PROPOSED EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES

JULY 2023

WOODBROOK ROAD DUMP SUPERFUND SITE

Site Name and Location

Woodbrook Road Dump Superfund Site

Borough of South Plainfield, Middlesex County, New Jersey

EPA ID# NJSFN0204260

Introduction

The purpose of this proposed Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) is to explain
changes to the remedy selected by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
the September 30, 2013, Record of Decision (2013 ROD), as modified by the February 5, 2018,
ESD (2018 ESD) for the Woodbrook Road Dump Superfund Site (Site). The major components
of the remedy include excavation and off-site disposal of soil and debris with polychlorinated
biphenyl (PCB) concentrations greater than 100 parts per million (ppm) at an approved disposal
facility, excavation and off-site disposal of soil and debris that contain PCBs at concentrations
greater than 1.0 ppm at an approved disposal facility, and establishment of institutional controls,
such as a deed notice or covenant, to prevent a change in land use to an unrestricted use such as
residential.

The estimated cost of the remedy was identified in the 2013 ROD as $24.4 million. However,
based upon further soil sampling conducted during the remedial design, EPA concluded that a
higher volume of contaminated material than estimated in the 2013 ROD would need to be
removed. In addition, the remedial design included on-site waste management costs that had not
been included in the 2013 ROD estimate. As a result, the estimated cost for remediation
increased to $45.3 million and this cost change was documented in the 2018 ESD.

By memorandum dated November 12, 2020, then-Administrator Wheeler directed EPA Region
2, in consultation with EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
(OSRTI), to conduct a review of the remedy selected in the 2013 ROD and the 2018 ESD. The
Administrator's direction was based on recommendations in a November 11, 2020,
memorandum (November 2020 Memorandum) from the then-Assistant Administrator of the
Office of Land and Emergency Management.

EPA Region 2 conducted a focused feasibility study (FFS) to reevaluate the remedy and provide
EPA with the basis and rationale to determine whether a modification to the remedy selected in
the 2013 ROD and modified in the 2018 ESD is needed to address contamination at the Site.
During the FFS process, the original risk assessments, performed under EPA oversight by the
performing party, were reevaluated as directed by the November 2020 Memorandum, and EPA
determined that the risk assessments had been conducted in accordance with EPA guidance.
EPA concluded that the receptors evaluated in the human health risk assessment, including
trespassers and utility workers, while conservative, are supported by Site conditions, and are
consistent with CERCLA guidance and scenarios evaluated for similar sites in New Jersey. EPA
also concluded that even if the receptors evaluated in the risk assessment had not included

652558


-------
trespassers, and the reasonably anticipated future use had been identified as "industrial" instead
of "recreational," the basis for action would still exist and the soil remediation goal of 1 ppm
PCBs identified in the 2013 ROD would have remained appropriate. The FFS considered the
remedial alternative selected in the ROD among other remedial alternatives. The FFS analysis
did not yield any new information or conclusion that would have led EPA to select a new
remedy.

The FFS did, however, establish that the estimated remedy cost has increased since the 2018
ESD, based on increased disposal costs due to inflation. In addition, during the FFS process,
EPA updated the applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) and concluded
that the remediation goal of 1.0 ppm for PCBs should be changed to 1.1 ppm. Finally, in 2021,
the area where the Site is located was designated by New Jersey as the Peter J. Barnes III
Wildlife Preserve, a 660-acre conservation area consisting of freshwater wetlands, forested
uplands, and meadows in the highly urbanized, densely populated Middlesex County.

Based on the above, EPA Region 2 is not proposing a new remedial alternative or any
fundamental change to the remedy selected in the 2013 ROD and 2018 ESD. However, this
proposed ESD documents the increased costs, the change in the remediation goal from 1 ppm to
1.1 ppm and the Site's location within the newly designated Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife
Preserve.

Under Section 117(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA or Superfund), EPA is required to publish an ESD
when, after issuance of a ROD, the remedial action taken differs significantly, but not
fundamentally, from the selected remedy. Sections 300.435(c)(2)(i) and 300.825(a)(2) of the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) set forth the criteria
for issuing an ESD and require that an ESD be published if the remedy is modified in a way that
differs significantly in either scope, performance, or cost from the remedy selected in the ROD
for the Site. For this Site, a reassessment of the remedy selected in the ROD resulted in an
additional cost increase, and changes in the remediation goals and ARARs.

This proposed ESD provides a brief history of the Site, describes the remedy as selected in the
2013 ROD and modified by the 2018 ESD, and explains how, subsequent to the finalization of
the 2013 ROD and 2018 ESD, updated cost estimates were developed. This proposed ESD
provides the basis of the modified cost estimate, remediation goals and ARARs, and
acknowledges the Site's location within the newly designated Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife
Preserve. This proposed ESD will be incorporated into the administrative record for the Site in
accordance with Section 300.825(a)(2) of the NCP. The administrative record is available for
review during business hours at EPA Region 2, 290 Broadway, New York, New York, at the
information repository in the South Plainfield Public Library located at 2484 Plainfield Avenue
in South Plainfield, New Jersey and online at https://www.epa.gov/superfund/woodbrook-road.

Site Location, History, Contamination Problems, Selected Remedy

The Woodbrook Road Dump Superfund Site is located primarily on two industrial-zoned
properties in South Plainfield north of Woodbrook Road identified as Block 388, Lots 1 and 26,
in Middlesex County, New Jersey. The properties cover approximately 70 acres of heavily

2


-------
wooded and undeveloped land within the Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife Preserve, formerly known
as the Dismal Swamp. Dumps were operated on the two properties by previous owners during
the 1940s and 1950s, accepting household and industrial wastes until reportedly shut down by
the State of New Jersey in 1958, although aerial photography analysis indicates that dumping
subsequently occurred at the Site. Texas Eastern Terminal Company (TETCO) acquired the
properties in 1971 and 1972. The surrounding area consists of a mixture of undeveloped/open
space and residential and industrial properties. The Site is transected by the northwest-flowing
Bound Brook, which ultimately discharges to Green Brook and the Raritan River. Three
tributaries and a body of standing water also bound portions of the Site and discharge to Bound
Brook. See Figure 1.

In September 1999, members of the non-profit organization Edison Wetlands Association
discovered weathered electrical capacitors on the western portion of the Site. The New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) sampled material inside one capacitor and
recorded greater than 50 ppm of PCBs with a field screening kit. NJDEP also observed the
name "Cornell Dubilier" on small phenolic ballast containers. Cornell-Dubilier Electronics, Inc.
(CDE) used PCBs in the process of manufacturing capacitors from 1936 to 1962 at a South
Plainfield facility, another Superfund site located approximately 0.75 miles northwest of the
Site. NJDEP requested EPA take the lead for the Woodbrook Road Dump Superfund Site in
October 1999.

In March 2000, the owner of the majority of the Site, TETCO, removed and disposed of 26
capacitors, installed a fence and posted warning signs surrounding Disposal Area 1, with EPA
oversight. Soil sampling performed by EPA during this time near Disposal Area 1, located on
Block 388, Lot 26, indicated the presence of PCBs in the soil. In April 2000, Disposal Area 2,
containing capacitor parts, was discovered on Lot 26. Soil samples collected in this area by EPA
indicated elevated PCB concentrations. Additional preventative security measures were
implemented by TETCO, including installation of additional fencing, warning signs and road-
side barriers to limit access by all-terrain vehicles, which periodically trespassed on the Site.

In 2000, EPA performed test pit excavations and sampling of surface water, sediment, domestic
well water, groundwater and soil throughout both lots and at some off-site locations. Based on
the results of these investigations, the Site was placed on the National Priorities List on April
30, 2003.

In August 2003, TETCO entered into an administrative order on consent with EPA to further
investigate and study the Site through a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) and to
implement additional Site security measures. A contractor for TETCO, TRC Environmental
Corporation (TRC), initiated the RI in 2007, which included sampling of groundwater, potable
water, surface water, sediment as well as surface and subsurface soil on- and off-site. Under
EPA oversight, TETCO, through TRC, completed a baseline human health risk assessment for
the Site in July 2011 and a screening level ecological risk assessment in February 2012. The
Draft Final RI Report, which summarizes the data and risk assessments, was approved by EPA
in July 2012 and the Final Draft FS was approved by EPA in July 2013.

In 2009, a Superfund Community Advisory Group (CAG) was formed to keep the public
apprised of activities at the Site. The CAG meets every three to four months or as needed for

3


-------
updates, presentations and discussions about progress at the Site.

In August 2013, based on the results of the RI, risk assessments, and FS, EPA issued a Proposed
Plan identifying EPA's preferred alternative for the Site cleanup. The RI designated soil and
debris with PCB concentrations >100 ppm as hot spots. After receiving and evaluating public
comments, in September 2013, EPA issued a ROD that describes the selected remedy for the
Site. The selected remedy satisfies the requirements of CERCLA Section 121 and the NCP's
nine evaluation criteria for remedial alternatives, 40 CFR §300.430(e)(9). The selected remedy
includes the following major components:

•	Excavation and off-site disposal of an estimated 4,000 cubic yards of soil and debris that
contains capacitors, capacitor parts and PCB-contaminated soil and debris with PCB
concentrations greater than 100 ppm to an approved off-site disposal facility.

•	Excavation and off-site disposal of an estimated 120,000 cubic yards of soil and debris that
contains PCBs at concentrations greater than 1.0 ppm to an approved off-site disposal
facility.

•	The establishment of institutional controls, such as a deed notice or covenant, to prevent a
change in land use to an unrestricted land use such as residential.

EPA conducted the remedial design (RD) from 2014 to 2017, which included a robust soil
sampling program to delineate the remediation zone for excavation. The RD concluded that
utilizing rail transportation, as preferred by the public during the public comment period, rather
than trucks to transport excavated materials for disposal would be cost effective. When
designing the remedy, EPA determined that elements of the remedy were not included in
TETCO's cost estimate in the feasibility study, including surface water controls/management,
wetland rehabilitation and underestimated disposal costs. The estimated cost of the remedy
increased from $24.4 to $45.3 million. EPA issued an ESD in 2018 to document the basis for
the revised cost and additional work.

Description of this Significant Differences and the Basis for the Differences

The 2013 ROD estimated that the remedy would cost $24.4 million. As described above, based
on the RD, the estimated cost for remediation increased to $45.3 million and this increase was
memorialized through a 2018 ESD. This proposed ESD further modifies the cost of the selected
remedy, specifically the component that addresses excavation and off-site disposal of soil and
debris contaminated with PCBs.

In response to the November 2020 Memorandum, EPA Region 2 conducted an FFS to
reevaluate the selected remedy in the 2013 ROD and 2018 ESD. Based on the FFS, EPA has
determined that the analysis of the remedial alternatives conducted in the original 2013 FS
remains valid. The FFS analysis did not yield any information identified subsequent to 2013
that would cause EPA to select a different remedy. However, primarily due to inflation, costs
have increased for all the alternatives considered and the selected remedy cost is now estimated
at $70 million (see Table 1).

4


-------
During the FFS reevaluation, EPA determined that the land use and ARARs identified in the
ROD needed to be revised. In 2021, the New Jersey state legislature enacted New Jersey Bill
A5822, renaming the Dismal Swamp to honor Peter J. Barnes III, a late New Jersey state
politician. The Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife Preservation Act indicates that the Peter J. Barnes III
Wildlife Preserve is a 660-acre conservation area consisting of freshwater wetlands, forested
uplands, and meadows in the highly urbanized, densely populated Middlesex County. The act
calls for the local governing bodies of Edison Township, Metuchen Borough, and South
Plainfield Borough to establish a Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife Preservation Commission to
review, approve, reject, and/or modify all applications for development within the Peter J.
Barnes III Wildlife Preserve. The act defined the Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife Preserve as the
area located within Edison Township, Metuchen Borough, and South Plainfield Borough in
Middlesex County as delineated by a metes and bounds description approved by a resolution
adopted by the respective local governing bodies of those municipalities.

In addition, in 2021, NJDEP promulgated revised soil remediation standards pursuant to New
Jersey law, renaming the standards and separating direct contact soil remediation standards into
one set of standards for ingestion-dermal exposure, and another set for inhalation exposure. The
standards formerly known as the New Jersey non-residential direct contact soil remediation
standards (NJNRDCSRS) are now known as the New Jersey non-residential soil remediation
standards (NJNRSRS). The NJNRSRS for ingestion-dermal exposure for PCBs was increased
in this process, from 1.0 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg), the NJNRDCSRS in 2013, to 1.1
mg/kg. Based on this update to the NJDEP standards, EPA will change the remediation goal for
the Site to 1.1 mg/kg, as opposed to the goal of 1 mg/kg identified in the ROD (where it was
referred to as 1.0 ppm). This change in the standard will cause only a slight decrease to
excavation volumes from those set forth in the 2018 ESD.

EPA has conducted the FFS in response to the November 2020 Memorandum and to determine
if there should be a change to the original alternative selected in the 2013 ROD, which was
Alternative 6. As described above, based on the findings of the FFS, EPA will not change the
original remedy; however, EPA acknowledges with this proposed ESD that there have been
updates to the original remedy since the 2013 ROD and 2018 ESD. The remedy selected in the
2013 ROD equates to Alternative 5 in the FFS.

Support Agency Comments

The State of New Jersey concurs with this proposed ESD, which modifies the cost estimate for
the remedy selected in the 2013 ROD, as modified by the 2018 ESD, and also identifies a new
remediation goal and an acknowledgement of the Site's location within the newly designated
Peter J. Barnes III Wildlife Preserve.

Affirmation of Statutory Determinations

EPA, after consultation with NJDEP, is issuing this proposed ESD. The proposed ESD modifies
the estimated cost to implement the remedy, identifies a new remediation goal for PCBs of 1.1
mg/kg and acknowledges the Site's location within the newly designated Peter J. Barnes III
Wildlife Preserve. The scope and performance of the remedy is not being modified by this

5


-------
proposed ESD. The remedy is protective of human health and the environment and will comply
with federal and State requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the
remedial action.

The remedy is technically feasible, cost-effective, and satisfies the statutory requirements of
CERCLA by providing for a remedial action that permanently and significantly reduces the
toxicity, mobility and volume of hazardous substances at the Site. Because this remedy, as
modified by this proposed ESD, will result in hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants
remaining on site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, a
statutory review will be conducted no less often than each five years after the initiation of the
remedial action to ensure that the remedy is, or will be, protective of human health and the
environment.

Public Participation Activities

In accordance with Section 117(d) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. Section 9617(d) and Section 300.435
of the NCP, 40 CFR Section 300.435, EPA published a public notice in the Home News
Tribune newspaper on July 13, 2023, informing the public of the availability of this proposed
ESD for review and comment. EPA is providing the public an opportunity to comment on the
changes described in this proposed ESD. A thirty (30) day public comment period is established
with the issuance of this proposed ESD, and EPA will accept comments from July 14 through
August 14, 2023. EPA's responses to comments received during this period will be documented
in a Responsiveness Summary, which will be included as an attachment to the final ESD.

This proposed ESD, and the documents which form the basis for the decision to modify the ROD by
including the updated cost estimates associated with excavation of soil and debris contaminated with
PCBs and identifying a new remediation goal for PCBs of 1.1 mg/kg are part of the administrative
record maintained for the Site in accordance with Section 300.825(a)(2) of the NCP. The administrative
record is available for review during business hours at the EPA Region 2 offices, 290 Broadway, New
York, New York; at the information repository in the South Plainfield Public Library located at 2484
Plainfield Avenue in South Plainfield, New Jersey; and online at www.epa.gov/superfund/woodbrook-
road. EPA recommends calling the EPA Region 2 Superfund Records Center at (212) 637-4308 to
confirm an appointment time before visiting. In addition, EPA will announce the availability of the
proposed ESD under "Announcements" on the same webpage, www.epa.gov/superfund/woodbrook-road.

Pat Evangelista, Director	Date

Superfund and Emergency Management Division

6


-------
Table 1 - Cost Estimate Summary for 2018 ESD Remedy (Updated to Current Dollars)

Woodbrook Road Dump Site, South Plainfield, New Jersey March 2023

Description

Unit
Quantity1

Unit

Updated Unit
Cost (Current
Dollars)2

Updated Line Item Cost
(Current Dollars)

General Requirements

$8,371,400

General Conditions

1

LS

$6,357,300

$6,357,300

Safety, Health & Emergency Response

1

LS

$154,000

$154,000

Temporary On Site Facilities

1

LS

$625,500

$625,500

Site Security

1

LS

$823,000

$823,000

Surveying

1

LS

$411,600

$411,600

Site Preparation

$6,345,700

Pre-Excavation Sampling

1

LS

$105,000

$105,000

Clearing and Grubbing

1

LS

$147,500

$147,500

Soil Erosion Sediment Controls

1

LS

$285,700

$285,700

Flood Control Installation

1

LS

$248,500

$248,500

Access Roads / Bridges

1

LS

$1,413,800

$1,413,800

Soil Containment Area

1

LS

$330,100

$330,100

Rail Spur / Loadout Area

1

LS

$3,023,600

$3,023,600

Sheet Pile Installation

1,330

LF

$576

$766,100

Monitoring Well Abandonment

1

LS

$25,400

$25,400

Dewatering / Water Treatment

$2,234,800

Water Treatment System

1

LS

$586,300

$586,300

Operation of Water Treatment System

1

LS

$1,648,500

$1,648,500

Excavation, Waste Handling, and Disposal

$34,400,500

Excavation

143,090

BCY

$49

$7,011,400

Excavation /Grading Uncontaminated Material

29,250

BCY

$45

$1,316,300

T&D TSCA Waste3

16,470

TON

$358

$5,896,300

T&D Non-TSCA Waste3

169,550

TON

$119

$20,176,500

Restoration

$6,074,100

Backfill / Grading Excavation Areas

62,300

ECY

$35

$2,180,500

Removal Site Infrastructure

1

LS

$2,875,000

$2,875,000

Wetland Restoration

13.5

AC

$54,700

$738,400

Upland Area Seeding

20.4

AC

$3,100

$63,200

Wetland Restoration Monitoring & Maintenance

5

YR

$43,400

$217,000

Subtotal

$57,426,500

Contingency (10%)1

$5,742,700

Project Management & Support (12%)1

$6,891,200

Total Capital Cost

$70,060,400

1.	Line items (including contingency and project management and support) and associated unit quantities and percentages within this updated
estimate were unchanged from the remedy cost estimate previously presented in the 2018 ESD.

2.	Unit costs (except those line items noted in Footnote 3) were revised to reflect March 2023 dollars using composite escalation indices for Qtr 2
FY18 and Qtr 2 FY23 within Table 1 (Quarterly Cost Indices) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Construction Cost Index System
(CWCCIS), EM 1110-2-1304, latest edition published September 30, 2022. No additional adjustment was made for the revised unit costs, beyond
rounding.

3.	Unit costs noted in Footnote 3 for transportation and disposal of wastes originally identified in the 2018 ESD were revised to reflect March
2023 dollars using December 2021 vendor quotes, which were escalated from 1Q22 to 2Q23 using Table 1 (Quarterly Cost Indices) of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Construction Cost Index System (CWCCIS), EM 1110-2-1304, latest edition published September 30,
2022. The vendor quotes were normalized to reflect costs typically borne by a remedial action contractor consistent with other line items.

7


-------
SITE BOUNDARY

BOUND BROOI^i

L*ŤO0

BOUND BROOK

FIGURE 1 - From TRC Environmental Corporation, June 08, 2012

8


-------