is predominantly white - 99.7 of
the population, or 371 people. There is one African
American, one Asian, one individual who identifies
his race as "other" and one individual of two or more
races, specifically white and African American. Of
the 375 people, six identify as Mexican. There are 166
total housing units in Tremont City, 151 of which are
occupied. Of the 151 occupied units, 100 are owner-
occupied and 99 are family households, 42 of which
have children under the age of 18 years.
According to the 2008-2012 American Community
Survey Estimate, about 84 percent have a high school
education or equivalent and about 2.3 percent have
attained a bachelor's degree or higher. The median
household income was estimated as $45,714. This
compares to the estimated median household income
for Springfield of $33,333 and for Clark County of
$43,684.
Produce sign on Mulberry Street in Tremont City.
The language spoken is predominantly English
with about 99.3 percent of the population speaking
English at home. According to the 2008-2012
American Community Survey, everyone living in
Tremont City speaks English well.
Population of Tremont City
White
African American
Asian
Two or More Races
Other
Hispanic or Latino
(Mexican)
Community Involvement Plan
27
-------
Rural German Township just outside the village of
Tremont City.
German Township
Census information specific to German Township is
not available. However, German Township occupies
about 33 square miles in Clark County. The township
is primarily rural, particularly around the barrel fill.
Governmental structure
German Township is governed by three elected
Trustees who serve four-year terms. A fourth official,
a fiscal officer, is also elected. The township provides
police, fire and emergency medical services, as well as
road and cemetery maintenance.
"What I like about the area
is the size, friendly people
and access to cultural
activities and parks
without the congestion of
a large city"
- Local resident
View of monitoring wells on the barrel fill with the landfill
in the background.
28
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Springfield
Hie city of Springfield is located in southwestern
Ohio in Clark County. It is the county seat and the
largest city in the county. Incorporated in 1850,
Springfield is a charming mid-sized, Midwestern
city. The people of Springfield are proud of their city
and cherish its size with access to good jobs as well
as cultural activities including an. area opera house,
museums and parks - all without the congestion of a
big city. It is also home to several colleges including
Wittenberg University and Clark State, which
community members enjoy. The wife of an area
frontiersman in the late 1700s and early 1800s, Simon
Kenton, named "Springfield" because of its many
springs and plentiful water.
Governmental structure
Like the village of Tremont City, the city of Springfield
has a council-manager form of government. The
mayor and council members are elected and they
appoint a nonpartisan city manager. The mayor and
council set policy and the city manager manages the
day to day activities of the city including developing
and managing the budget.
Demographics
According to the 2010 Census, the population of
Springfield is 60,608 people with a median age of
36. The racial make-up is predominantly white, 75.2
percent, followed by 18.1 percent African American,
0.8 percent Asian, 0.3 percent American Indian or
Alaskan Native, 25 people that identify themselves
as Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 1.5
percent "other" and 4 percent that are of two or more
races. Three percent of the population is Hispanic
or Latino of any race. There are 28,437 total housing
units in Springfield, 86 percent (24,459) of which
are occupied. Of the occupied units, 52.8 percent are
owner-occupied. There are 24,459 total households,
58.9 percent of which are family households with
28.3 percent of those with children under the age of
18 years.
According to the 2008-2012 American Community
Survey Estimate, about 82.3 percent have a high
school education or equivalent and about 14.7
percent have attained a bachelors degree or higher.
The median household income was estimated as
$33,333.
The language spoken
in Springfield is
predominantly English
with 95.6 percent
of the population
speaking English at
home. Approximately
1.5 percent of the
population speak
English less than very
well, of those, most
speak Spanish.
Population of Springfield
White
African American
Asian
American Indian or Alaskan
Native
: Native Hawaiian or Other
Pacific Islander
Other
I Two or More Races
I Hispanic or Latino
(of any race)
Community Involvement Plan
29
-------
Clark County
Clark County is the 21st largest county in Ohio with a
total area of 402.53 square miles. It is located between
Dayton and Columbus and is predominately rural.
Less than 1 percent of the 400 square miles consists of
urban areas.
Governmental structure
The Clark County government consists of a three-
member Board of County Commissioners. The
commissioners are elected and serve four-year terms.
They meet weekly at regularly-scheduled meetings
to discuss county business. The commissioners in
turn hire a county administrator who implements the
board's policies.
Demographics
According to the 2010 Census, the population of
Clark County is 138,333 people with a median age of
40.5. The racial make-up is predominantly white, 86.3
percent, followed by 8.8 percent African American,
0.6 percent Asian, 0.3 percent American Indian or
Alaskan Native, 51 people that identify themselves
as Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 1.4
percent "other" and 2.5 percent that are of two
or more races. Approximately 2.8 percent of the
population is Hispanic or Latino of any race. There
are 61,419 total housing units in Clark County, 89.9
percent (55,244) of which are occupied. Of the 55,244
occupied units, 68.7 percent are owner-occupied.
Of the total occupied households, 66.8 percent of
are family households and 27 percent are those with
children under the age of 18 years.
According to the 2008-2012 American Community
Survey Estimate, about 86.1 percent have a high
school education or equivalent and about 17 percent
have attained a bachelors degree or higher. Hie
median household income was estimated as $43,684.
The language spoken in Clark County is
predominantly English with 96.1 percent of the
population speaking English at home. Approximately
1.3 percent of the population speak English less than
very well, of those, most speak Spanish.
Population of Clark County
D White
¦ African American
D Asian
American Indian or Alaskan
Native
¦ Native Hawaiian or Other
Pacific Islander
¦ Other
¦ Two or More Races
¦ Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
30
Community Involvement Plan
-------
History
Clark County was established by the Ohio government
on March 1,1818. Its name is derived from General
George Rogers Clark, who was an American
Revolution war hero. The county was originally
formed from Champaign, Madison, and Greene
counties, and the first settlement was made in 1796
at Chribbs Station located at the fork of Mad River.
A member of George Clark's expedition, lohn Paul,
returned to the area and built a home in 1790. He is
believed to be the first white settler to locate in what
became Clark County. Although this was the first
settlement, it is said that prehistoric mound builders
were the first inhabitants of the area, and some
remnants of their structures can still be found in the
village of En on.
After the completion of the National Road through
Ohio in the 1830s, Clark County really began to
flourish. First was agriculture, then industry. The
combination of these two endeavors paved the way
for Springfield to become home to many leading
manufacturers of agricultural equipment such as
International Harvester Company and the Champion
Machine Company. After Clark County native,
William Whiteley, invented a self-raking reaper and
mower known as "the champion" machine in 1856,
he and a few other people created the Champion
Machine Co. in Springfield, which in the 1880s was the
largest farm equipment factory in the U.S. to operate
under one roof. Whiteley later sold his interest to
another firm who in turn joined four more firms to
create International Harvester in 1902. International
Harvester Company, now known as Navistar
International still has a large plant in Springfield.
Clark County is also
considered home to
the 4-H Club. Albert
Belmont Graham,
Superintendent of
Springfield Township
Rural schools from
1900 - 1904, is credited
with its founding. In
1902 Graham held
the first meeting of an
agriculture experiment Albert Belmont Graham
club, which he called ph(?ta SOUrQS; http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/ A ._B ._Gr aham
a "Boys' and Girls'
Agricultural Experiment Club" in the basement
at the Clark County Post Office. He had become
involved in a back-to nature movement called
the "Country Life Movement" as he saw the
youth moving to cities and becoming more
urbanized thus losing touch with the ways of
rural living. Graham sought to teach the youth
the "ways of nature". His efforts are credited
as spurring the founding of the 4-H program
across the country.
Clark County today
Clark County continues to thrive today. Interestingly,
it is the same combination of agriculture and industrial
manufacturing that spurred the areas growth a century
ago that drives the economy today. Many of the largest
employers in the area are such industries. They include
Dole Fresh Vegetables, International Truck and Engine
Corp., Bell Nursery, Bob Evans, Gordon Food Service,
Reiter Dairy, Klosterman Bakery and Woeber Mustard.
As with Albert Graham before
them, many of the residents
U.S. EPA interviewed for this
CIP stated how they enjoyed
the small town life and rural
ways of living. They said that
they were concerned about the
fate of these agricultural-based
industries, which need good
quality water to endure.
Community Involvement Plan
31
-------
Community Involvement Efforts
The graphic below shows the types of community
involvement activities U.S. EPA organizes at a site and
how they follow along with the investigation and cleanup
process. Hie following is a list of past community
involvement activities at this site:
> April 2000 - U.S. EPA wrote and distributed a
fact sheet announcing the beginning of the site
investigation. U.S. EPA also posted the fact sheet on
its website.
> October 2000 - U.S. EPA wrote a fact sheet
announcing the completion of the initial investigation
of die site and explained the results. U.S. EPA also
posted he fact sheet information on the website.
> May 2001 - US. EPA prepared a fact sheet explaining
the results of the second phase of the investigation
and announcing the beginning of phase III. U.S. EPA
also posted the fact sheet information on the website.
> July 27-29,2004 - U.S. EPA conducted community
interviews for use in developing the CIP.
> January 2009 - U.S. EPA completed the CIP.
> June 2010 - U.S. EPA wrote and distributed a fact
sheet explaining the cleanup alternatives for the site,
including U.S. EPAs recommended alternative.
> June 2010 - U.S. EPA held a public comment period
(June 10 - July 12) on the cleanup alternatives. US.
EPA announced the comment period in the fact sheet
and in an advertisement the Agency placed in the
Springfield News-Sun.
> June 22,2010 - U.S. EPA held a public meeting to
explain the results of the site investigation and the
cleanup alternatives and accept oral comments. U.S.
EPA announced the meeting in the fact sheet and the
advertisement. U.S. EPA had the meeting transcribed.
> May 2011 - U.S. EPA wrote and distributed a fact sheet
explaining its new recommended alternative.
> May 2011 - U.S. EPA held a public comment period
(May 1 - June 30) on the new cleanup alternatives. Hie
comment period was announced in the fact sheet and
in an advertisement U.S. EPA placed in the Springfield
News-Sun.
> June 22,2011 - U.S. EPA held a public meeting to
explain the results of the site investigation and the
cleanup alternatives and accept oral comments. U.S.
EPA announced the meeting in the fact sheet and
in the advertisement. U.S. EPA had the meeting
transcribed.
Community Involvement Activities at NPL Sites
PA/SI Proposed Listing nil
on NPL in Federal „ puSk: V
IMBHMffrfcirrJ
Proposed |0
Listing Comments
Register
Fin al^ Listing ^ j \ Community J' Estabi'is'ti strative
Interviews
on NPL in
Federal
Register
Public
Information! Notice of
Repository/! Admini-
- Involvement /\dmin
miiftuB - I wr
Notice and
Availability
. of Explanation of
Significant Differences
(if necessary)
Post-ROD
Significant
Changes
(if necessary)
Public
Revised , Notice of
CIP ROD
\ Availability \
Notice of Availability/
Brief Description of
Proposed ROD
Amendment
(if necessary)
Public Comment
: Period, Public Meeting,
Meeting Transcript,
¦Responsiveness
Summary
(if necessary)
Notice and
Availability of
Amended ROD
(if necessary)
Revised Pre-ROD
Significant Proposed Plan q- ,-f-
Changes and Discussion of oignillCalll
(if needed) \ Significant Changes ChanqGS
(if needed) (if necessary)
U
, Remedial
Public Briefing , Action
on J Begins
Final Engineering
Design
O&M
Proposed NPL
Deletion in
Federal
Register
Community Involvement and Outreach Center
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U.S. EPAoPhone: 703-603-XXXX
Ariel Rios BuildingOFax: 703-603-9100
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Ohttp://www
Washington, DC 20460
January 2001
.epa.gov/superfund
32
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Meeting with Wittenberg students
As part of U.S. EPAs community involvement efforts
for the Tremont City Barrel Fill site, Ginny Narsete
met with students at Wittenberg University. She gave
a presentation explaining community involvement
to two classes that had been learning about the site
and the controversy surrounding U.S. EPAs selected
cleanup plan in class.
Photo Source: Wittenberg University Website
Wittenberg University
Ginny Narsete interviews a Wittenberg University student.
Ginny Narsete explains U.S. EPA's community involvement
program to a class at Wittenberg.
Wittenberg students answer questions posed by Ginny Narsete.
Community Involvement Plan
33
-------
Members of the environmental group People for Safe Water held a rally to protest U.S. EPA's current cleanup plan for the barrel fill.
People for Safe Water shows support
for a student forum, called "Science in
Social Context" organized by Nancy
McHugh, Professor of Philosophy at
Wittenberg University.
Marilyn Welker, President of People for
Safe Water talks with members at a raUy.
*Photos courtesy of People for Safe Water.
People for Safe Water holds a letter writing
event. They, along with other local officials,
sent a letter, at right, to Governor Kasich
expressing their concerns about the barrelfill.
People
for
Safe
Water
Outreach
34
Community Involvement Plan
-------
This page was intentionally left blank.
Community Involvement Plan
-------
THE SITE
This section presents a description and history of activities at the site.
Site location Map
WASTE TRANSFER
FACILITY
TREMONT CITY LANDFILL
EPA Disclaimer: Please be advised that areas depicted in the map
have been estimated. The map does not create any rights enforceable
by any party. EPA may refine or change this data and map at any time.
36
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Site location and description
Hie Tremont City Barrel Fill site is located at 3108
Snyder Domer Road, about 1 1/2 miles west of
Tremont City Ohio, in Clark County and about 3 1/2
miles northwest of Springfield, The site is located just
north of Snyder Domer Road, which is immediately
north of Chapman Creek. Storms Creek is located
about one mile north of the site. Chapman Creek
and Storms Creek flow eastward into the Mad River,
which is about two miles east of the site. The barrel
fill location covers 8.5 acres on the northwest corner of
a larger, 80-acre property that also includes the Tremont
City Landfill and the Tremont City Waste Transfer
Facility. Hie site is located in a sparsely populated, rural
area. The land surrounding the three-acre area remain
mostly agricultural with little residential or commercial
development. (See map on Page 36.)
Site history
In 1976 Ohio EPA issued a permit for a chemical
landfill that would dispose of various industrial
waste from the barrel fill site. From 1976 to 1979,
about 51,500 drums and around 300,000 gallons
of industrial waste were disposed of in 50 waste
cells about 15 to 20 feet deep. This waste included
glues, resins, paint sludge, paint scrap and waste,
soap, shampoo, detergent, asbestos, oils and other
industrial compounds.
Disposal of liquid, biodegradable waste (margarine,
corn syrup) from food industry sources occurred in
barrel fill cells between 1979 and 1980. All disposal
operations at the site stopped in 1980 and a soil cover
of three to four feet was placed over the area. Soil was
added in subsequent years and now the cover over the
waste cells ranges from 10- to 17-feet deep.
U.S. EPA began investigating
conditions at the barrel fill
location in 1997 in response
to community concerns about
pollution releases. The Agency
did find some leaks from the
waste cells and concluded
more study was needed. In
2002, U.S. EPA negotiated a
legal agreement with the PRPs.
The legal agreement required
the PRPs to investigate
the contamination and to
reimburse U.S. EPA for any
oversight costs the Agency
incurred.
Uncovered barrels at the site.
Community Involvement Plan
37
-------
Site pollution
The investigation by the PRPs from 2003 to 2005,
found most of the waste cells were intact but did
show high levels of contaminants at the barrel fill site.
The underground waste and drums contain a variety
of "contaminants of concern" at concentrations that
exceed established safety levels. Contaminants of
concern are substances that pose a significant current
or future health risk at the site. Elevated levels of
volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, xylenes,
ethylbenzene, toluene, methylene chloride, and
semi-volatile organic compounds, or SVOCs and
metals including chromium and arsenic, were
detected in the liquid and solid waste held in the
waste cell water samples, surrounding waste and in
the shallowest groundwater layer. SVOCs were also
found in the surface water while VOCs and metals
have contaminated the soil. Results of sediment
(mud) sampling conducted next to the barrel fill
site near Chapman Creek also showed elevated
contaminant levels.
In order to evaluate updated conditions at the site, in
2013 U.S. EPA took soil, water and sediment samples
around the barrel fill site. The results of this sampling
did not show any new releases.
Legend
• Rl Monitoring Well Location
Barrel FNI
Waste Transfer Facility
TremontCity Landfill
Note: Well locations are approximate.
TremontCity Barrel Fill Site
TremontCity, Ohio
Figure 1
Monitoring Well Locations
The map above shows the boundaries of the barrel fill, the locations of the monitoring wells sampled during the remedial investigation, as
well as the proximity to Tremont City and the city of Springfield wellfield.
38
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Risks to people and environment
The investigation at the property included a
human health risk assessment that studied risks
to maintenance workers and trespassers, the most
likely people to be exposed to pollution on the site.
The assessment concluded contaminant levels in the
air, soil and surface water do not currently pose a
significant risk. However, the study did find elevated
risk to human health from future groundwater
contaminants potentially leaking into surface
water. The assessment did not evaluate the risk of
contamination to the underground layer of rock and
other material containing drinking water (called an
aquifer). But U.S. EPA has concluded contaminants
will move toward the drinking water aquifer in the
future if no cleanup action is taken. Therefore, U.S.
EPA has considered the drinking water aquifer a
factor in its evaluation of cleanup alternatives.
In a proposed plan released in June 2010, U.S. EPA
recommended Alternative 4a (described on Page
40), one of 11 cleanup alternatives considered for
the barrel fill site. U.S. EPA held a public comment
period on the alternatives from June 10 - August
11, 2010. The comment period was extended an
additional 30 days due to public interest. During the
comment period, U.S. EPA hosted a public meeting
on June 22nd.
After evaluating additional cleanup alternatives
submitted during an extended comment period, U.S.
EPA developed Alternative 9a (described on Page 40).
After evaluating Alternative 9a against the other cleanup
alternatives using the Superfund remedy selection criteria
(see Explanation of evaluation criteria box below), U.S.
EPA has determined that Alternative 9a offers the best
balance of the criteria. The resulting changes to the
preferred alternative based on new information about
additional cleanup alternatives and the modification are
significant.
Because the changes to the preferred alternative
could not have been reasonably anticipated by the
public based on the information then available to
the public, U.S. EPA issued a new (revised) proposed
plan for the preferred Alternative 9a, and opened a
second public comment period. The second public
comment period on the new proposed plan ran May
31 through July 30, 2011.
Explanation of evaluation criteria
U.S. EPA compares each cleanup option or alternative
with these nine criteria established by federal law:
1. Overall protection of human health and the
environment examines whether an option protects
living things. This standard can be met by reducing or
removing pollution or by reducing exposure to it.
2. Compliance with applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements (ARARs) ensures options
comply with federal, state and local laws.
3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence
evaluates how well an option will work over the long-
term, including how safely remaining contamination
can be managed.
4. Reduction of toxicity, mobility or volume
through treatment determines how well the option
reduces the toxicity, movement and amount of
pollution.
n
5. Short-term effectiveness compares how quickly
an option can help the situation and how much risk
exists while the option is under construction.
6. Implementability evaluates how feasible the
option is and whether materials and services are
available in the area.
7. Cost includes not only buildings, equipment,
materials and labor but also the cost of maintaining
the option for the life of the cleanup.
8. State acceptance determines whether the state
environmental agency (in this case Ohio EPA) accepts
an option. U.S. EPA evaluates this criterion after
receiving public comments.
9. Community acceptance considers the opinions
of nearby residents and other stakeholders about
the proposed cleanup plan. U.S. EPA evaluates this
standard after a public hearing and comment period.
Community Involvement Plan
39
-------
Cleanup options
Both Alternatives 4a and 9a include the
following elements:
> Fencing and signs will be placed around the site.
> Institutional controls such as prohibiting certain
future land uses and the use of site groundwater will
be placed on the property to prevent or limit human
exposure to hazardous and nonhazardous waste.
> Long-term groundwater monitoring will be
implemented to verify the effectiveness and
reliability of the cleanup.
> Contingency planning will be done in case
officials must take action if unexpected conditions
occur that may adversely affect the cleanup-for
example, contaminated groundwater moving off
site or contaminated substances remaining on site
affecting ground or surface water.
The following are summaries of the cleanup options:
Alternative 4a
Excavate liquid and hazardous waste and transport
off site for treatment and disposal; consolidate
nonhazardous solid waste and contaminated soil in
an onsite waste cell for nonhazardous solid waste -
This cleanup option involves excavation and removal
of contaminated soil above and below the barrel fill
waste cells, removal of the waste inside the cells,
and transportation of the waste and contaminated
soil to an offsite facility for treatment and disposal.
Alternative 4a includes construction of a new waste
cell for solid, nonhazardous waste and polluted but
nonhazardous soil. Hazardous and liquid waste
and hazardous soil would be transported off site for
treatment and disposal. Alternative 4a also includes
relocation of an unnamed tributary east of the barrel
fill site to help with the installation and operation of
the new solid waste cell.
Cost: $56.9 million
Alternative 9a
(This is U.S. EPAs selected cleanup option) Excavate all
waste and transport liquid waste off site for treatment
and disposal. Build a double-lined engineered waste
cell with a liquid collection system. Consolidate
hazardous and nonhazardous solid waste and
contaminated soil in the waste cell. Place a cap over the
cell and install a slurry wall around the cell along with
a liquid collection system - This alternative excavates
all hazardous solid and liquid waste, nonhazardous solid
waste and contaminated soil. Liquid waste would be
removed from excavated drums and then transported off
site for treatment and disposal. An engineered waste cell
containing a bottom clay liner and a flexible membrane
liner, which is a sheet of strong synthetic material, would
be built and designed to contain both nonhazardous and
hazardous solid waste and contaminated soil. The waste
cell would be capped and a system to collect liquids and
prevent leaks would be installed. A slurry wall would be
¦
We want the cleanup
done right the first time.
We do not want to see a
band aid put on it."
- Local official
40
Community Involvement Plan
-------
installed around the waste cell for the purpose of isolating
the waste and groundwater at the site. Another liquid
collection system would be installed as a back-up. Any
liquid collected would be pumped to an onsite storage
tank for eventual treatment and disposal.
Cost: $27.7rnilIion
In September 2011, U.S. EPA signed and approved the
Record of Decision, or ROD, that outlines U.S. EPA's
plan for cleaning up waste and contaminated soil at
the Tremont City Barrel Fill site. In order to evaluate
updated conditions at the site, U.S. EPA took soil,
water and sediment samples around the barrel fill site
in 2013. The results of this sampling did not show any
new releases.
BACKFIU.
MONLIOLHD WASTE
FORMER
AREA
OF
DRUMS
NATIVE SUTY CLAY
PUMP
APPROJQMA7E BOTTOM
OF FORMER WASTE CELLS
NATIVE SILTY CLAY
PERFORATED PIP£
BACKFILL WITH CLEAN SOIL OVERBURDEN MATERIAL FROM WASTE CELL EKCAVAT1GW
FIGURE 12
CONCEPTUAL CROSS-SECTION (LOOKING WEST) - ALTERNATIVE 9A
TREMONT CITY BARREL FILL SITE
| not TO scale Tremont City, Ohio
HW CAP
LINER
6" TOPS OIL
24" COMMON FILL
GEONET
FML
24* RECOMFACTED CLAY
<1 x crnfoac)
12* LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM
FML
W RE COMPACTED CLAY
(1 x lO*3 cm/secj
ACCESS FIT
GROUND \{1100r- 11
ACCESS PfT
NATIVE SILTY CLAY
ANGLED
ACCESS DRILLING
t075 INTERTILL
(AVQ. THICKNESS 2.7*)
BENTOWTE - SOB. SLURRY WALL
HORIZONTAL WELL LEAKAGE
COLLECTION SYSTEM
3* TO 4'
-*T NATIVE SILTY CLAY
The above diagram shows a cross-section of Alternative 9a, Tlie diagram shows a cross section of the newly engineered waste
cell, which includes a leachate collection system underlying a flexible membrane liner, a leakage collection system underlying
compacted clay soil and a slurry wall, along with a hazardous waste cover. rIhefour barrier components (cover, liner, slurry
wall, compacted clayj prevent liquid infiltration into the waste cell, and the leachate and leakage collection system removing
any liquids that may drain out reconsolidated waste. In addition, the remedy would include groundwater monitoring of wells
surrounding the site.
Community Involvement Plan
41
-------
This page was intentionally left blank.
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Appendix A
Glossary - Initials - Acronyms
Administrative Record. The body of documents
that forms the basis for the selection of a particular
response at a site. For example, the Administrative
Record for remedy selection includes all documents
that were considered or relied upon to select the
remedy through the Record of Decision.
Aquifer. An aquifer is a geological formation that is
capable of yielding a significant amount of water to a
drinking water well or spring. When rain falls to the
ground, the water does not stop moving, some seeps
underground, into pores between sand, clay and rock
formations called aquifers. Many communities obtain
their drinking water from aquifers through both public
water systems like Springfield's and through private
wells like those in the village of Tremont City and
German Township.
Arsenic. An element of varying appearance found
naturally in the environment. Arsenic has been used in
the production of boric acid, pharmaceutical products
and pesticides. It is a byproduct of copper, zinc and
lead smelting. Exposures over a long period of time
have caused birth defects and genetic damage in test
animals. There is evidence that it can cause skin, lung,
liver and bladder cancer in humans.
CAG. See Community Advisory Group.
CERCLA. See Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act.
Chromium. A metal used in the electroplating
industry to protect against corrosion and in paints to
help paint adhere to metal. Ingestion of high doses
can cause hemorrhages of the digestive tract, while
inhalation over a long period of time can cause lung
and other respiratory cancers.
CIC. See Community Involvement Coordinator.
CI P. See Community Involvement Plan.
Cleanup. Actions taken to deal with a release or threat
of release of a hazardous substance that could affect
humans and/or the environment. The term "cleanup"
is sometimes used interchangeably with the terms
"remedial action," "remediation," "removal action,"
"response action," or "corrective action."
Community. An interacting population of various
types of individuals, or species, in a common location;
a neighborhood or specific area where people live.
Community Advisory Group. A committee, task
force, or board made up of citizens affected by a
hazardous waste site. CAGs provide a public forum
for community members to present and discuss their
needs and concerns about the decision-making process
at sites affecting them.
Community Engagement. The process of involving
communities in all phases of the cleanup process.
Communities are asked to provide input on how
the cleanup will be conducted and how it may affect
community plans and goals. See also Community
Involvement.
Community Involvement Plan
A-l
-------
Community Involvement. The term used by U.S.
EPA to identify its process for engaging in dialogue and
collaboration with communities affected by Superfund
sites. U.S. EPAs community involvement approach
is founded in the belief that people have a right to
know what the Agency is doing in their community
and to have a say in it. Its purpose is to give people
the opportunity to become involved in the Agency's
activities and to help shape the decisions that are made.
Community Involvement Coordinator. The U.S.
EPA official whose lead responsibility is to involve and
inform the public about the Superfund process and
response actions in accordance with the interactive
community involvement requirements set forth in
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan.
Community Involvement Plan. A plan that outlines
specific community involvement activities that occur
during the investigation and cleanup at the site.
The CIP outlines how U.S. EPA will keep the public
informed of work at the site and the ways in which
residents can review and comment on decisions that
may affect the final actions at the site. The document
is available in the site's information repository
maintained by U.S. EPA. The CIP may be modified
as necessary to respond to changes in community
concerns, information needs and activities.
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act. A federal law
passed in 1980 and modified in 1986 by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act. Commonly
known as Superfund, CERCLA is intended to protect
people's health and the environment by investigating
and cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites. Under the program, U.S. EPA can either:
• Pay for site cleanup when parties responsible
for the contamination cannot be located or are
unwilling or unable to do the work; or
• Take legal action to force parties responsible for
site contamination to clean up the site or pay back
the federal government for the cost of the cleanup.
Contaminants. Any physical, chemical, biological or
radiological substances or matter that have an adverse
effect on air, water or soil.
Contamination. Introduction into water, air and
soil of microorganisms, chemicals, toxic substances,
wastes or wastewater in a concentration that makes the
medium unfit for its next intended use. Also applies to
surfaces of objects, buildings and various household
use products.
Dense Non-aqueous Phase Liquids. A DNAPL
is one of a group of organic substances—such as
chlorinated solvents, creosote based wood-treating
oils, coal tar wastes, and pesticides—that are relatively
insoluble in water and more dense than water.
DNAPLs tend to sink vertically through sand and
gravel aquifers to the underlying layer.
DNAPL. See Dense Non-aqueous Phase Liquids.
Ethylbenzene. Ethylbenzene is a colorless liquid
found in a number of products including gasoline and
paints. Breathing very high levels can cause dizziness
and throat and eye irritation. Breathing lower levels
has resulted in hearing effects and kidney damage in
animals.
Hazardous Substances. Materials that pose a threat
to human health and/or the environment. Typical
hazardous substances are toxic, corrosive, ignitable,
explosive or chemically reactive. Any substance
designated by U.S. EPA to be reported if a designated
quantity of the substance is spilled in the waters of
the United States or is otherwise released into the
environment.
Hazardous Waste. Byproducts that can pose a
substantial or potential hazard to human health
or the environment when improperly managed.
Hazardous wastes usually possess at least one of four
characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity or
toxicity) or appear on special U.S. EPA lists.
Information Repository. A file containing current
information, technical reports and reference
documents regarding a site. The information
repository usually is located in a public building
convenient for local residents such as a public school,
town hall or library.
A-2
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Metals. Metals include elements with a metallic luster
and are found on and beneath the earths surface, such
as iron, manganese, lead, cadmium, zinc, nickel, gold
and mercury.
Methylene Chloride. A colorless liquid with a
mild, sweet odor. It is a volatile organic compound
commonly used as a paint remover and degreaser. It is
moderately toxic by inhalation, ingestion or absorption
through the skin and can cause eyes to become
irritated. Breathing large amounts damage the central
nervous system. It is considered by U.S. EPA to be a
probable cancer-causing substance.
National Priorities List. U.S. EPA's list of serious
uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites
identified for possible long-term cleanup under
Superfund. The list is based primarily on the score a
site receives from the Hazard Ranking System. U.S.
EPA is required to update the National Priorities List at
least once a year.
NPL. See National Priorities List.
Potentially Responsible Party. Any individual or
company (including owners, operators, transporters or
generators that has been identified as being potentially
responsible for or contributing to a spill or other
contamination at a Superfund site. Whenever possible,
through administrative and legal action, U.S. EPA
requires PRPs to clean up hazardous sites that have
been contaminated.
Proposed Plan. A plan for a site cleanup that is
available to the public for comment.
PRP. See Potentially Responsible Party.
Public. The community or people in general or a part
or section of the community grouped because of a
common interest or activity.
Public Comment Period. A formal opportunity for
community members to review and contribute written
comments on various U.S. EPA documents or actions.
Public Meeting. Formal public sessions that are
characterized by a presentation to the public followed
by a question-and-answer session. Formal public
meetings may involve the use of a court reporter and
the issuance of transcripts. Formal public meetings
are required only for the proposed plan and Record of
Decision amendments.
Record of Decision. A ROD is a legal, technical
and public document that explains which cleanup
alternative will be used at a Superfund NPL site. The
ROD is based on information and technical analysis
generated during the remedial investigation and
feasibility study and consideration of public comments
and community concerns.
RD/RA. See Remedial Design/Remedial Action.
Remedial Design/Remedial Action. Remedial
design is a phase in the CERCLA response process
in which technical drawings are developed for the
chosen remedy, costs for implementing the remedy
are estimated and roles and responsibilities of U.S.
EPA, states and contractors are determined. During
the remedial action phase, the remedy is implemented
generally by a contractor, with oversight and
inspection conducted by U.S. EPA, the state or both.
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study.
The remedial investigation is a study designed
to collect the data necessary to determine the
nature and extent of contamination at a site. The
feasibility study is an analysis of the practicality of a
proposal—e.g., a description and analysis of potential
cleanup alternatives for a site such as one on the
National Priorities List. The feasibility study usually
recommends a selection of a cost-effective alternative.
It usually starts as soon as the remedial investigation is
under way; together, they are commonly referred to as
the remedial investigation/feasibility study.
Remedial Project Manager. The U.S. EPA official
who is the technical lead on a project.
Responsiveness Summary. A summary of oral and/
or written public comments received by U.S. EPA
during a comment period on key U.S. EPA documents
and U.S. EPA's responses to those comments.
Community Involvement Plan
-------
RI/FS. See Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study.
ROD. See Record of Decision.
RPM. See Remedial Project Manager.
SARA. See Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act.
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds. SVOCs are
chemicals which have a tendency to volatilize, or
evaporate, at temperatures higher than volatile organic
compounds. Examples of SVOCs are phenols and
phthalates. Because of the tendency to evaporate
when exposed to air, SVOCs disappear more rapidly
from surface water than from groundwater. Since
groundwater does not come into contact with air,
SVOCs are not easily released and can be remain in
groundwater that is being used for drinking water,
posing a threat to human health. Some SVOCs are
believed to cause cancer in humans.
SVOCs. See Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act. Modifications to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act, enacted on October 17,1986.
Superfund Alternative. A Superfund Alternative site
follows the same investigation and cleanup process as a
traditional Superfund site without being listed on the NPL.
Superfund. The program operated under the
legislative authority of CERCLA that funds and carries
out U.S. EPA solid waste emergency and long-term
removal and remedial activities. These activities
include establishing the National Priorities List,
investigating sites for inclusion on the list, determining
their priority and conducting and/or supervising
cleanup and other remedial actions.
Toluene. Toluene is a clear, colorless liquid with a
distinctive smell. It occurs naturally in crude oil. It
is also produced in the process of making gasoline
and other fuels from crude oil and making coke from
coal. Toluene is used in making paints, paint thinners,
fingernail polish, lacquers, adhesives, and rubber
and in some printing and leather tanning processes.
Exposure to toluene may affect the nervous system.
Exposure to low to moderate levels can cause tiredness,
confusion, weakness, drunken-type actions, memory
loss, nausea, loss of appetite, and hearing and color
vision loss. These symptoms usually disappear when
exposure is stopped. Inhaling high levels of toluene
in a short time can make you feel light-headed, dizzy,
or sleepy. It can also cause unconsciousness, and even
death. Exposure to high levels of toluene may affect
your kidneys. Studies in humans and animals generally
indicate that toluene does not cause cancer.
VOCs. See Volatile Organic Compounds.
Volatile Organic Compounds. A type of organic
compound that tends to change from a liquid to a
gas at low temperatures when exposed to air. As a
result of this tendency, VOCs disappear more rapidly
from surface water than from groundwater. Since
groundwater does not come into contact with air,
VOCs are not easily released and can be remain in
groundwater that is being used for drinking water,
posing a threat to human health. Some VOCs are
believed to cause cancer in humans.
Xylenes. Xylene is a colorless, sweet-smelling
liquid that catches on fire easily. It occurs naturally
in petroleum and coal tar. Chemical industries
produce xylene from petroleum. It is one of the
top 30 chemicals produced in the United States in
terms of volume. Xylene is used as a solvent and in
the printing, rubber, and leather industries. It is also
used as a cleaning agent, a thinner for paint, and in
paints and varnishes. It is found in small amounts in
airplane fuel and gasoline. Exposure to xylene occurs
in the workplace and when you use paint, gasoline,
paint thinners and other products that contain it.
People who breathe high levels may have dizziness,
confusion, and a change in their sense of balance. U.S.
EPA has found that there is insufficient information to
determine whether or not xylene is carcinogenic.
-4
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Appendix B
Information Repository, Administrative Record, Websites and Possible Meeting Locations
Local Information Repository Possible Meeting Locations
Clark County Public Library
Reference Services
201 S. Fountain Ave.
Springfield, OH 45502
937-328-6908
www.ccpl.lib.oh.us/
QQQD
CLARK
COUNTY
PUBLIC
LIBRARY
Official Information Repository
U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund Record Center
Room 711, 7th Floor
Ralph Metcalfe Federal Building
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
www.epa.gov/ reg5sfun/sfd/foia/ sf-
records-center.html
U.S. EPA Site Web Page
wivw.epa.gov/ region5/cleanup/
tremon t
German Township Fire House
3940 Lawrenceville Dr.
Springfield, OH 45504
937-969-8333
Northwestern Jr./Sr. High School
5780 Troy Road
Springfield, OH 45502
937-964-1324
Community Involvement Plan
B-l
-------
This page was intentionally left blank.
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Appendix C
List of Contacts (Information is current as of May 2015)
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Officials
Jena Sleboda Braun
Remedial Project Manager
Superfund Division, SR-6J
U.S. EPA
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
312-886-0272 or 800-621-8431 Ext. 60272
sleboda.jena@epa.gov
Ginny Narsete
Community Involvement Coordinator
Superfund Division SI-7J
U.S. EPA
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-886-4359 or 800-621-8431 Ext. 64359
narsete.virginia@epa.gov
Federal Elected Officials
Robert Portman
Senator
448 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-3504
202-224-3353
www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact-form
37 W. Broad St., Room 300
Columbus, OH 43215
614-469-6774
Sherrod Brown
Senator
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-2315
www.brown.senate.gov/ contact/
200 N. High St., Room 614
Columbus, OH 43215
614-469-2083
John A. Boehner
U.S. Representative
1011 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-6205
http://johnboehner.house.gov/contact/
76 E. High St., 3rd Floor
Springfield, OH 45502
937-322-1120
State Elected Officials
John Kasich
Governor
77 S. High St., 30th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-3555
Christopher Widener (District 10)
State Senator
1 Capitol Square, 1st Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-3780
www.ohiosenate.gov/senate/widener/contact
Community Involvement Plan
C-l
-------
Robert Hackett (District 74)
State Representative
77 S. High St., 11th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-1470
www.ohiohouse.gov/bob-d-hackett/contact
Kyle Koehler (District 79)
State Representative
77 S. High St., 11th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-2038
www.ohiohouse.gov/kyle-koehler/contact
Mike DeWine
Attorney General
30 E. Broad St., 14th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-4986
Jon Husted
Secretary of State
180 E. Broad St., 16th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-2655
877-767-6446 (toll-free)
Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency Officials
Jeff Martin
Ohio EPA
Assessment, Remediation and Corrective Action Section
Central District Office
P.O. Box 1049
Columbus, OH 43216-1049
614-644-2294
martin.jeffrey@epa.ohio.gov
Chuck Mellon
Ohio EPA
Remedial Response
Southwest District Office
401 E. Fifth St.
Dayton, Ohio 45402
937-285-6056
chuck.mellon@epa.ohio.gov
Clark County Officials
Nathan Kennedy, CPA
County Administrator
50 E. Columbia St.
Springfield, OH 45501
937-521-2005
nkennedy@clarkcountyohio.gov
Clark County Board of Commissioners
937-521-2005
commission@clarkcountyohio.gov
Commissioners
John Detrick
David Herier
Richard Lohnes
Clark County Emergency Management Agency
3130 E. Main St., Suite IE
Springfield, OH 45505
937-521-2175
Lisa D'Allessandris, Director
937-521-2176
ldallessandris@clarkcountyohio.gov
Clark County Solid Waste District
1602 W. Main St.
Springfield, OH 45504
937-521-2020
Chuck Bauer, Director
cbauer@clarkcountyohio.gov
Ray Anderson, Recycling Facility Worker
randerson@clarkcountyohio.gov
George Bennett, Environmental Officer
gbennett@clarkcountyohio.gov
John Haughey, Recycling Facility Manager
jhaughey@clarkcountyohio.gov
Bonnie Martens, Great American Cleanup Assistant
bmartens@clarkcountyohio.gov
Linda Mitchell, Program Assistant
lmitchell@clarkcountyohio.gov
Ohio EPA
C-2
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Steve Schlather, Program Coordinator
sschlather@clarkcountyohio.gov
Brad Tillman, Environmental Officer
btillman@clarkcountyohio.gov
Charles Patterson, Health Commissioner
Clark County Combined Health District
529 E. Home Road
Springfield, OH 45503
937-390-5600
cpatterson@ccchd.com
Clark County
Combined
Health District
German Township Officials
German Township Offices
3940 Lawrenceville Drive
Springfield, OH 45504
937-964-1661
Trustees
Charles Metzger
Bob Clark
Rodney Kaffenbarger
Fiscal Officer
Angela Griest
Meet at 7:00 p.m. on the second Monday of each
month.
Village of Tremont City Officials
WELCOME
TO
TREMONT CITY
WE CHESIiH QUR CHILDHEN
r-LE^SF PRIVf CAREFULLV
Village of Tremont City
Municipal Building
26 E Main St.
Tremont City, OH 45372
937-969-8281
tremontclerk@bizwoh.rr.com
The following Tremont City officials can be
reached at the above address, phone and email:
Paula Johnson, Mayor
Mark Hunger, Clerk
Donald Roberts, Police Chief
Council members
Tony Flood, President
Larry Blevins
Steve Hieder
Tony Flood II
Andrew Everingham
Steve Owston
Meet at 7:30 pm 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of the month
City of Springfield Officials
Springfield City Hall
76 E High St, 3rd Floor
Springfield, OH 45502
Warren R. Copeland, Mayor
937-324-7341
cchappell@ci.springfield.oh.us
Jim Bodenmiller, City Manager
937-324-7300
jbodenmiller@ci.springfield.oh.us
Connie J. Chappell, CMC, Clerk
937-324-7341
cchappell@ci.springfield.oh.us
City Commissioners
Kevin O'Neill, Assistant Mayor
Joyce Chilton
Karen B. Duncan
Daniel J. Martin
C. Nicholas Heimlich, Fire Chief
Fire Station # 1
350 N. Fountain Ave.
Springfield, OH 45504
937-324-7605
cheimlich@ci.springfield.oh.us
Stephen P. Moody, Police Chief
Public Safety Building
130 N. Fountain Ave.
Springfield, OH 45502
937-324-7685
spd@ci.springfield.oh.us
The City of f* 1 1
Sprmgneld
r o Ohio
Community Involvement Plan
C-3
-------
Interested Parties
Greater Springfield Chamber of Commerce
20 S. Limestone St.
Suite 100
Springfield, OH 45502
937-325-7621
Marilyn Welker
President
People for Safe Water
937-484-6988
mwelker@ctcn.net
Nancy McHugh
Professor of Philosophy
Department of Philosophy
Wittenberg University
Springfield, OH 45501
nmchugh @wittenb erg. edu
Newspapers
Springfield News-Sun
202 N. Limestone St.
Springfield, OH 45503
937-328-0300
The Springfield Paper
300 E. Auburn Ave.
Springfield, OH 45505
937-327-9017
editor@pendapublishing.com
Radio
WBLY Radio
2 W. Columbia St.
Springfield, OH 45502
937-342-3720
http://wblyspr ingfield. com /
stationmanager@wblyspringfield.com
WHIO - 95.7 FM/1290 AM
1611 S. Main St.
Dayton, OH 45409
937-259-2111
Jeremy.Ratliff@coxinc.com
WPKO - 98.3 FM/WBLL - 1390 AM
1501 County Road 235
Bellefontaine, OH 43311-9505
937-592-1045
btipple@wpko.com
WEEC -100.7 FM
1205 Whitefield Circle
Xenia, OH 45385
937-424-1640
WING -1410 AM/WCLI -101.5 FM
717 E. David Road
Dayton, OH 45429
937-294-5858
WING: mark.neal@alphamediausa.com
WCLI: brad.waldo@alphamediausa.com
WYSO-91.3 FM
150 E. South College St.
Yellow Springs, OH 45387
937-767-6420
wyso@wyso.org
Television
WHIO - TV 7, CBS
1611 S. Main St.
Dayton, OH 45409
937-259-2111
7online@whiotv.com
WDTN - TV 2, NBC
4595 S. Dixie Dr.
Moraine, OH 45439
937-293-2101
newstips@wdtn.com
WKEF - ABC 22/FOX 45
45 Broadcast Plaza
Dayton, OH 45417
937-263-4500
comments@abc22now.com
C-4
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Appendix D
Community Engagement and the Superfund Process
Superfund is an
environmental cleanup
program enabled by
a federal law enacted
in 1980 known as
the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and
Liability Act, or CERCLA,
also called Superfund.
In 1986, another law, the
Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act, or SARA, reauthorized CERCLA
to continue Superfund cleanup activities. The CERCLA
law gives U.S. EPA the authority to require those parties
responsible for creating hazardous waste sites to clean up
those sites or to reimburse the government if U.S. EPA
cleans up the site. U.S. EPA compels responsible parties
to clean up hazardous waste sites through administrative
orders, consent decrees and other legal settlements. U.S.
EPA is authorized to enforce the Superfund laws within
Indian reservations, in all 50 states and in U.S. territories.
Superfund site identification, monitoring and response
activities are coordinated with state, tribal and territorial
environmental protection or waste management agencies.
There are several steps involved in cleaning up a
contaminated site. Once U.S. EPA has been made aware of
a contaminated site from individual citizens, local, tribal
or state agencies or others, U.S. EPA follows a step-by-step
process (see the next page of this Appendix) to determine
the best way to clean up the site and protect human health
and the environment.
If the site poses an immediate threat to public health or the
environment, U.S. EPA can intervene with an emergency
response action. The goal of U.S. EPA's Emergency Response
and Removal Program is to protect the public and the
environment from immediate threats posed by the release
or discharge of hazardous substances.
The Superfund program encourages active dialogue
between communities affected by the release of hazardous
substances and all of the agencies responsible for carrying
out or overseeing cleanup actions. U.S. EPA considers
community involvement to be an important part of the
Superfund program and opportunities for community
involvement occur throughout the process. At each step
in the process, there are opportunities for various levels
of community involvement (see the next page of this
Appendix).
Visit these U.S. EPA websites for more information on
the Superfund process.
Superfund: www.epa.gov/superfund
Cleanup Process: www.epa.gov/superfund/deanup/index.htm
Community Involvement: www.epa.gov/superfund/community/index.htm
Community Involvement Plan
D-l
-------
Superfund
Process Steps
• Gather historical site condition information to
determine if further investigation is needed
• Use Hazard Ranking System to evaluate risks
• Publish notice in Federal Register and local media
announcing proposed listing and public comment
period
• Once listed, EPA publishes notice in Federal Register
• and responds to comments
• Determines the nature and extent of contamination,
evaluates human health and ecological risk
f • Presents the cleanup alternatives and is issued for
a 30-day public comment period
Preliminary
Assessment/Site
Inspection
National
Priorities List
Process
Remedial
Investigation/
Feasibility Study
Proposed
Plan
Community Involvement
Opportunities
• Provide any information you have about the site
to the EPA
• Read information about EPA's proposal to list the site
• Contact EPA for questions or additional information
• If concerned, submit comments during the Public
Comment period
• Consider forming a Community Advisory Group and
applying for a Technical Assistance Grant
• Participate in public meetings
• Contact community involvement coordinator with
questions
• Read proposed plan
• Participate in public meetings
• Visit Information Repository
• Contains the selected remedy for a site and the
Responsiveness Summary which provides
responses to all comments received during the
public comment period
Record of Decision
• Read the ROD for site cleanup
• Participate in public events or visit the information
repository
• Contact site CIC with questions
f • Includes preparing for and doing the bulk of the
cleanup at the site
• Final design is developed
• Any necessary physical construction has been
completed (even though final cleanup levels may
not have been reached)
• Ensures that Superfund cleanups provide
long-term protection of human health and
environment
• Monitoring continues
• All site work completed
• EPA requests comments on upcoming deletion of
site from NPL list
Remedial Design/
Remedial Action
• Learn about the final design
• Work through your CAG, TAG orTechnical Assistance
Services for Communities provider for information
• Attend meetings and site visits
• Contact CIC with questions
Construction
Completion
Post-Construction
Completion
NPL
Deletion
• Attend meetings and site visits
• Contact CIC with questions
• Work through your CAG, TAG or TASC provider for
information
• Visit the site or arrange a site tour through EPA
• Contact CIC with questions
• Read EPA's proposal and Responsiveness Summary
• Read the final deletion report
• Plan a community event to celebrate deletion
from NPL
After site is clean:
• EPA works with community to help return site to
productive use
¦ EPA will ensure that any land use restrictions
continue to be met
Reuse
• Work with EPA and neighbors to plan the
redevelopment
• Explore EPA's tools and resources
• Be supportive of redevelopment plans once they've
been agreed upon
D-2
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Appendix E
Fact Sheets
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Fact Sheets
on contaminants of concern and Super fund Alternative Site
Fact Sheet
Fact Sheets:
Arsenic
Chromium
Ethyl benzene
Methylene Chloride
Toluene
Superfund Alternative Approach
Community Involvement Plan
E-l
-------
This page was intentionally left blank.
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Arsenic -ToxFAQs1
CAS # 7440-38-2
This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions (FAQs) about arsenic. For more information, call the CDC
Information Center at 1-800-232-4636.This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their
health effects. It is important you understand this information because this substance may harm you.The effects of exposure
to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether
other chemicals are present.
HIGHLIGHTS: Exposure to higher than average levels of arsenic occur mostly in the
workplace, near hazardous waste sites, or in areas with high natural levels. At high
levels, inorganic arsenic can cause death. Exposure to lower levels for a long time
can cause a discoloration of the skin and the appearance of small corns or warts.
Arsenic has been found in at least 1,149 of the 1,684 National Priority List (NPL) sites
identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
What is arsenic?
Arsenic is a naturally occurring element widely distributed
in the earth's crust. In the environment, arsenic is
combined with oxygen, chlorine, and sulfur to form
inorganic arsenic compounds. Arsenic in animals and
plants combines with carbon and hydrogen to form
organic arsenic compounds.
Inorganic arsenic compounds are mainly used to preserve
wood. Copper chromated arsenate (CCA) is used to
make "pressure-treated" lumber. CCA is no longer used
in the U.S. for residential uses; it is still used in industrial
applications. Organic arsenic compounds are used as
pesticides, primarily on cotton fields
and orchards.
What happens to arsenic when it enters
the environment?
• Arsenic occurs naturally in soil and minerals and may
enter the air, water, and land from wind-blown dust
and may get into water from runoff and leaching.
• Arsenic cannot be destroyed in the environment.
It can only change its form.
• Rain and snow remove arsenic dust particles from
the air.
• Many common arsenic compounds can dissolve in
water. Most of the arsenic in water will ultimately end
up in soil or sediment.
• Fish and shellfish can accumulate arsenic; most of
this arsenic is in an organicform called arsenobetaine
that is much less harmful.
How might I be exposed to arsenic?
• Ingesting small amounts present in yourfood and
water or breathing air containing arsenic.
• Breathing sawdust or burning smoke from wood
treated with arsenic.
• Living in areas with unusually high natural levels of
arsenic in rock.
• Working in a job that involves arsenic production or
use, such as copper or lead smelting, wood treating,
or pesticide application.
How can arsenic affect my health?
Breathing high levels of inorganic arsenic can give you a
sore throat or irritated lungs.
Ingesting very high levels of arsenic can result in death.
Exposure to lower levels can cause nausea and vomiting,
decreased production of red and white blood cells,
abnormal heart rhythm, damage to blood vessels, and a
sensation of "pins and needles" in hands and feet.
Ingesting or breathing low levels of inorganic arsenic for
a long time can cause a darkening of the skin and the
appearance of small"corns"or"warts"on the palms, soles,
and torso.
Skin contact with inorganic arsenic may cause redness
and swelling.
Almost nothing is known regarding health effects
of organic arsenic compounds in humans. Studies
in animals showthat some simple organic arsenic
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Toxicology and Health Human Sciences
Community Involvement Plan
E-3
-------
Arsenic
CAS # 7440-38-2
compounds are less toxic than inorganic forms. Ingestion
of methyl and dimethyl compounds can cause diarrhea
and damage to the kidneys.
How likely is arsenic to cause cancer?
Several studies have shown that ingestion of inorganic
arsenic can increase the risk of skin cancer and cancer
in the liver, bladder, and lungs. Inhalation of inorganic
arsenic can cause increased risk of lung cancer. The
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and
the EPA have determined that inorganic arsenic is a known
human carcinogen. The International Agency for Research
on Cancer (IARC) has determined that inorganic arsenic is
carcinogenic to humans.
How can arsenic affect children?
There is some evidence that long-term exposure to arsenic
in children may result in lower IQ scores.There is also
some evidence that exposure to arsenic in the
womb and early childhood may increase mortality in
young adults.
There is some evidence that inhaled or ingested arsenic
can injure pregnant women or their unborn babies,
although the studies are not definitive. Studies in animals
show that large doses of arsenic that cause illness in
pregnant females, can also cause low birth weight, fetal
malformations, and even fetal death. Arsenic can cross
the placenta and has been found in fetal tissues. Arsenic is
found at low levels in breast milk.
How can families reduce the risks of
exposure to arsenic?
• If you use arsenic-treated wood in home projects,
you should wear dust masks, gloves, and protective
clothing to decrease exposure to sawdust.
• If you live in an area with high levels of arsenic in
water or soil, you should use cleaner sources of water
and limit contact with soil.
• If you work in a job that may expose you to arsenic,
be aware that you may carry arsenic home on your
clothing, skin, hair, or tools. Be sure to shower and
change clothes before going home.
Is there a medical test to determine
whether I've been exposed to arsenic?
There are tests available to measure arsenic in your blood,
urine, hair, and fingernails.The urine test is the most
reliable test for arsenic exposure within the last few days.
Tests on hair and fingernails can measure exposure to high
levels of arsenic over the past 6-12 months. These tests can
determine if you have been exposed to above-average
levels of arsenic.They cannot predict whether the arsenic
levels in your body will affect your health.
Has the federal government made
recommendations to protect
human health?
The EPA has set limits on the amount of arsenic that
industrial sources can release to the environment and
has restricted or cancelled many of the uses of arsenic
in pesticides. EPA has set a limit of 0.01 parts per million
(ppm) for arsenic in drinking water.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has set a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10
micrograms of arsenic per cubic meter of workplace air
(10 pg/m3) for 8 hour shifts and 40 hour work weeks.
References
Agency forToxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
2007.Toxicological Profile for Arsenic (Update). Atlanta,
GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Public Health Service.
Where can I get more information?
For more information, contact the Agency forToxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology and
Human Health Sciences, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-57, Atlanta, GA 30333.
Phone: 1-800-232-4636
ToxFAQs™ Internet address via WWW is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp.
ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate,
and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state
health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns.
August2007 Page 2 of 2
E-4
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Chromium - ToxFAQs1
CAS # 7440-47-3
This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions (FAQs) about chromium. For more information, call the
CDC Information Center at 1-800-232-4636.This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and
their health effects. It is importantyou understand this information because this substance may harm you.The effects of
exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, howyou are exposed, personal traits and habits,
and whether other chemicals are present.
HIGHLIGHTS: Exposure to chromium occurs from ingesting contaminated food or
drinking water or breathing contaminated workplace air. Chromium(VI) at high levels
can damage the nose and cause cancer. Ingesting high levels of chromium(VI) may
result in anemia or damage to the stomach or intestines. Chromium(lll) is an essential
nutrient. Chromium has been found in at least 1,127 of the 1,669 National Priorities
List (NPL) sites identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
What is chromium?
Chromium is a naturally occurring element found in rocks,
animals, plants, and soil. It can exist in several different
forms. Depending on the form it takes, it can be a liquid,
solid, or gas.The most common forms are chromium(O),
chromium(lll), and chromium(VI). No taste or odor is
associated with chromium compounds.
The metal chromium, which is the chromium(O) form, is
used for making steel. Chromium(VI) and chromium(lll)
are used for chrome plating, dyes and pigments, leather
tanning, and wood preserving.
What happens to chromium when it
enters the environment?
• Chromium can be found in air, soil, and water after
release from the manufacture, use, and disposal
of chromium-based products, and during the
manufacturing process.
• Chromium does not usually remain in the
atmosphere, but is deposited into the soil and water.
• Chromium can easily change from one form to
another in water and soil, depending on the
conditions present.
• Fish do not accumulate much chromium in their
bodies from water.
How might I be exposed to chromium?
• Eating food containing chromium(lll).
• Breathing contaminated workplace air or skin contact
during use in the workplace.
• Drinking contaminated well water.
• Living near uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites containing chromium or industries that
use chromium.
How can chromium affect my health?
Chromium(lll) is an essential nutrient that helps the body
use sugar, protein, and fat.
Breathing high levels of chromium(VI) can cause irritation
to the lining of the nose, nose ulcers, runny nose, and
breathing problems, such as asthma, cough, shortness
of breath, or wheezing. The concentrations of chromium
in air that can cause these effects may be different for
different types of chromium compounds, with effects
occurring at much lower concentrations for chromium(VI)
compared to chromium(lll).
The main health problems seen in animals following
ingestion of chromium(VI) compounds are irritation and
ulcers in the stomach and small intestine and anemia.
Chromium(lll) compounds are much less toxic and do not
appear to cause these problems.
Sperm damage and damage to the male reproductive
system have also been seen in laboratory animals exposed
to chromium(VI).
Skin contact with certain chromium(VI) compounds can
cause skin ulcers. Some people are extremely sensitive
tochromium(VI) or chromium(lll). Allergic reactions
consisting of severe redness and swelling of the skin have
been noted.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Toxicology and Health Human Sciences
Community Involvement Plan
E-5
-------
Chromium
CAS # 7440-47-3
How likely is chromium to cause cancer?
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS),
the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC),
and the EPA have determined that chromium(VI)
compounds are known human carcinogens.
In workers, inhalation of chromium(VI) has been shown to
cause lung cancer. Chromium(VI) also causes lung cancer
in animals. An increase in stomach tumors was observed
in humans and animals exposed to chromium(VI) in
drinking water.
How can chromium affect children?
It is likely that health effects seen in children exposed to
high amounts of chromium will be similar to the effects
seen in adults.
We do not know if exposure to chromium will result in
birth defects or other developmental effects in people.
Some developmental effects have been observed in
animals exposed to chromium(VI).
How can families reduce the risk of
exposure to chromium?
• Children should avoid playing in soils near
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites where chromium
may have been discarded.
• Chromium is a component of tobacco smoke. Avoid
smoking in enclosed spaces like inside the home or
car in order to limit exposure to children and other
family members.
• Although chromium(lll) is an essential nutrient,you
should avoid excessive use of dietary supplements
containing chromium.
Is there a medical test to determine
whether I've been exposed to chromium?
Since chromium(lll) is an essential element and naturally
occurs in food, there will always be some level of
chromium in your body. Chromium can be measured in
hair, urine, and blood.
Higher than normal levels of chromium in blood or
urine may indicate that a person has been exposed
to chromium. However, increases in blood and urine
chromium levels cannot be used to predict the kind of
health effects that might develop from that exposure.
Has the federal government made
recommendations to protect
human health?
The EPA has established a maximum contaminant level of
0.1 mg/L for total chromium in drinking water.
The FDA has determined that the chromium
concentration in bottled drinking water should not
exceed 0.1 mg/L.
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration
(OSHA) has limited workers'exposure to an average of
0.005 mg/m3chromium(VI), 0.5 mg/m3 chromium(lll),
and 1.0 mg/m3 chromium(O) for an 8-hour workday,
40-hour workweek.
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
2012.Toxicological Profile for Chromium. Atlanta, GA: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service.
Where can I get more information?
For more information, contact the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology and
Human Health Sciences, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-57, Atlanta, GA 30333.
Phone: 1-800-232-4636
ToxFAQs™ Internet address via WWW is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp.
ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate,
and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state
health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns.
Page 2 of 2
E-6
Community Involvement Plan
-------
Ethyl benzene- ToxFAQs™
CAS #100-41-4
This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions (FAQs) about ethyl benzene. For more information, call
the CDC Information Center at 1-800-232-4636.This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances
and their health effects. It is important you understand this information because this substance may harm you.The effects of
exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and
whether other chemicals are present.
HIGHLIGHTS: Ethylbenzene is a colorless liquid found in a number of products including
gasoline and paints. Breathing very high levels can cause dizziness and throat and eye
irritation. Breathing lower levels has resulted in hearing effects and kidney damage in
animals. Ethylbenzene has been found in at least 829 of 1,699 National Priorities List
(NPL) sites identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
What is ethylbenzene?
Ethylbenzene is a colorless,flammable liquid that smells
like gasoline.
It is naturally found in coal tar and petroleum and is also
found in manufactured products such as inks, pesticides,
and paints.
Ethylbenzene is used primarily to make another chemical,
styrene. Other uses include as a solvent, in fuels, and to
make other chemicals.
What happens to ethylbenzene when it
enters the environment?
• Ethylbenzene moves easily into the air from water
and soil.
• It takes about 3 days for ethylbenzene to be broken
down in air into other chemicals.
• In surface water, ethylbenzene breaks down by
reacting with other chemicals found naturally
in water.
• Ethylbenzene can move through soil
into groundwater.
• In soil, it is broken down by bacteria.
How might I be exposed to ethylbenzene?
• If you live in a city or near many factories or
heavily traveled highways, you may be exposed to
ethylbenzene in air.
• Releases of ethylbenzene into the air occur from
burning oil, gas, and coal and from industries
using ethylbenzene.
• Ethylbenzene is not often found in drinking water.
Higher levels may be found in residential drinking
water wells near landfills, waste sites, or leaking
underground fuel storage tanks.
• Exposure can occur if you work in an industry where
ethylbenzene is used or made.
• Exposure can occur if you use products containing it,
such as gasoline, carpet glues, varnishes, and paints.
How can ethylbenzene affect my health?
Exposure to high levels of ethylbenzene in air for short
periods can cause eye and throat irritation. Exposure to
higher levels can result in dizziness.
Irreversible damage to the inner ear and hearing has
been observed in animals exposed to relatively low
concentrations of ethylbenzene for several days to weeks.
Exposure to relatively low concentrations of ethylbenzene
in air for several months to years causes kidney damage in
animals.
How likely is ethylbenzene to
cause cancer?
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
has determined that ethylbenzene is a possible
human carcinogen.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Toxicology and Health Human Sciences
Community Involvement Plan
E-7
-------
Ethylbenzene
CAS# 100-41-4
How does ethylbenzene affect children?
There are no studies evaluating the effects of ethylbenzene
exposure on children or immature animals. It is likely that
children would have the same health effects as adults. We
do not know whether children would be more sensitive
than adults to the effects of ethylbenzene.
We do not know if ethylbenzene will cause birth defects
in humans. Minor birth defects and low birth weight
have occurred in newborn animals whose mothers were
exposed to ethylbenzene in air during pregnancy.
How can families reduce the risk of
exposure to ethylbenzene?
• Use adequate ventilation to reduce exposure to
ethylbenzene vapors from consumer products such as
gasoline, pesticides, varnishes and paints, and newly
installed carpeting.
• Sometimes older children sniff household chemicals,
including ethylbenzene, in an attempt to get high.
Talk with your children about the dangers of
sniffing chemicals.
• Household chemicals should be stored out of reach
of children to prevent accidental poisoning. Always
store household chemicals in their original containers;
never store them in containers that children would
find attractive to eat or drinkfrom, such as old soda
bottles. Gasoline should be stored in a gasoline can
with a locked cap.
Is there a medical test to show whether
I've been exposed to ethylbenzene?
Ethylbenzene is found in the blood, urine, breath, and
some body tissues of exposed people. The most common
way to test for ethylbenzene is in the urine. This test
measures substances formed by the breakdown of
ethylbenzene. Because these substances leave the body
very quickly, this test needs to be done within a few hours
after exposure occurs.
These tests can show you were exposed to ethylbenzene,
but cannot predict the kind of health effects that
might occur.
Has the federal government made
recommendations to protect
human health?
The EPA has determined that exposure to ethylbenzene in
drinking water at concentrations of 30 mg/L for 1 day or
3 mg/L for 10 days is not expected to cause any adverse
effects in a child.
The EPA has determined that lifetime exposure to 0.7 mg/L
ethylbenzene is not expected to cause any adverse effects.
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration
(OSHA) has limited workers'exposure to an average of
100 ppm for an 8-hour workday, 40-hour workweek.
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
2010.Toxicological Profile for Ethylbenzene. Atlanta, GA:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service.
Where can I get more information?
For more information, contact the Agency forToxic Substances and Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology and
Human Health Sciences, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-57, Atlanta, GA 30333.
Phone: 1-800-232-4636
ToxFAQs™ Internet address via WWW is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp.
ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize,
evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or
state health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns.
September2007 Page 2 of 2
E-8
Community Involvement Plan
-------
This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions (FAQs) about methylene chloride. For
more information, call the ATSDR Information Center at 1-888-422-8737. This fact sheet is one in a series
of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. It's important you understand this information
because this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the
dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present.
Atsdr
AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES
AND DISEASE REGISTRY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
CAS # 75-09-2
Division of Toxicology ToxFAQs1
February 2001
HIGHLIGHTS: Exposure to methylene chloride occurs mostly from breathing
contaminated air, but may also occur through skin contact or by drinking
contaminated water. Breathing in large amounts of methylene chloride can
damage the central nervous system. Contact of eyes or skin with methylene
chloride can result in burns. Methylene chloride has been found in at least 882
of 1,569 National Priorities List sites identified by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
What is methylene chloride?
Methylene chloride is a colorless liquid with a mild, sweet
odor. Another name for it is diehloromethane. Methylene
chloride does not occur naturally in the enviromnent.
Methylene chloride is used as an industrial solvent and as a
paint stripper. It may also be found in some aerosol and
pesticide products and is used in the manufacture of
photographic film.
What happens to methylene chloride when it
enters the environment?
~ Methylene chloride is mainly released to the enviromnent
in air. About half of the methylene chloride in air disappears
in 53 to 127 days.
~ Methylene chloride does not easily dissolve in water, but
small amounts may be found in drinking water.
~ We do not expect methylene chloride to build up in plants
or animals.
How might I be exposed to methylene chloride?
~ The most likely way to be exposed to methylene chloride
is by breathing contaminated air.
~ Breathing the vapors given off by products containing
methylene chloride. Exposure to high levels of methylene
chloride is likely if methylene chloride or a product
containing it is used in a room with inadequate ventilation.
How can methylene chloride affect my health?
If you breathe in large amounts of methylene chloride you
may feel unsteady, dizzy, and have nausea and a tingling or
numbness of your finger and toes. A person breathing
smaller amounts of methylene chloride may become less
attentive and less accurate in tasks requiring hand-eye
coordination. Skin contact with methylene chloride causes
burning and redness of the skin.
How likely is methylene chloride to cause
cancer?
We do not know if methylene chloride can cause cancer in
humans. An increased cancer risk was seen in mice
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Public Health Service
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Community Involvement Plan
E-9
-------
Page 2
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
CAS # 75-09-2
ToxE\Qs™ Internet address is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html
breathing large amounts of methylene chloride for a long
time.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has determined that
methylene chloride may cause cancer in humans.
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has
determined that methylene chloride can be reasonably
anticipated to be a cancer-causing chemical.
The EPA has determined that methylene chloride is a
probable cancer-causing agent in humans.
How can methylene chloride affect children?
It is likely that health effects seen in children exposed to
high amounts of methylene chloride will be similar to the
effects seen in adults. We do not know if methylene chloride
can affect the ability of people to have children or if it
causes birth defects. Some birth defects have been seen in
animals inhaling very high levels of methylene chloride.
How can families reduce the risk of exposure to
methylene chloride?
~ Families may be exposed to methylene chloride while using
products such as paint removers. Such products should
always be used in well-ventilated areas and skin contact
should be avoided.
~ Children should not be allowed to remain near indoor paint
removal activities.
Is there a medical test to show whether I've been
exposed to methylene chloride?
~ Several tests can measure exposure to methylene chloride.
These tests are not routinely available in your doctor's
office.
~ Methylene chloride can be detected in the air you breathe
out and in your blood. These tests are only useful for
detecting exposures that have occurred within a few days.
~ It is also possible to measure carboxyhemoglobin (a
chemical formed in the blood as methylene chloride breaks
down in the body) in the blood or formic acid (a breakdown
product of methylene chloride) in the urine. These tests are
not specific for methylene chloride.
Has the federal government made
recommendations to protect human health?
~ The EPA requires that releases of methylene chloride of
1,000 pounds or more be reported to the federal government.
~ The EPA recommends that exposure of children to
methylene chloride be limited to less than 10 milligrams per
liter of drinking water (10 mg/L) for 1 day or 2 mg/L for 10
days.
~ The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established
limits on the amounts of methylene chloride that can remain
after processing of spices, hops extract, and decaffeinated
coffee.
~ The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has set limits of 25 parts methylene chloride per
million parts of workplace air (25 ppm) for 8-hour shifts and
40-hour work weeks.
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR). 2000. Toxicological Profile for methylene chloride.
Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service.
Where can I get more information? For more information, contact the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, Division of Toxicology, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-32, Atlanta, GA 30333. Phone: 1-888-422-8737,
FAX: 770-488-4178. ToxFAQs™ Internet address is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html. ATSDR can tell you where to
find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting
from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality
department if you have any more questions or concerns.
Federal Recycling Program U Printed on Recycled Paper
E-10 Community Involvement Plan
-------
This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions (FAQs) about toluene. For more information,
call the ATSDR Information Center at 1-888-422-8737. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about
hazardous substances and their health effects. It's important you understand this information because this
substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration,
how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present.
Atsdr
TOLUENE
m mm kJ ¦%
AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES
AND DISEASE REGISTRY
CAS # 108-88-3
Division of Toxicology ToxFAQs1
February 2001
HIGHLIGHTS: Exposure to toluene occurs from breathing contaminated
workplace air, in automobile exhaust, some consumer products paints, paint
thinners, fingernail polish, lacquers, and adhesives. Toluene affects the nervous
system. Toluene has been found at 959 of the 1,591 National Priority List sites
identified by the Environmental Protection Agency
What is toluene?
Toluene is a clear, colorless liquid with a distinctive smell.
Toluene occurs naturally in crude oil and in the tolu tree. It
is also produced in the process of making gasoline and
other fuels from crude oil and making coke from coal.
Toluene is used in making paints, paint thinners, fingernail
polish, lacquers, adhesives, and rubber and in some printing
and leather tanning processes.
What happens to toluene when it enters the
environment?
~ Toluene enters the enviromnent when you use materials
that contain it. It can also enter surface water and
groundwater from spills of solvents and petrolieum products
as well as from leasking underground storage tanks at
gasoline stations and other facilities.
~ When toluene-containing products are placed in landfills
or waste disposal sites, the toluene can enter the soil or
water near the waste site.
~ Toluene does not usually stay in the enviromnent long.
~ Toluene does not concentrate or buildup to high levels in
animals.
How might I be exposed to toluene?
~ Breathing contaminated workplace air or automobile
exhaust.
~ Working with gasoline, kerosene, heating oil, paints, and
lacquers.
~ Drinking contaminated well-water.
~ Living near uncontrolled hazardous waste sites containing
toluene products.
How can toluene affect my health?
Toluene may affect the nervous system. Low to moderate
levies can cause tiredness, confusion, weakness, drunken-
type actions, memory loss, nausea, loss of appetite, and
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Public Health Service
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Community Involvement Plan
E-ll
-------
Page 2
TOLUENE
CAS # 108-88-3
ToxFAQs™ Internet address is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html
hearing and color vision loss. These symptoms usually
disappear when exposure is stopped.
Inhaling High levels of toluene in a short time can make you
feel light-headed, dizzy, or sleepy. It can also cause
unconsciousness, and even death.
High levels of toluene may affect your kidneys.
How likely is toluene to cause cancer?
Studies in humans and animals generally indicate that
toluene does not cause cancer.
The EPA has determined that the carcinogenicity of toluene
can not be classified.
How can toluene affect children?
It is likely that health effects seen in children exposed to
toluene will be similar to the effects seen in adults.
Some studies in animals suggest that babies may be more
sensitive than adults.
Breathing very high levels of toluene during pregnancy can
result in children with birth defects and retard mental
abilities, and growth. We do not know if toluene harms the
unborn child if the mother is exposed to low levels of toluene
during pregnancy.
How can families reduce the risk of exposure to
toluene?
~ Use toluene-containing products in well-ventilated areas.
~ When not in use, toluene-containing products should be
tightly covered to prevent evaporation into the air.
Is there a medical test to show whether I've been
exposed to toluene?
There are tests to measure the level of toluene or its
breakdown products in exhaled air, urine, and blood. To
determine if you have been exposed to toluene, your urine or
blood must be checked within 12 hours of exposure. Several
other chemicals are also changed into the same breakdown
products as toluene, so some of these tests are not specific
for toluene.
Has the federal government made
recommendations to protect human health?
EPA has set a limit of 1 milligram per liter of drinking water (1
mg/L).
Discharges, releases, or spills of more than 1,000 pounds of
toluene must be reported to the National Response Center.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has set a
limit of 200 parts toluene per million of workplace air (200
ppm).
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR). 2000. Toxicological Profile for Toluene. Atlanta,
GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service.
Where can I get more information? For more information, contact the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, Division of Toxicology, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-32, Atlanta, GA 30333. Phone: 1-888-422-8737,
FAX: 770-488-4178. ToxFAQs™ Internet address is http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html. ATSDR can tell you where to
find occupational and enviromnental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting
from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality
department if you have any more questions or concerns.
Federal Recycling Program o Printed on Recycled Paper
E-12 Community Involvement Plan
-------
United States Office of Enforcement and April 2008
Environmental Protection Agency Compliance Assurance EPA-330R08001
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
«>EPA Understanding the Superfund
United Stales - . . .
Sr""-" Alternative Approach
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Introduction
Superfund sites are places where EPA has
determined that a hazardous substance, pollutant
or contaminant is located. These areas are
entered in EPA's official site inventory. There
are many pathways available to getting a
Superfund site cleaned up. Among the best
known pathways, for sites that need long-term
cleanup, is to list the site on the National
Priorities List (NPL). Sites on the NPL are
eligible for federal remedial (long-term) cleanup
funds.'
EPA may also clean up sites eligible for the NPL
using other Superfund and non-Superfund
authorities, or States may use their authorities to
clean up these sites. Which cleanup pathway is
chosen depends on many variables, such as the
complexity of the cleanup, the availability of
funds (private or public) for the cleanup, and the
nature (e.g., private, governmental, tribal),
number and experience of the parties involved at
the site.
One of EPA's non-NPL Superfund pathways is
referred to as the Superfund Alternative (SA)
approach. The SA approach uses the same
process and standards for investigation and
cleanup as sites on the NPL. Sites using the SA
approach are not eligible for federal remedial
cleanup funds. Cleanup funding for sites with
SA agreements is provided by the potentially
responsible parties (PRPs).
As long as a PRP enters into an SA agreement
with EPA and stays in compliance with that
1 For more information on the NPL listing process,
see www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/index.htm.
agreement, there is no need for EPA to list the
site on the NPL. If a PRP fails to meet the
obligations of the agreement, EPA may
reconsider putting the site on the NPL.
Currently, sites using the SA approach are a
small percentage of all cleanup agreements.
Threshold Criteria
for Using the SA Approach
Eligibility for this approach is based on the
following three criteria:
1. Site contamination is significant enough that
the site would be eligible for listing on the
NPL (i.e., the site would have a Hazard
Ranking System (HRS) score of 28.5 or
greater;
2. A long-term response (i.e., a remedial
action) is anticipated at the site; and
3. There is at least one willing, capable party
(e.g., a company or person) that has
responsibility under Superfund, who will
negotiate and sign an agreement with EPA
to perform the investigation and cleanup.
Getting Started with the SA Approach
EPA has discretion to determine if the SA
approach is appropriate at a particular site. If a
site meets criteria 1 and 2 above, EPA may
approach a PRP, or a PRP may approach EPA,
to negotiate an SA agreement. The SA
agreement is equivalent to an agreement
negotiated at an NPL site. For example, the
same investigation and cleanup will be done as
if the site were listed on the NPL.
Community Involvement Plan
E-13
-------
PRPs may choose not to negotiate an SA
agreement. In that case, the site would proceed
to cleanup using a different path (e.g., NPL
listing, State cleanup program).
State Role
EPA will consult with the state in which the site
is located on whether to attempt the SA
approach, settlement negotiations and remedy
selection. Throughout the process, the state will
have the same opportunities for involvement as
at an NPL site.
Cleanup Agreements
EPA will negotiate agreements with PRPs for
site investigation and site cleanup. The
agreement for investigation is usually in the
form of an Administrative Order on Consent
(AOC). The agreement for remedial action is
always in the form of a judicial Consent Decree
(CD).
Both the AOC and the CD should include
language specific to the SA approach that keeps
sites using the SA approach in an equivalent
position to sites listed on the NPL. EPA has
model language for SA provisions that address
NPL listing after partial cleanup, technical
assistance for communities, financial assurance
and natural resource damage claims. The
provisions needed depend on the work being
performed.
Investigation & Remedy Selection
Once the site studies are complete and the
hazards are identified, EPA will select a site
remedy the same way it selects a remedy for
sites listed on the NPL.
Community Participation
At sites listed on, or proposed to be listed on the
NPL, a qualified community group may apply
for a technical assistance grant (TAG) to hire an
independent technical advisor. In SA
agreements, EPA negotiates a technical
assistance provision for the PRP to provide
funds should a qualified community group apply
for such an advisor.
EPA's Role During and After Cleanup
EPA will oversee the investigation and cleanup
just as it would at a site listed on the NPL.
When the cleanup is completed, EPA will ensure
the remedy continues to work as intended by
monitoring the site and performing the same
reviews it conducts for sites listed on the NPL.
Potential Benefits of the SA Approach
The benefits of the SA approach will vary
depending on the site circumstances. A benefit
that accrues at most sites is the resource savings
of not formally proposing and listing a site on
the NPL. Other benefits may include a
community's good will at not having the site
listed on the NPL, a PRP's willingness to
negotiate a good-faith agreement, and the
opportunity to start cleanup work more quickly
than waiting for listing on the NPL. Overall, the
cleanup process is as protective as at NPL sites.
Further Information. If you have questions
regarding this fact sheet, please contact Nancy
Browne, Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement, at (202) 564-4219,
browne.nancy@epa.gov; or Robert Myers,
Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation, (703) 603-8851,
myers.robei1@epa.gov.
For more information on the SA approach,
including links to the guidance and a list of sites
that have SA approach agreements, please go to:
http://epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/superfund/saa
.html
Disclaimer This document is provided solely for
informational purposes. It does not provide legal
advice, have any legally binding effect, or expressly
or implicitly create, expand, or limit any legal rights,
obligations, responsibilities, expectations, or benefits
for any person. This document is not intended as a
substitute for reading the statute or the guidance
documents described above.
E-14
Community Involvement Plan
-------
-------
------- |