National Academies Press: OpenBook

Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites (2013)

Chapter: Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List

« Previous: Appendix B: Complex Site List
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

Appendix C

Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List

80 Superfund facilities with groundwater contamination were identified by EPA personnel as having met cleanup goals and being delisted from the National Priorities List (NPL). Information on the 80 facilities found in this appendix was compiled by the Committee based on Site Deletion documents, Records of Decision, EPA Fact Sheets, and other information available from the CERCLIS website (http://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/srchsites.cfm). The Committee strongly advises anyone using these data to review the primary documents concerning these sites.

For the 80 facilities, Tables C-1 through C-4 provide information on the site types, the contaminants of concern (COCs) present, the remedial action objectives (RAOs), and the extent to which contaminant concentrations in groundwater met maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) prior to facility delisting, respectively. Contaminants were divided into categories of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) and metals. Figures C-1 through C-4 provide the same information in graphical form. Further explanation of these tables and graphs can be found in Chapter 2.

NOTE: PAGES 321-408 OF THIS APPENDIX ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE AT WWW.NAP.EDU/CATALOG.PHPRECORD_ID=14668.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

FACILITY INDEX

Region 1

  1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination

  2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard

  3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits

  4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc.

Region 2

  5. Anchor Chemicals

  6. Jones Sanitation

  7. Katonah Municipal Well

  8. Krysowaty Farm

  9. Love Canal

10. Mannheim Avenue Dump

11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill

12. Pijak Farm

13. Spence Farm

14. Suffern Village Well Field

15. Tabernacle Drum Dump

16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc

17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill

18. V&M/Albaladejo

19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2

Region 3

20. Aladdin Plating

21. Berks Landfill

22. Brodhead Creek

23. Matthews Electroplating

24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.

25. New Castle Spill

26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating

27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

Region 4

28. BMI-Textron

29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.

30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill

31. Davie Landfill

32. Dubose Oil Products Co.

33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.

34. Independent Nail Co.

35. Lee’s Lane Landfill

36. Lewisburg Dump

37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.

38. Rochester Property

39. Sixty-Second Street Dump

40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.

41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)

Region 5

42. Agate Lake Scrapyard

43. Alsco Anaconda

44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination

45. Berlin & Farro

46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill

47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal

48. Laskin/Poplar Oil Co.

49. Northern Engraving Co.

50. Southside Sanitary Landfill

51. Tri-State Plating

52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center) OU1

53. Waste, Inc., Landfill

54. Windom Dump

Region 6

55. Bailey Waste Disposal

56. Cleveland Mill

57. Double Eagle Refinery Co.

58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant

59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery

60. Gurley Pit

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

61. Industrial Waste Control

62. Mallard Bay Landing Bulk Plant

63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)

64. Old Inger Oil Refinery

65. South 8th Street Landfill

Region 7

66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative

67. Kem-Pest Laboratories

68. Labounty

69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination

70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump

Region 8

71. Rose Park Sludge Pit

72. Whitewood Creek

Region 9

73. Del Norte Pesticide Storage

74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)

75. Schofield Barracks

76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)

77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.

Region 10

78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex

79. Northwest Transformer

80. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

TABLE C-1 80 Delisted NPL Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater by “Site Type”

Landfills Industrial Facilities Potable Well Fields Military Bases Other

    9. Love Canal

   1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination

   7. Katonah Municipal Well

   44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination

   8. Krysowaty Farm

   10. Mannheim Avenue Dump

   2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard

   14. Suffern Village Well Field

   75. Schofield Barracks

   12. Pijak Farm

   11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill

   3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits

   19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2

    

   13. Spence Farm

   17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill

   4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc.

    

    

   18. V&M/Albaladejo

   21. Berks Landfill

   5. Anchor Chemicals

   

   

   45. Berlin & Farro

   52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center)

   27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5

   6. Jones Sanitation

    

    

   30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill

   15. Tabernacle Drum Dump

   

   

   66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative

   78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex

   31. Davie Landfill

   16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc.

    

    

   35. Lee’s Lane Landfill

   20. Aladdin Plating

    

    

    

   36. Lewisburg Dump

   22. Brodhead Creek

    

    

    

   39. Sixty-Second Street Dump

   23. Matthews Electroplating

    

    

    

   42. Agate Lake Scrapyard

   24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.

    

    

    

   46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill

   25. New Castle Spill

    

    

    

   47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal

   26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Landfills Industrial Facilities Potable Well Fields Military Bases Other

   50. Southside Sanitary Landfill

   28. BMI-Textron

    

    

    

   53. Waste, Inc., Landfill

   29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.

    

    

    

   54. Windom Dump

   32. Dubose Oil Products Co.

    

    

    

   65. South 8th Street Landfill

   33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.

    

    

    

    

   34. Independent Nail Co.

    

    

    

    

   37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.

    

    

    

    

   38. Rochester Property

    

    

    

    

   40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.

    

    

    

    

   41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)

    

    

    

    

   43. Alsco Anaconda

    

    

    

    

   48. Laskin/Poplar Oil Co.

    

    

    

    

   49. Northern Engraving Co.

    

    

    

    

   51. Tri-State Plating

    

    

    

    

   55. Bailey Waste Disposal

    

    

    

    

   56. Cleveland Mill

    

    

    

    

   57. Double Eagle Refinery Co.

    

    

    

    

   58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant

    

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
 

   59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery

    

    

    

    

   60. Gurley Pit

    

    

    

    

   61. Industrial Waste Control

    

    

    

    

   62.Mallard Bay Landing Bulk ant

    

    

    

    

   63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)

    

    

    

    

   64. Old Inger Oil Refinery

    

    

    

    

   67. Kem-Pest Laboratories

    

    

    

    

   68. Labounty

    

    

    

    

   69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination

    

    

    

    

   70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump

    

    

    

    

   71. Rose Park Sludge Pit

    

    

    

    

   72. Whitewood Creek

    

    

    

    

   73. Del Norte Pesticide Storage

    

    

    

    

   74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)

    

    

    

    

   76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)

    

    

    

    

   77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.

    

    

    

    

   79. Northwest Transformer

    

    

    

    

   80. Union Pacific Railroad Co.

    

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

TABLE C-2 Contaminants of Concern at the 80 Delisted NPL Facilities

   VOCs Only

   VOCs and SVOCs

   Metals Only

   Metals and VOCs

   Metals, VOCs, and SVOCs

   Other

   1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination

   2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard

   18. V&M/Albaladejo

   5. Anchor Chemicals

   41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)

   3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits

   4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc.

   8. Krysowaty Farm

   20. Aladdin Plating

   6. Jones Sanitation

   48. Laskin/ Poplar Oil Co.

   11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill

   7. Katonah Municipal Well

   9. Love Canal

   23. Matthews Electroplating

   16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc.

   57. Double Eagle Refinery Co.

   13. Spence Farm

   10. Mannheim Avenue Dump

   67. Kem-Pest Laboratories

   24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.

   17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill

   59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery

   22. Brodhead Creek

   12. Pikaj Farm

    

   29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.

   21. Berks Landfill

   61. Industrial Waste Control

   28. BMI-Textron

   14. Suffern Village Well Field

    

   30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill

   31. Davie Landfill

   62. Mallard Bay Landing Bulk Plant

   34. Independent Nail Co.

   15. Tabernacle Drum Dump

    

   37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.

   35. Lee’s Lane Landfill

   80. Union Pacific Railroad Company

   43. Alsco Anaconda

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

   19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2

    

   39. Sixty-Second Street Dump

   36. Lewisburg Dump

    

   49. Northern Engraving Co.

   25. New Castle Spill

    

   40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.

   38. Rochester Property

    

   71. Rose Park Sludge Pit

   26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating

    

   47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal

   46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill

    

   79. Northwest Transformer

   27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5

    

   50. Southside Sanitary Landfill

   53. Waste, Inc., Landfill

    

    

   32. Dubose Oil Products Co.

    

   51. Tri-State Plating

   55. Bailey Waste Disposal

    

    

   33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.

    

   56. Cleveland Mill

   58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant

    

    

   42. Agate Lake Scrapyard

    

   63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)

   60. Gurley Pit

    

    

   44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination

    

   65. South 8th Street Landfill

   64. Old Inger Oil Refinery

    

    

   45. Berlin & Farro

    

   72. Whitewood Creek

   68. Labounty

    

    

   52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center)

    

    

   70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump

    

    

    54. Windom Dump

    

    

   

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
VOCs Only VOCs and SVOCs Metals Only Metals and VOCs Metals, VOCs, and SVOCs Other

   66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative

    

    

    

    

    

   69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination

    

    

    

    

    

   73. Del Norte Pesticide Storage

    

    

    

    

    

   74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)

    

    

    

    

    

   75. Schofield Barracks

    

    

    

    

    

   76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)

    

    

    

    

    

   77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.

    

    

    

    

    

   78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex

    

    

    

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

TABLE C-3 Remedial Objectives at the 80 Delisted NPL Facilities.

Achieve MCLs or Another Cleanup Level Objectives Unclear other than Risk Reduction No Explicit Objective
2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard 3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits 1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination
4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc. 6. Jones Sanitation 5. Anchor Chemicals
7. Katonah Municipal Well 26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating 8. Krysowaty Farm
10. Mannheim Avenue Dump 53. Waste, Inc., Landfill 9. Love Canal
11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill 57. Double Eagle Refinery Co. 12. Pijak Farm
15. Tabernacle Drum Dump 58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant 13. Spence Farm
19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2 71. Rose Park Sludge Pit 14. Suffern Village Well Field
23. Matthews Electroplating   16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc.
24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.   17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill
28. BMI-Textron   18. V&M/Albaladejo
29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.   20. Aladdin Plating
30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill   21. Berks Landfill
31. Davie Landfill   22. Brodhead Creek
32. Dubose Oil Products Co.   25. New Castle Spill
33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.   27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5
35. Lee’s Lane Landfill   34. Independent Nail Co.
36. Lewisburg Dump   41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)
37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.   42. Agate Lake Scrapyard
38. Rochester Property   48. Laskin/Poplar Oil Co.
39. Sixty-Second Street Dump   50. Southside Sanitary Landfill
40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.   55. Bailey Waste Disposal
43. Alsco Anaconda   56. Cleveland Mill
44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination   59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Achieve MCLs or Another Cleanup Level Objectives Unclear other than Risk Reduction No Explicit Objective
45. Berlin & Farro   60. Gurley Pit
46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill   61. Industrial Waste Control
47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal   67. Kem-Pest Laboratories
49. Northern Engraving Co.   78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex
51. Tri-State Plating   79. Northwest Transformer
52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center) OU1    
54. Windom Dump    
62. Mallard Bay Landing Bulk Plant    
63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)    
64. Old Inger Oil Refinery    
65. South 8th Street Landfill    
66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative    
68. Labounty    
69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination    
70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump    
72. Whitewood Creek    
73. Del Norte Pesticide Storage    
74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)    
75. Schofield Barracks (USARMY)    
76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)    
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Achieve MCLs or Another Cleanup Level Objectives Unclear other than Risk Reduction No Explicit Objective
77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.    
80. Union Pacific Railroad Company    
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

TABLE C-4 Extent to which MCLs were Achieved at the 80 Delisted NPL Facilities

MCLs Achieved MCLs Not Achieved
 

   Active Remedy/No LTM

   Active Remedy/ LTM

   No Active Remedy/ No LTM

   LTM

   15. Tabernacle Drum Dump

   7. Katonah Municipal Well

   1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination

   2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard

   19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2

   10. Mannheim Avenue Dump

   12. Pijak Farm

   3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits

   33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.

   39. Sixty-Second Street Dump

   13. Spence Farm

   6. Jones Sanitation

   38. Rochester Property

   54. Windom Dump

   14. Suffern Village Well Field

   11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill

   44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination

    

   16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc.

   21. Berks Landfill

   45. Berlin & Farro

    

   23. Matthews Electroplating

   30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill

   48. Laskin/Poplar Oil Co.

    

   24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.

   31. Davie Landfill

   51. Tri-State Plating

    

   25. New Castle Spill

   35. Lee’s Lane Landfill

   52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center)

    

   28. BMI-Textron

   36. Lewisburg Dump

   63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)

    

   29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.

   47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Other
Risk Assessment/ No LTM Risk Assessment/ LTM RAO Didn’t Include Achievement of MCLs MCL Achievement Unknown No Apparent GW Contamination

   5. Anchor Chemicals

   17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill

   4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc.a

   8. Krysowaty Farm

   18. V&M/ Albaladejo

   41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)

   20. Aladdin Plating

   9. Love Canal

   46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill

   55. Bailey Waste Disposal

    

   27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5

   22. Brodhead Creeka

   57. Double Eagle Refinery Co.

   60. Gurley Pit

    

   34. Independent Nail Co.

   26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating

   59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery

   78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex (USDOE)

    

    

   42. Agate Lake Scrapyard

   61. Industrial Waste Control

   79. Northwest Transformer

    

    

   49. Northern Engraving Co.

   64. Old Inger Oil Refinery

    

    

    

   53. Waste, Inc., Landfill

    

    

    

    

   56. Cleveland Mill

    

    

    

    

   58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant

    

    

    

    

   71. Rose Park Sludge Pit

    

    

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
MCLs Achieved MCLs Not Achieved
Active Remedy/No LTM Active Remedy/ LTM No Active Remedy/ No LTM LTM

   69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination

    

   32. Dubose Oil Products Co.

   66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative

   70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump

    

   37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.

   68. Labounty

   74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)

    

   40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.

   72. Whitewood Creek

   76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)

    

   43. Alsco Anaconda

   77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.

   80. Union Pacific Railroad Company

    

   50. Southside Sanitary Landfill

    

    

    

   62. Mallard Bay Landing Bulk Plant

    

    

    

   65. South 8th Street Landfill

    

    

    

   67. Kem-Pest Laboratories

    

LTM = long-term monitoring.

a Indicates a facility with a TI waiver.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Other
Risk Assessment/ No LTM Risk Assessment/ LTM RAO Didn’t Include Achievement of MCLs MCL Achievement Unknown No Apparent GW Contamination
    73. Del Norte Pesticide Storagea    
    75. Schofield Barracksa    
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

image

FIGURE C-1 80 Delisted NPL facilities by “site type.”

image

FIGURE C-2 Contaminant groups found at the 80 delisted NPL facilities.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

image

FIGURE C-3 Types of remedial action objectives for the 80 delisted NPL facilities.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

image

FIGURE C-4 Extent of achievement of MCLs for the 80 delisted NPL facilities.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

1. Cheshire Groundwater Contamination

State: CT

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: July 2, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Many VOCs including trichloroethane (TCA), dichloroethene (DCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), and xylenes

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment; risk assessment results found risk was acceptable, between 1:10,000 and 1:1 million, and the hazard quotient was sufficiently low.

Technologies Applied: Soil excavation

Reported Results: Trichloroethane 3 µg/L, dichloroethane 14 µg/L, dichloroethene 0.9 µg/L, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 15 µg/L, bromodichloromethane 0.6 µg/L, dichlorobenzene 1 µg/L, dibromochloromethane 0.6 µg/L, tetrahydrofuran 5.2 µg/L, and toluene 1.4 µg/L. Concentrations greater than 10,000 µg/L for PCE, 3,500 µg/L for trichloroethene (TCE), and 5,000 µg/L for chloroform have been found in groundwater from location OW-1 at various times from June 1989 to February 1991.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Unclear. Soil vapor sampling was performed by a third party but results were inconclusive. Risk assessment for inhalation pathway of some contaminants found negligible risk.

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

2. Pinette’s Salvage Yard

State: ME

Site Lead: EPA/State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 30, 2002

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 28, 2010

COCs: Base neutral acids, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), VOCs

RAOs: Reduce the following contaminants in groundwater to below the designated MCL: benzene 5 µg/l, chlorobenzene 47 µg/l, 1-4-dichlorobenzene 27 µg/L, and PCBs 0.5 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Soil excavation and pump and treat

Reported Results: In October 2009, all wells tested had contaminant concentrations in groundwater below the MCL except DMW-5 (PCB 2.1 µg/L).

MCLs Achieved? No, PCB concentrations in DMW-5 are still above the MCL.

ICs in Place? Yes, they are restricting site and aquifer use through a restrictive covenant.

Vapor Intrusion: Not a concern because: “(1) the remaining levels of VOCs in the groundwater at the Site have been measured to be very low; (2) there are no occupied buildings currently within the Restricted Area; and (3) the Restrictive Covenant prohibits the construction or placement of any buildings within the Restricted Area without prior written permission of the Maine DEP.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/fiveyear/f05-01016.pdf)

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

3. SACO Tannery Waste Pits

State: ME

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 29, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: December 30, 2008

COCs: Arsenic and monochlorobenzene

RAOs: Arsenic concentrations less than 10 µg/L and monochlorobenzene concentrations less than 100 µg/L. MCLs were set as the action levels, or standards, for all groundwater contaminants, except for arsenic at four locations. EPA established Alternate Concentration Limits (ACLs) for four site monitoring wells [MW-l0l (70 µg/L), MW-103 (123 µg/L), MW-111B (64 µg/L), and MW-114B (77 µg/L)] based on the maximum concentrations observed in the four wells during the RI.

Technologies Applied: GW monitoring, source control, excavation

Reported Results: Arsenic concentrations continue to exceed the ACL of 123 µg/L in one of four locations (MW-103) and the 2001 MCL in four of the other five wells in the long-term monitoring program. There does not appear to be a consistent trend in concentrations, with arsenic concentrations at some wells stable over the past twelve years and others fluctuating.

Following the 2005 hydraulic assessment, ME DEP discontinued monitoring for monochlorobenzene except at MW-114A. This was done because for the other eight wells in long-term monitoring, six never exceeded the MCL 100 µg/L and the other two only once each. The MCL has been exceeded slightly at MW-l14A seven times (100-130 µg/L), all since April 2000.

MCLs Achieved? No, arsenic and monochlorobenzene concentrations are still above the MCL, but the restriction on use of site groundwater prevents any exposures.

ICs in Place? Yes, there is restricted site access through state legislation converting it into a wildlife preserve.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

Vapor Intrusion: Not a concern because the COCs are primarily metals and monochlorobenzene is essentially limited to one area of the site, and institutional controls that prevent development are in place.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

4. Tansitor Electronics, Inc.

State: VT

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 29, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 23, 2009

COCs: VOCs

RAOs: 1,1,1-TCA less than 200 µg/L, 1,1-DCE less than 7 µg/L, TCE less than 5 µg/L, PCE less than 5 µg/L, which are the federal MCLs. A technical impracticability (TI) waiver was granted for a 10-acre area where MCLs do not have to be met.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and monitored natural attenuation

Reported Results: Groundwater monitoring within the TI Zone has shown gradual reductions in concentrations of contaminants. Groundwater monitoring beneath and outside the TI Zone has demonstrated that there continues to be no migration beyond the TI Zone or the Site.

MCLs Achieved? No, because a TI zone was established.

ICs in Place? Yes, the use of groundwater is prevented through deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: With respect to potential vapor intrusion within the manufacturing building, information provided by the facility indicates that the HVAC systems create an ongoing air exchange of 8–24 times per workday to address the use of solvents within the manufacturing process and soil vapor data levels were below OSHA time weighted average levels. As the contaminated groundwater is a potential vapor intrusion source, EPA will continue to evaluate this pathway in future reviews, particularly if land use of the Site changes.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

5. Anchor Chemicals

State: NY

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 30, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 29, 1995

COCs: Lead, chromium, and VOCs

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment; risk assessment showed that the current risk via multiple pathways was within the acceptable range

Technologies Applied: Excavation of drywell sediments

Reported Results: Highest detected concentrations: 1,1,1-tricholoroethane 10 µg/L, chromium 1440 µg/L, lead 240 µg/L

MCLs Achieved? No, but risk assessment found the risk to fall within an acceptable range. “Groundwater samples were collected in April 1996 to assess the effectiveness of the removal action. No contaminants were detected above drinking water maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). A second round of groundwater samples were taken in July 1997. Nickel and chromium were detected in the second round; however, the levels do not justify a change in EPA’s no-further-action decision for the site.” (www.epa.gov/region02/superfund/npl/0201324c.pdf).

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: “All drywell clean-outs should be performed using the requirements for potential vapor emissions which are outlined in a New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) procedures manual. EPA has reviewed the referenced requirements for responding to potentially harmful vapor emissions and will require that they be followed during the drywell removals.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/rods/fulltext/r0295254.pdf).

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

6. Jones Sanitation

State: NY

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 23, 2005

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 27, 2011

COCs: VOCs and metals

RAOs: Onsite: provide additional data on the chemical composition, especially VOCs and metals, of groundwater on-site; evaluate whether the landfill closure has substantially changed groundwater flow patterns and chemistry; and observe the natural attenuation of contaminants in the groundwater.

Offsite: ensure no site-related contaminants are impacting local drinking water sources.

Technologies Applied: Excavation/capping, groundwater monitoring, and MNA

Reported Results: Onsite: 2006 – benzene 2.8 µg/L (RAO 0.7), chlorobenzene 19 µg/L, TCE 1.4 µg/L, PCE 5.4 µg/L (MCL 5), vinyl chloride 0.35 µg/L, cis -1 ,2-DCE 5.5 µg/L, 1,2-DCE 0.52 µg/L, 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1.8 µg/L, 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.68 µg/L, 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.96 µg/L, manganese 1830 µg/L (RAO 300), iron 43100 µg/L (MCL 300), and lead 29 µg/L (MCL 15).

2005-2011: Benzene has decreased and exhibited concentrations less than the cleanup goal/RAO of 0.7 µg/L, the current NYSDEC standard of 1.0 µg/L, and EPA’s MCL of 5 µg/L. Chlorobenzene concentrations have been increasing during the last three rounds of sampling but have been found to be decreasing when compared to the concentrations detected between 2002 and 2005. The concentrations continue to exceed the NYSDEC standard of 5 µg/L but are below EPA’s MCL of 100 µg/L. Benzene and chlorobenzene concentrations have only been detected in monitoring well JSMW-3B located downgradient of the original excavated trench areas and directly upgradient of the capped area. This well also exhibits concentrations of iron and manganese that are not consistent with background. In addition, several other VOCs have been detected in the monitoring wells within the past five years above their respective NYSDEC WQS and MCLs;

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

however, the concentrations have decreased and are currently (2011) below their MCLs and NYSDEC WQS.

Offsite: No site-related contaminants were detected in any of the groundwater wells tested. A review of the sampling results from the residential potable groundwater wells demonstrate that off-site groundwater has not been impacted by the site.

MCLs Achieved? No, concentrations of some VOCs and metals are still above standards.

ICs in Place? Yes, there are deed restrictions and/or well permitting restrictions to prevent human contact with contaminated groundwater at the site.

Vapor Intrusion: Vapor intrusion was not previously evaluated as a potential future exposure pathway based on the (health protective) assumption that buildings are not located above the contaminants of concern in the groundwater.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

7. Katonah Municipal Well

State: NY

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: March 20, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 25, 2007

COCs: PCE

RAOs: Achieve PCE concentration less than 5 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: 2007 monitoring well results show PCE concentrations at 0.2 and 0.4 µg/L

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? No. EPA believes actions identified in the Record of Decision (ROD) along with NYC programs protecting its reservoirs and water supplies are sufficient.

Vapor Intrusion: 2006 GW monitoring showed likelihood of vapor intrusion to be low.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

8. Krysowaty Farm

State: NJ

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: February 22, 1989

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: VOCs, pesticides, base neutral compounds, PCBs

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Excavation/offsite disposal

Reported Results: None provided

MCLs Achieved? Unknown

ICs in Place? Yes, an alternative water supply was provided.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No. Semiannual monitoring was planned for five years, but no results are available.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

9. Love Canal

State: NY

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 30, 2004

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 29, 2008

COCs: VOCs, SVOCs, and pesticides

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Cap and treat along with pump and treat

Reported Results: The 2007 O&M Report shows that there has been no significant change in chemical concentration conditions and that the barrier drain system is successfully capturing leachate from the Site and preventing off-site migration of contamination. Hence, monitoring results continue to confirm that the remediation and containment system, i.e., the leachate collection and treatment system, is functioning properly.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable because the goal was containment

ICs in Place? Yes, there are zoning and deed restrictions.

Vapor Intrusion: Based on the distance to the nearest residences, further evaluation of vapor intrusion is not deemed necessary. Also, indoor air sampling was performed as part of the 1988 Love Canal EDA Habitability Study which did not find any indoor air issues within the homes in the emergency declaration area.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

10. Mannheim Avenue Dump

State: NJ

Site Lead: EPA/State

Date Deleted from NPL: August 28, 2007

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 23, 2004

COCs: TCE

RAOs: TCE in groundwater aquifer below 1 µg/L which is the NJ Safe Drinking Water Act level (Federal MCL is 5 µg/L).

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: Monitoring has indicated that the goal of restoring the groundwater aquifer to meet all appropriate drinking water standards specified in the ROD has been achieved. The highest TCE concentration found during 2003 sampling was 0.21 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None mentioned

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

11. Pfohl Brothers Landfill

State: NY

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 22, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: March 18, 2011

COCs: VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, dioxins, furans, cyanide

RAOs: Reduce contamination to drinking water standards

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: Since 2006 data show that no VOCs, PCBs, dioxins, furans, or cyanide were detected above the Class GA water quality standards. SVOCs were detected sporadically above water quality standards in one well, but four groundwater wells continue to be purged dry during sampling, possibly affecting the VOC sampling results.

MCLs Achieved? No, SVOC concentrations are still above water quality standards

ICs in Place? Yes, in the form of declarations of covenants and restrictions on access

Vapor Intrusion: VOCs in the groundwater are located within the containment system and are at a great distance from the residences, so the potential for soil vapor intrusion issues related to this site is low.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

12. Pijak Farm

State: NJ

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: March 3, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Benzene and phthalates

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Waste, soil and groundwater removal, site regrading and surface restoration, groundwater removal, berm along site perimeter, and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: 1984 ROD states that samples from MW-2S contained 14 base-extractable compounds ranging in concentrations from 220 µg/L to 3600 µg/L, and averaging about 1000 µg/l. Included are four priority pollutants: ethylbenzene (MCL 700 µg/L), 1,2-dichlorobenzene (MCL 1.9 µg/L), di-n-butyl phthalate (MCL 2.5 µg/L) and bis (2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate (6 µg/L) in concentrations of 940 µg/L, 220 µg/L, 310 µg/L and 320 µg/L, respectively.

MCLs Achieved? Yes. The potentially responsible party (PRP) Morton International, under State monitoring, completed the removal and disposal of on-site contaminated drums, lab packs, and visibly contaminated soil to an approved facility, thereby eliminating risks posed by exposure to these materials. Soil sampling conducted subsequent to these activities indicated the presence of residual PCB contamination in soil at the site. Therefore, between 1989 and 1994 Morton International, under State supervision, provided for the excavation and off-site disposal of the contaminated soil. In all, approximately 4,000 cubic yards (6,400 tons) of waste material and contaminated soil were excavated and disposed of offsite. The results of groundwater monitoring conducted over a five-year period indicate that the groundwater is clean.

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

13. Spence Farm

State: NJ

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: March 3, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Acetone, phthalate, phenol, zinc, chromium, and mercury

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Excavation and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: 16 monitoring wells were sampled as part of the investigative program. All organic compounds detected were generally in the concentration range of from 10 to 50 ppb. Two volatile organic compounds were detected, neither of which are priority pollutants. Of the base-extractable organics detected, only two are priority pollutants: Di-n-octyl phthalate being detected at mw-1s, 1d (dup) and mw-8 and bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate being detected at mw-3s, mw-4d, and mw-6s. As a result of the random dumping at this site, the organic compounds identified in the groundwater samples are almost entirely different from those compounds found in the test pit, split-spoon, and stream sediment samples.

For inorganic priority pollutant compounds, very low concentrations of mercury (approximately 0.0004 mg/L) and zinc (approximately 0.10 mg/L) were found. Phenols were detected at mw-5, arsenic at mw-8, and chromium at mw-9. Occurrences of contamination at MW-5, the site upgradient well, and MW-8, which was located in an area thought to be uncontaminated, were not anticipated and appear to be the results of high background levels.

According to the Federal Register notice, “The groundwater monitoring conducted annually from 1989 through 1994 did not detect Site-related contaminants above criteria established for the protection of groundwater. NJDEP and EPA have determined that the remedy implemented at the Site is protective of human health and the environment and that no further cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate. Hazardous substances on Site were cleaned up to levels that would allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, therefore the five-year review requirement of section 121(c) of CERCLA, as amended, is not applicable.”

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? None after 1994

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

14. Suffern Village Well Field

State: NY

Site Lead: unclear

Date Deleted from NPL: May 28, 1993

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 30, 1998

COCs: Trichloroethane

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, excavation, natural attenuation

Reported Results: 1996 sampling indicated that the level of trichloroethane in the distribution water is well below the NYS Department of Health drinking water standard of 5 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

15. Tabernacle Drum Dump

State: NJ

Site Lead: unclear

Date Deleted from NPL: May 8, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 10, 1998

COCs: 1,1,1-trichloroethane and 1,1-dichloroethene

RAOs: Groundwater concentrations of 26 µg/L for TCA and 2 µg/L for DCE

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, reinjection into the ground

Reported Results: From May 1996 to July 1997 TCA ranged from 0.5 to 2.0 µg/L and DCE ranged from 0.2 to 1.0 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

16. Tronic Plating Co., Inc.

State: NY

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: October 5, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: 1,1-DCE, TCA, TCE, PCE, 1,2-DCE, antimony; beryllium; cadmium; total chromium; lead; nickel; silver; thallium; and, hexavalent chromium.

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. Risk assessment showed risks from exposure to groundwater/soil are within EPA’s acceptable range.

Technologies Applied: Excavation to address localized plume of cadmium in the groundwater

Reported Results: No results given for after the cleanup.

MCLs Achieved? Yes, the groundwater does not exceed MCLs. Although groundwater sampling indicated some MCL exceedances for some contaminants, the distributions of these contaminants suggested either off-site sources or localized contamination and could not be associated with potential sources at the Site.

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: The remote subsurface location of the contaminants precludes fugitive particulate or vapor emissions from the Site. Low levels of VOCs in the subsurface soil samples also indicate that the volatilization to ambient air will be negligible. During the remedial investigation, ambient air in the work space was monitored using the HNU analyzer. During the drilling of the industrial leaching pool, storm drain, and monitoring well borings, VOCs were detected only once at 0.5 ppm level.

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

17. Upper Deerfield Township Sanitary Landfill

State: NJ

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: June 10, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 18, 2009

COCs: VOCs such as benzene, tricholorethene, and vinyl chloride; mercury

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. Baseline risk assessment found that under current and likely future land use scenarios, total carcinogenic risks are within EPA’s acceptable risk range for the site.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: 2009 well sampling results (contaminants above MCL highlighted in italics):

Contaminant

Max Detected Concentration
(µg/L)

MCL (µg/L)


2-chlorophenol

50.2

40

1,4dichlorobenzene

65.5

75

n-nitroso-di-npropylamine

66.4

NS

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

69.4

70

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

67.8

NS

Pentachlorophenol

2.58

1

Aluminum

2090

200

Arsenic

2070

10

Barium

2320

2000

Cadmium

52.6

5

Cobalt

527

NS

Chromium

211

100

Iron

1060

300

Manganese

555

50

Lead

529

15

Antimony

521

6

Selenium

1860

0.50

Thallium

1870

2

Vanadium

531

NS


NS = no standard.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

MCLs Achieved? No, but risk assessment determined that existing risk was within the acceptable range.

ICs in Place? Yes, an alternate water supply was provided.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes, the township will monitor groundwater until 2024.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

18. V&M/Albaladejo

State: Puerto Rico

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: October 22, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Metals

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. An investigation into the nature and extent of groundwater contamination was conducted in 1998 and 1999. Six monitoring wells were installed to determine if surface soil contamination had migrated into the groundwater. Four rounds of groundwater sampling indicated that no site-related contamination is present in the groundwater at the site.

Technologies Applied: Soil removal

Reported Results: There were no exceedances of inorganic analytes during the Round 4 (most recent) sampling.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable because no groundwater contamination ever found

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No. EPA stated that the source of groundwater contamination was removed with the successful completion of the soils removal action. No future monitoring of the groundwater is anticipated.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

19. Vestal Water Supply Well 4-2

State: NY

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 30, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: 1,1,1-trichloroethane and tricholorethene

RAOs: State groundwater standards

Technologies Applied: Wellhead treatment and excavation

Reported Results: Levels of contaminants in the influent (untreated groundwater) to Well 4-2 have declined to levels which are below drinking water standards.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? No

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

20. Aladdin Plating

State: PA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 16, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 14, 2009

COCs: Chromium and hexavalent chromium

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. A risk assessment performed during the RI/FS concluded that groundwater contamination posed no threat to human health or the environment.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring to watch for migration of contamination into drinking water aquifers

Reported Results: The maximum monitoring-well concentrations for chromium appear to be holding steady through successive sampling events at around 40 ppm total chromium (MCL 0.1 ppm). No evidence of migration of chemicals to residential wells has been detected.

MCLs Achieved? No, but risk assessment determined risk to be in the acceptable range

ICs in Place? Yes, a Unilateral Administrative Order which requires the property owner to file a Notice of Use Restriction with the county recorder of deeds.

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes, groundwater monitoring until 2023

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

21. Berks Landfill

State: PA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 14, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 30, 2010

COCs: VOCs including vinyl chloride, trichloroethene, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene; metals including aluminum, iron, and manganese

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, leachate collection system and landfill caps

Reported Results: Maximum concentrations in onsite groundwater wells from 2005 to 2009: DCE 470 µg/L, TCE 480 µg/L, vinyl chloride 65 µg/L, PCE 36 µg/L, aluminum 6,690 µg/L, iron 6,100 µg/L, and manganese 6,100 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? No

ICs in Place? Yes, there is a prohibition of consumption of onsite groundwater

Vapor Intrusion: Not considered a pathway of concern

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

22. Brodhead Creek

State: PA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: July 23, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: May 22, 2009

COCs: The polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and indenopyrene.

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. EPA performed a risk assessment and determined there was no significant risk because groundwater from the site was not being used. A TI Zone was established.

Technologies Applied: Excavation

Reported Results: Groundwater at the Site remains significantly contaminated

MCLs Achieved? No, as a TI zone was established

ICs in Place? Yes, institutional controls restrict the use of groundwater at the Site and prohibit excavation unless prior written approval is provided by EPA, PADEP, and the property owner.

Vapor Intrusion: Vapor intrusion would be a potential concern to be quantitatively evaluated if a building were constructed on-site. However, it is extremely unlikely that a building, commercial or residential, will ever be constructed on-site due to the makeup of the land (floodplains).

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

23. Matthews Electroplating

State: VA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: January 19, 1989

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 21, 2004

COCs: Chromium

RAOs: Reduce chromium concentrations to below the MCL of 100 µg/L

Technologies Applied: None

Reported Results: Total and hexavalent chromium concentrations had dropped below 50 µg/L in all residential wells by February 1992.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, alternate drinking water supply was provided (community water supply line was extended to a new water line).

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No. EPA has determined that hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants no longer remain at the site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Therefore, no further five-year reviews are needed for this site.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

24. Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc.

State: MD

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: July 18, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 26, 2008

COCs: Chromium

RAOs: Reduce chromium concentrations to below the MCL of 100 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, natural attenuation

Reported Results: The groundwater monitoring program demonstrated to EPA’s and MDE’s satisfaction that groundwater met water quality standards, and the program was discontinued prior to the Site’s deletion from the NPL in 2000.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

25. New Castle Spill

State: DE

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: June 12, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 12, 1996

COCs: Tris

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. EPA developed a health-based drinking water cleanup level of 4.4 mg/L for Tris.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: The fact sheet says that Tris, a flame retardant, was detected in soils near the drum storage area and in shallow groundwater beneath the site. The ROD states that there would be a five-year follow-up, but the document listed as the five-year review on the CERCLIS website is only a link to the Federal Register notice of the site being deleted from the NPL.

MCLs Achieved? Yes, by 1996 data showed that Tris levels in the shallow aquifer had reached the established cleanup goals.

ICs in Place? Yes, restriction of well installation in the Columbia aquifer (in the vicinity of the site)

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

26. Southern Maryland Wood Treating

State: MD

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: April 5, 2005

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 30, 1999

COCs: Toluene, naphthalene, benzene, 2-methylnaphthalene, ethylbenzene, acenaphthylene, styrene acenaphthene, total xylenes, fluorene, phenol, phenanthrene, 2-methylphenol, fluoranthene, 4-methylphenol pyrene, 2,4-dimethylphenol, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, pentachlorophenol

RAOs: Protect groundwater as a current or potential future drinking water supply by containing or treating subsurface soil that contains in excess of 1.0 ppm B(a)P equivalence

Technologies Applied: Sheet pile wall, excavation, pump and treat

Reported Results: No results reported

MCLs Achieved? No, but containment was the goal. In December 2000 (the year after the most recent five-year review) the equipment that was used to treat the soils was decontaminated, dismantled, and removed from the site. Water Treatment Plant No. 2 was also dismantled and removed within this timeframe. Groundwater wells placed around the site have been monitored from October 2000 until September 2002 and have continued to confirm that the cleanup was a “success.” All wells, including the 600 ft water production well, have been removed and sealed.

ICs in Place? Yes, restricted access. The landfill is secured by a fence with a guard posted at the front gate on a 24-hour basis.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring: Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

27. Sussex County Landfill No. 5

State: DE

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 28, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: February 11, 2005

COCs: Benzene, vinyl chloride, 1,2-dichloropropane, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, tricholorethene

RAOs: As per the most recent five-year review, the goal was to reduce contaminants to the following MCLs: benzene 5 µg/L, vinyl chloride 2 µg/L, 1,2-dichloropropane 5 µg/L, 1,4-dichlorobenzene 75 µg/L, and tricholorethene 5 µg/L. MCLs were not included in the original RAO.

Technologies Applied: None. “In October 1993, Sussex County completed the RI which included EPA-prepared Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Risk Assessment. The Risk Assessment indicated that very low levels of contaminants of concern existed in the groundwater which translated into correspondingly low risk levels at the Site. Based on the results of the RI and the Risk Assessments, EPA determined that a feasibility study was not necessary to evaluate remedial alternatives.” (www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/rods/fulltext/r0295254.pdf).

Reported Results: As of November 2003, all COCs were detected below their MCL except benzene which was found at concentrations of 8.2 and 6.2 µg/L. However, benzene was not detected above its MCL in any of the residential wells currently used for drinking water.

MCLs Achieved? No, benzene concentration is still above the MCL.

ICs in Place? Yes, provision of an alternate drinking water supply (bottled water and a water purification system), restriction of well installation, and deed restrictions. Residents have since been hooked up to the county water supply and domestic wells were closed.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring: Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

28. BMI-Textron

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 19, 2002

Date of Last Five-Year Review: August 25, 2000

COCs: Arsenic, sodium, cyanide and fluoride

RAOs: Drinking water standards (MCLs are supposedly in “table 2” of the ROD, but there appear to be no tables in the document posted).

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, natural attenuation and soil excavation.

Reported Results: In January 2000 cyanide levels (both total and amenable) were below drinking water standards. However, fluoride was not sampled, as recommended by both agencies. No other results are reported.

MCLs Achieved? Yes. Sampling at the Site continued until MCLs were met for all COCs at all eight wells. The last sampling event occurred in July 2000.

ICs in Place? Yes. Permits to dig wells must be obtained from FL DEP

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

29. Cedartown Industries, Inc.

State: GA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 19, 2006

Date of Last Five-Year Review: August 24, 2006

COCs: Cadmium, lead, antimony, arsenic, and beryllium

RAOs: Reduce contaminants to the following MCLs: cadmium 5 µg/L, lead 15 µg/L (MCGL is 0), antimony 6 µg/L, arsenic 10 µg/L (MCGL is 0), and beryllium 4 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Excavation/GW monitoring

Reported Results: With the exception of an apparently spurious result in February 2005, cadmium concentrations in the collected samples have not exceeded the MCL of 5.0 µg/L since the first quarter of 1998. In addition, the results of the groundwater monitoring program have verified that the treatment of soils has not released significant concentrations of the other COCs (lead, antimony, arsenic, and beryllium) to the groundwater.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, deed notation

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No. The five-year review states that since the objectives of the groundwater remedial action have been achieved, long-term groundwater monitoring should be discontinued.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

30. Cedartown Municipal Landfill

State: GA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: March 10, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 21, 2006

COCs: Beryllium, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese

RAOs: Reduce contaminants to the following concentrations: beryllium 4 µg/L, cadmium 5 µg/L, chromium 100 µg/L, lead 15 µg/L (MCGL 0), and manganese 50 µg/L (there is no MCL for manganese, this is a National Secondary Drinking Water Regulation).

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: July 2006 results show all concentrations below the MCLs except chromium (MCL 100 µg/L) in one well (130 µg/L) and manganese (MCL 840 µg/L) in two wells (1430 and 967 µg/L).

MCLs Achieved? No, chromium and manganese are still above MCLs in some locations

ICs in Place? Yes, record notices and deed, zoning, and land use restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

31. Davie Landfill

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 21, 2006

Date of Last Five-Year Review: March 16, 2011

COCs: Vinyl chloride and antimony

RAOs: Vinyl chloride goal of 1 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: Groundwater monitoring data from the past five years (2005-2010) have shown slight exceedances of the vinyl chloride cleanup goal (1 µg/L).

MCLs Achieved? No, vinyl chloride concentration is still above the cleanup goal.

ICs in Place? Yes, provision of an alternate water supply (residents were connected to the public water line)

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

32. Dubose Oil Products Co.

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 4, 2004

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 25, 2008

COCs: VOCs

RAOs: Reduce COC concentrations below the following MCLs: benzene 1 µg/L, 1,1-dichloroethene 7 µg/L, pentachlorophenol 30 µg/L, PAHs 10 µg/L, trichloroethene 2 µg/L, and xylenes 50 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Excavation and bioremediation of soils; draining and backfilling of on-site ponds; removal of on-site structures; site grading and revegetation; installation of surface water runoff controls; and groundwater monitoring.

Reported Results: No remaining hazardous contaminants above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, the Site is in a Florida Delineated Area where groundwater well drilling is restricted.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

33. Gold Coast Oil Corp.

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 9, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 20, 2001

COCs: VOCs

RAOs: Reduce COC concentrations below the following MCLs: 1,1-dichloroethane 50 µg/L, t-1,2-dichloroethane 700 µg/L, methylene chloride 50 µg/L, tetrachloroethene 7 µg/L, toluene 3400 µg/L, and tricholorethene 30 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Excavation and a groundwater recovery, treatment, and disposal system

Reported Results: October 1996 sampling showed all COCs below MCLs

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

34. Independent Nail Co.

State: SC

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: October 9, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: April 5, 2000

COCs: Chromium, cyanide, and zinc

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. Risk assessment found that contaminant levels in the groundwater presented no imminent or substantial threat to human health or the environment.

Technologies Applied: Excavation and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: “Chromium, cyanide, and zinc have been detected in groundwater at the Independent Nail Company Site at maximum concentrations of 0.058 mg/L, 0.110 mg/L and 0.098 mg/L, respectively. A comparison of these contaminant concentrations with drinking water MCLs, SMCLs, and health advisories indicates that total chromium is the only groundwater contaminant at the Independent Nail Company Site which exceeds any of these standards or criteria.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/rods/fulltext/r0488040.pdf).

MCLs Achieved? No, total chromium is still above the MCL. Risk assessment found risk to fall within an acceptable range.

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

35. Lee’s Lane Landfill

State: KY

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: April 25, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 25, 2008

COCs: Lead, arsenic, benzene and chromium

RAOs: Reduce contaminants to the following standards: lead 15 µg/L (action level, like an MCL), arsenic 10 µg/L (the MCL), benzene 5 µg/L (the MCL), and chromium 100 µg/L (the MCL).

Technologies Applied: Groundwater and ambient air monitoring

Reported Results: December 2007: Arsenic 0.011 and 0.033 mg/L, chromium <0.001 mg/L, and lead <0.005 mg/L. Analytical results for benzene have not been reported for groundwater at the site during this review period.

MCLs Achieved? No, arsenic is still above MCL. Lead results were unclear, and there are no benzene results in the most recent five-year review.

ICs in Place? Yes, an alternate water supply was provided, and there is access control via fencing and gating.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

36. Lewisburg Dump

State: TN

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: February 21, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 19, 2007

COCs: Aluminum, barium, iron, manganese, methylene chloride, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

RAOs: Meet the following MCLs: Aluminum 50-200 µg/L (secondary drinking water standard), barium 200 µg/L, iron 300 µg/L (secondary standard), manganese 50 µg/L (secondary drinking water standard), methylene chloride 5 µg/L, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 6 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: No organic compounds were detected during Nov. 2005 sampling. Inorganics were detected, but only lead (120 µg/L) exceeded the MCL for drinking water, which is 15 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? No, lead is still above the MCL.

ICs in Place? Yes, there are deed restrictions, security fencing, and prevention of using land for residential construction.

Vapor Intrusion: As long as the institutional controls (which prevent the use of property for housing and prohibit activities that could impair the landfill cover) remain in effect, the site should remain stable and free of soil vapor intrusion or any other future contaminant migration in the future.

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

37. Palmetto Recycling, Inc.

State: SC

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 13, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 7, 2004

COCs: Lead

RAOs: Reduce lead concentrations to below the MCL of 15 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring/excavation of soils

Reported Results: 2004 groundwater monitoring indicates that the groundwater concentrations for lead are below 15 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

38. Rochester Property

State: SC

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 9, 2007

Date of Last Five-Year Review: February 25, 2005

COCs: TCE, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and manganese

RAOs: Reduce concentrations of the following COCs: trichloroethene 5 µg/L (the MCL), manganese 180 µg/L (no MCL, but the secondary drinking water regulation is 50 µg/L), and bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 6 µg/L (the MCL). A chromium remedial goal was been removed from the RAO due to new IRIS information regarding its hazard quotient posted between the first and second five-year reviews.

Technologies Applied: In situ air sparging system

Reported Results: All wells and performance monitoring points were sampled in November 2006 (the final confirmation sampling event) and contaminant concentrations were found to be below the cleanup goals for the site.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes. A deed restriction is in place in order to deter the installation of a private well.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? To be determined. According to the most recent five-year review, EPA and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control are currently reviewing the most recent groundwater monitoring report in order to determine the appropriate response with regard to future system operations and groundwater monitoring.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

39. Sixty-Second Street Dump

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 1, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 21, 2009

COCs: Cadmium, chromium, lead

RAOs: Reduce concentrations of chromium to 100 µg/L, lead to 15 µg/L, and cadmium to 5 µg/L. Note that standards for chromium and cadmium changed in 2009 from the original ROD goals.

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: Jan 2009 sampling results: chromium 1.8 µg/L, cadmium < 0.15 µg/L, and lead 0.16 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes. The site is within a Florida Ground Water Delineation Area so there is a restriction on new drinking water wells.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

40. Standard Auto Bumper Corp.

State: FL

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 29, 2007

Date of Last Five-Year Review: March 15, 2011

COCs: Chromium, nickel, and thallium

RAOs: Restore groundwater to health-based levels (chromium 100 µg/L, nickel 100 µg/L, and thallium 2 µg/L). (There is no federal MCL for nickel, so the cleanup standard for nickel is likely from FL.)

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: The latest groundwater monitoring data show that nickel, chromium, and thallium were not detected in any of the three groundwater wells above the MCL. Groundwater monitoring ended in 2001 in accordance with the ROD.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, there is an alert system that notifies the Miami-Dade County DERM of any construction permit requests for the locations adjacent to the Site where soil contamination remains below the surface. Owners must also contact EPA and other authorities prior to any construction, excavation, or removal of any part of a building or road.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

41. Woodbury Chemical Co. (Princeton Plant)

State: FL

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: November 27, 1995

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Pesticides (aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, and heptachlor epoxide) and metals (arsenic and chromium) have been detected at low levels in off-site groundwater to the south and east. Nitrates detected in groundwater have been linked to the heavy use of fertilizers in the area surrounding the site.

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. Exposure and toxicity assessment showed no unacceptable risk.

Technologies Applied: Soil excavation and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: None listed. According to the Notice for Site Deletion, “Confirmational monitoring of groundwater demonstrates that no significant risk to public health or the environment is posed by the Site.”

MCLs Achieved? No, but risk assessment showed that the current risks are acceptable

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No. Groundwater monitoring was conducted for one year from the signing of the ROD (1992).

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

42. Agate Lake Scrapyard

State: MN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: August 1, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: August 24, 2001

COCs: PCE

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment; no explicit goals for reducing contaminant concentrations are available.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: In October of 1996, analytical results showed that only two wells had detectable concentrations of PCE. The concentration at OW6 was 6 µg/L, which is below the Health Risk Limit (HRL) of 7 µg/L, and they have shown a steady decrease since January 1992. The PCE concentrations at OW7 in October of 1997 were 3.6 µg/L. This further supports the conclusion that there is not a significant source of PCE impacting the groundwater and that natural attenuation has reduced the PCE concentrations.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as such goals were never set. Reports discuss meeting “health based goals” but these are not specified.

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

43. Alsco Anaconda

State: OH

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 23, 1997

COCs: Metals, chlorinated benzene compounds, semi-volatile organics, and cyanide.

RAOs: “Site-related contaminants with an existing MCL shall be reduced to a concentration at or below the MCL. Carcinogenic site-related contaminants shall be reduced to levels that pose a cumulative carcinogenic risk of no greater than 1 × 10–6. Concentrations of noncarcinogenic site-related contaminants shall be reduced to levels that pose a cumulative HI no greater than 1 for any specific toxicological category.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/d011105.htm).

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: None listed

MCLs Achieved? Yes. “With the exception of cyanide and arsenic, cleanup criteria for contaminants established for this site have been met since 1999. Monitoring in May, August, and October 2000 met cleanup objectives for cyanide and arsenic.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/d011105.htm).

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No, since contaminant levels are below those allowing for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

44. Avenue “E” Groundwater Contamination

State: MI

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: March 20, 2007

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 28, 2005

COCs: Benzene, toluene, acetone, tricholorethene, carbon tetrachloride, and other organic compounds

RAOs: Prevent the groundwater transport of contaminants from the site and treat the water extracted to remove the fuel-related contaminants. Operate the system until contaminant levels are at or below 5 µg/L for six consecutive months.

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: “All groundwater contaminants have reached the cleanup standards specified in the 1987 agreement between the Coast Guard and MDNR.” (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/fiveyear/f05-05024.pdf).

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Because the groundwater was to be remediated to unrestricted use, there were no provisions for institutional controls at this site.

Vapor Intrusion “Currently soil vapor intrusion is not considered a possible problem at this site. Down gradient monitoring wells placed along Avenue E in the residential area where the plume was traced had no detectable levels of contaminants of concern associated with the USCG plume.” (www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/fiveyear/f05-05024.pdf).

Long-Term Monitoring? No, monitoring ended in October 2005.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

45. Berlin & Farro

State: MI

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: June 24, 1998

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Methylene chloride, 1,2-dichlorethane, vinyl chloride, 1,1-dichlorethene, benzene, and trichloroethene

RAOs: Reduce COCs to the following cleanup levels: methylene chloride 5 µg/L, 1,2-dichlorethane 0.4 µg/L (1 µg/L if analytic procedure does not allow for lower MDL), vinyl chloride 0.02 µg/L (1 µg/L if analytic procedure does not allow for lower MDL), 1,1-dichlorethene 7 µg/L, benzene 1 µg/L, and trichloroethene 3 µg/L. Some of these values are the federal MCLs and some are lower.

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, soil excavation, and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: As documented by the June 27, 1996, Remedial Action Report and the September 18, 1996, Superfund Site Close Out Report, confirmatory sampling verified that all soil, sediment, and groundwater cleanup standards were met at the Site and that all cleanup actions specified in the amended ROD have been implemented.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes. There are deed restrictions to prevent installation of drinking water wells during remediation.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

46. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill

State: MN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: July 1995

Date of Last Five-Year Review: February 2, 2009

COCs: VOCs, chloroform, and heavy metals, including cadmium and lead.

RAOs: Reduce contaminants to the following MCLs: chloroform 70 µg/L (MCLG), cadmium 5 µg/L, and lead 15 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, source control on the landfill OU

Reported Results: No results listed for COCs

MCLs Achieved? Unknown. The most recent five-year review cannot be downloaded from CERCLIS. As of the second five-year review, they had not met MCLs, but concentrations were trending down.

ICs in Place? Yes, restriction of well development

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

47. Fadrowski Drum Disposal

State: WI

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 6, 2005

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 30, 2008

COCs: Metals (different metals are listed in different locations in the documents, none of which are ever specifically identified as the contaminants of concern)

RAOs: Reduce contaminant concentrations below 1988 NR 140 Wisconsin groundwater standards [Preventative Action Limits (PALs), Enforcement Standards (ESs), or ACLs]. These cleanup goals are more stringent than federal MCLs.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring, source control, and natural attenuation

Reported Results: As of 2008 many monitored compounds had declined in concentration via the process of natural attenuation such that they met the cleanup criteria (1988 Chapter NR 140 PALs, ESs or established ACLs).

MCLs Achieved? No. Fluoride, iron, and manganese remain about their PALs; however, due to their natural occurrence in the groundwater, achieving PALs for these three constituents via natural attenuation or related methods is neither technically nor economically feasible.

ICs in Place? Yes, restriction of future land and groundwater use and prohibition of future development of the Site within the Waste Management Boundary.

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes, annual sampling for an unspecified amount of time.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

48. Laskin/Poplar Oil Co.

State: OH

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 5, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: May 15, 2009

COCs: PCBs, PAHs, SVOCs, VOCs, and metals

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Excavation, groundwater diversion trenches, and monitoring

Reported Results: “A diversion trench was constructed up-gradient of the capped area, in order to intercept all groundwater flow in the shallow aquifer moving northward toward the Site, and a drain in the trench conducts the intercepted flow directly to Cemetery Creek. Treatment of the diverted water was not required because upgradient groundwater is not contaminated. Although the trench and cap effectively de-watered the Site, groundwater and surface water monitoring were initially conducted as part of the Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan (IMMP) because hazardous substances were present on-site. Currently, groundwater levels are monitored in order to determine if the Site remains dewatered.” (http://www.epa.gov/region5superfund/fiveyear/reviews_pdf/ohio/laskin_poplar_oil.pdf).

The results of water level measurements conducted since the 2004 five-year review show that water levels have remained below the level of the unweathered shale, and thus no groundwater or surface water samples were required to be collected (http://www.epa.gov/region5superfund/fiveyear/reviews_pdf/ohio/laskin_poplar_oil.pdf).

MCLs Achieved? Probably not in the groundwater directly below the site, but yes in the groundwater discharging to the Cemetery Creek, which is a likely point of compliance.

ICs in Place? Yes, there are restrictions on groundwater use for drinking water purposes. The ROD indicated that after the site is de-watered, there will be essentially no groundwater available for any purpose.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

49. Northern Engraving Co.

State: WI

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: April 6, 2010

COCs: Copper, fluoride, nickel, zinc, 1,1- dichloroethylene, tricholorethene, and vinyl chloride

RAOs: Reduce contaminants below the following ACLs: fluoride 4,800 µg/L, copper 1,000 µg/L, nickel 644 µg/L, zinc 5,000 µg/L, tricholorethene 40 µg/L, vinyl chloride 10 µg/L, and 1, 1-dichloroethylene 10 µg/L. These numbers are much higher than MCLs.

Technologies Applied: Source control via a RCRA cover installed atop the lagoon and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: The concentrations of the indicator contaminants were below the ACLs during the second five-year monitoring period.

MCLs Achieved? No, but MCLs were not the goal; ACLs were.

ICs in Place? Yes, there is a deed affidavit, and the most recent review recommended deed restrictions.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No. Because groundwater remediation goals were met, groundwater monitoring was discontinued in 2000.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

50. Southside Sanitary Landfill

State: IN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: July 3, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 20, 2005

COCs: Heavy metals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, and nickel

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Slurry wall and leachate collection system to isolate the groundwater beneath the landfill from the surrounding groundwater

Reported Results: A review of the water level data indicated that the slurry wall performance is within acceptable limits. The analytical results from 11 monitoring wells located outside of the slurry wall showed that chemical concentrations are also within acceptable limits, except in MW-15R.

MCLs Achieved? Yes, outside the slurry wall, but probably not within the wall.

ICs in Place? No. However, within six months of the most recent five-year review report (2005), the IN Department of Environmental Management will develop and submit an IC Plan that will include a schedule for implementing an easement/restrictive covenant, as well as an evaluation of the need for any additional institutional controls.

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

51. Tri-State Plating

State: IN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: July 14, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Chromium

RAOs: Reduce contamination of chromium to meet State and Federal standards (Could not find IN standard but the federal MCL is 100 µg/L)

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: Groundwater remediation goals were met in 1995

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes. Fencing was built around portions of the site.

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

52. University of Minnesota (Rosemount Research Center) OU1

State: MN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: February 6, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 15, 2007

COCs: Chloroform and TCE

RAOs: Reduce chloroform contamination below 60 µg/L (the MCLG is 70 µg/L) and TCE below 5 µg/L

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: Groundwater samples from all five monitoring wells showed concentrations of chloroform ranging from 2.3 to 23 µg/L, which was below than the MDH drinking water criteria of 60 µg/L. Trichloroethene was detected (in well MW-23D) at a concentration of 2.6 µg/L, less than the federal MCL of 5 µg/L. Based on the groundwater sampling results, the MPCA determined that the groundwater was potable and therefore, no further groundwater sampling was necessary.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, a declaration of restrictions and covenants and affidavit concerning real property contaminated with hazardous substances documents were filed.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

53. Waste, Inc., Landfill

State: IN

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 27, 2011

COCs: Benzene, PAHs, PCBs, arsenic, manganese, chromium, cadmium, mercury, antimony

RAOs: Prevent migration of groundwater contamination

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring; landfill cap

Reported Results: Average contaminant concentrations in landfill leachate are lower than the previous reporting period with limited detections and no exceedances of any associated MCLs. This continues to demonstrate that the installation of the multi-layer cap has effectively reduced the infiltration of rainwater through the landfill contents and reduced the leachate concentrations at the site.

MCLs Achieved? No, since the goal was only to prevent migration of the contamination.

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

54. Windom Dump

State: MN

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: April 23, 2010

COCs: Cis-1,2-dichloroethene and vinyl chloride

RAOs: Reduce contamination below action levels (MCL of 70 µg/L for cis-1,2-dichloroethene and 2 µg/L for vinyl chloride)

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: Response actions have successfully reduced contaminant concentrations below action levels.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

55. Bailey Waste Disposal

State: TX

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 15, 2007

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 7, 2010

COCs: Organic compounds and heavy metals

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment, but the ROD did not contain a groundwater remedy.

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat for the short term to remove groundwater that might rise due to waste consolidation.

Reported Results: No results provided. The most recent review states: “The original ROD for the Site did not contain a ground water remedy, as the RI concluded that the Site had no impact on drinking water, and ‘in the unlikely event that site constituents were to migrate via a ground water pathway, it would take more than 800 years for them to reach potable ground water… [and] shallow ground water beneath and adjacent to the site is saline and not suitable for human consumption’. Moreover, the area is subject to tidal flow (i.e., significant daily flow in and out of the area), so ground water discharge to surface water has not been found to be an issue. The major components of the amended ground water remedy included no long-term ground water treatment, but in the short-term (i.e. during construction of the cap), a ‘consolidation water collection layer [was installed] to intercept and remove ground water that rises due to the consolidation of the waste’. The collected water was then pumped to a wastewater holding tank, treated to the discharge limits in effect during the remedy implementation, and discharged.” (http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6sf/texas/bailey/Bailey_5-Year_Review_Final_w_Signature_Pages.pdf)

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as the groundwater was never found to be contaminated.

ICs in Place? Yes, a deed notice

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring: No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

56. Cleveland Mill

State: NM

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: July 23, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: August 20, 2007

COCs: Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, lead, and zinc

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment; no obvious groundwater-specific goal other than to prevent contamination.

Technologies Applied: Soil excavation in the original ROD. Because EPA anticipated that associated groundwater contamination would naturally attenuate once the source was removed, the 1993 ROD did not include a groundwater remedy.

Reported Results: All the monitoring wells and residential wells used to gather RI data were below MCLs and New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission (NMWQCC) standards. (But this has nothing to do with the remedy or the post-deletion monitoring.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as these were not remedial goals. It could be argued that this was not a contaminated groundwater site.

ICs in Place? Yes, restrictive covenants

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

57. Double Eagle Refinery Co.

State: OK

Site Lead: EPA/State

Date Deleted from NPL: August 21, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: May 15, 2007 (combined review done for Fourth St. and Double Eagle sites)

COCs: PAH, chlorinated hydrocarbons and PCB, alkyl benzenes, ketones, lead (primary COC), arsenic, and antimony

RAOs: Ensure that contaminants do not migrate deeper, or to a receptor point off-site, and determine if an off-site source of contamination exists. The plan for the site seems to indicate that no one will ever drink the groundwater, precluding the need to meet MCLs.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: COC concentrations tend to be decreasing, except for chlorinated solvents in a few wells. The off-site wells BMW- 6A and BMWD-1 showed an increase in chlorinated solvent concentrations, which prompted the DEQ to drill additional wells in the area. The results of the off-site study indicate that there are off-site sources of chlorinated solvent contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of natural attenuation in 2002 indicating that natural attenuation is taking place at the site.

MCLs Achieved? Not sure; no concentrations were provided

ICs in Place? Yes, a deed notice

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No. The 2006 ESD determined that further groundwater monitoring is not necessary. The wells were plugged by the DEQ.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

58. Dutchtown Treatment Plant

State: LA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 16, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 12, 2007

COCs: Benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene (BTEX), and lead

RAOs: Prevent contamination of underlying 150-foot-deep drinking water aquifer and restore contaminated shallow groundwater, based on its classification, for future use.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: Deep Water Zone: According to the first five-year review report (EPA 2002a), “From 1997-2002, BTEX was not detected in any of the Deep Zone wells for any of the sampling events reported in the monitoring results.” From 2003 through 2006, BTEX constituents were not detected in the one remaining Deep Zone well (MW-7) for any of the sampling events reported in the groundwater analytical results. There is no evidence of vertical contaminant migration, thus the remedy continues to be protective of the shallowest drinking water aquifer (encountered at 100 feet bgs and extending to 300 feet bgs).

Shallow Water Zone: According to the first five-year review report (EPA 2002a), “For the monitoring results review (1997-2002), no concentrations of BTEX exceeded the Class III groundwater corrective action levels (taking into account the natural attenuation factor of 173) set forth in the O&M work plan (G&M 1997) for any of the sampling events reported.” From 2003 through 2006, BTEX constituents continue to remain below the Class III (not an underground source of drinking water) groundwater corrective action levels with the Updated O&M Plan’s (AGM 2002a) identified natural attenuation factor (of 173) included.

MCLs Achieved? No, but shallow groundwater would not be used as drinking water so cleanup to MCLs was not required. Deep water wells have never had site related contaminants detected (based on data from 1997-2006).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

ICs in Place? Yes, access restrictions, deed notices, and restriction on groundwater use from site wells.

Vapor Intrusion: The risk assessment did not consider vapor intrusion to indoor air. Although there are residences located within 100 feet of the site boundary (i.e., to the east), there are no residences located within 100 feet of the impacted shallow groundwater zone, and groundwater is not migrating toward the residences (i.e., it is migrating towards the northwest). Therefore, the vapor intrusion pathway is not considered a complete pathway.

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

59. Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery

State: OK

Site Lead: EPA/State

Date Deleted from NPL: August 21, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: May, 15, 2007 (combined review done for Fourth St. and Double Eagle sites)

COCs: PAH, chlorinated hydrocarbons and PCB, alkyl benzenes, ketones, lead (primary COC), arsenic, and antimony

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: COC concentrations tend to be decreasing, except for chlorinated solvents in a few wells. The off-site wells BMW-6A and BMWD-1 showed an increasing trend in chlorinated solvent concentrations, which prompted the DEQ to drill additional wells in the area. The results of the off-site study indicate that there are off-site sources of chlorinated solvent contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of natural attenuation in 2002 indicating that natural attenuation was taking place at the site.

MCLs Achieved? Unknown because no concentration data were provided

ICs in Place? Yes, a deed notice

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

60. Gurley Pit

State: AR

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 6, 2003

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 27, 2007

COCs: Lead, barium, zinc, and TOC

RAOs: The Remedial Investigation indicated that the groundwater contained no site-related contaminants and that the potential for future groundwater contamination would be prevented by the implementation of the source control remedy.

Technologies Applied: Source control and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: The results from the 2006 sampling event showed pit concentrations of barium, lead, zinc, and TOC, the COCs for the site, consistent with previous sampling rounds. The results provided no indication that the site was negatively impacting groundwater.

MCLs Achieved? Not Applicable

ICs in Place? Yes, deed notice

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

61. Industrial Waste Control (There is limited documentation for this site)

State: AR

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: April 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 26, 2007

COCs: Methylene chloride, toluene, PAHs, heavy metals including nickel, chromium, and lead

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment

Technologies Applied: Off-site disposal; solidification of soil; slurry wall to prevent contamination of groundwater; natural attenuation; groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: No numeric results are given. During September 2003, two monitoring wells recorded higher than baseline levels of contaminants. A Site Assessment Study concluded in November 2006 that the increase above baseline values was related to natural attenuation locally around the monitor wells and that contaminants of concern would not migrate off-site. No offsite migration of COCs has been detected in mine void at the downgradient monitor wells (MW-10, 11, and 103D) or the property line monitor well (MW-15).

MCLs Achieved? Unknown, as no numeric results are given.

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

62. Mallard Bay Landing Bulk Plant

State: LA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 19, 2005

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Arsenic, benzene, bromodichloromethane, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and manganese

RAOs: Reduce contamination to meet the following levels: arsenic (10 µg/L, the MCL); bromodichloromethane/chloroform (there is no specific MCL, but the total trihalomethane amount should not exceed 80 µg/L); carbon tetrachloride (5 µg/L, the MCL); manganese (50 µg/L, the MCL); benzene (5.0 µg/L, the LDEQ Risk Evaluation Corrective Action Program Screening Standard).

Technologies Applied: Emergency removal action

Reported Results: No numeric results given, but the fact sheet states that no hazardous substances remain at the Site above levels that prevent unlimited use and unrestricted exposure.

MCLs Achieved? Yes, but no data were provided.

ICs in Place? No. The waste will ultimately be removed from the site so it is anticipated that no institutional controls will be needed.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

63. Odessa Chromium #2 (Andrews Highway)

State: TX

Site Lead: EPA/State

Date Deleted from NPL: July 19, 2004

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 25, 2001

COCs: Chromium

RAOs: Reduce chromium to MCL (100 µg/L)

Technologies Applied: Extraction and electrochemical treatment of contaminated groundwater

Reported Results

MW-214A

MW-223R

MW-213

Jun 98   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Jun 98   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Jun 00   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Oct 98   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Oct 98   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Oct 00   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Dec 98  ND (0.02 mg/L)

Dec 98  ND (0.02 mg/L)

Jan 01   0.01 mg/L

MW-216

MW-209

MW-221

MW-231

Oct 98  0.03 mg/L

Apr 00 0.09 mg/L

Jun 00    0.1 mg/L

Jun 00   0.01 mg/L

Nov 98 0.05 mg/L

May 00 0.09 mg/L

Jul 00     0.1 mg/L

Oct 00   ND (0.02 mg/L)

Dec 98  0.06 mg/L

June 00 0.08 mg/L

Aug 00   0.1 mg/L

Jan 01   0.02 mg/L

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

64. Old Inger Oil Refinery

State: LA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 12, 2008

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 23, 2007

COCs: Heavy metals, phenols, benzene, naphthalene, benzo (a) pyrene, and benzo (a) anthracene

RAOs: Reduce contamination to levels meeting LDEQ’s RECAP GWSS standards: benzene 5.0 µg/L (same as MCL), naphthalene 10 µg/L (no MCL), benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 µg/L (same as MCL), benzo(a)anthracene 7.8 µg/L (no MCL).

Technologies Applied: Five emergency removal actions; Pump and treat, groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: The data review determined that the shallow groundwater, when compared to the Risk Evaluation and Corrective Action Program Groundwater Screening Standards values, is not contaminated above levels that pose an unacceptable risk. The five-year review document was not accessible from CERCLIS.

MCLs Achieved? Unclear, as numeric results were provided.

ICs in Place? Yes, conveyance notice

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

65. South 8th Street Landfill

State: AR

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 28, 2004

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 16, 2009

COCs: Lead, arsenic, and manganese

RAOs: Restore groundwater to MCLs (lead 15 µg/L, arsenic 10 µg/L, and manganese 50 µg/L)

Technologies Applied: Monitored natural attenuation

Reported Results: No specific results listed but the fact sheet says that the groundwater is no longer contaminated. According to the last five-year review says “For the ground water OU, nine monitoring wells were sampled during eight sampling events in 2002 and the analytical results confirmed that the source area treatment and natural attenuation processes in the aquifer have reduced the metal concentrations below the remedial goals specified in the 1998 ROD Amendment. The nine groundwater monitoring wells were plugged and abandoned in June 2003.”

MCLs Achieved? Yes, but no numeric results provided in the final five-year review.

ICs in Place? Yes. There is a prohibition on further excavation.

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

66. Farmers’ Mutual Cooperative

State: IA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 13, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 7, 2000

COCs: Alachlor, atrazine, cyanazine, metolachlor, metribuzin, trifluralin, benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and total xylenes

RAOs: Reduce contamination to meet State action levels: alachlor 0.4 µg/L, atrazine 3 µg/L, cyanazine 1 µg/L, metolachlor 70 µg/L, metribuzin 100 µg/L, trifluralin 5 µg/L, benzene 5 µg/L, toluene 2,420 µg/L, ethyl benzene 700 µg/L, and total xylenes 12,000 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and natural attenuation

Reported Results: Pesticide contaminant concentrations have been shown to be below standards for three consecutive sampling events (November 1997 through November 1999) but benzene concentrations in MW-13 and MW-22 continue to indicate concentrations above action levels.

MCLs Achieved? No, benzene was still above action levels in two wells in 2000.

ICs in Place? Yes. The site remains on the State Registry of Hazardous Waste or Hazardous Substance Disposal Sites and cannot be sold or undergo a significant change in use without the approval of the IDNR.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? In a letter dated April 3, 2000, IDNR agreed with the recommendation to discontinue pesticide monitoring, to abandon 12 monitoring wells, and to continue annual sampling of monitoring wells MW-13 and MW-22 for BTEX, with the understanding that subsequent modification to the monitoring could be required if the magnitude and/or extent of BTEX contamination were found to increase significantly.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

67. Kem-Pest Laboratories

State: MO

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 20, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 21, 1999

COCs: Pesticides including heptachlor, chlordane, and endrin; VOCs; and SVOCs

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. The baseline risk assessment indicated groundwater contamination did not pose a significant threat to human health.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring will be conducted for the first five years to verify that no unacceptable exposures posed, by conditions at the site, occur.

Reported Results. 1999 review of groundwater monitoring to date indicates that the remedy is protective.

MCLs Achieved? Yes, according to the Fact Sheet MCLs were met.

ICs in Place? None listed

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

68. Labounty

State: IA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 6, 1993

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 22, 2010

COCs: Arsenic and 1,1,2-trichloroethane

RAOs: Reduce arsenic concentration in the Cedar River to acceptable levels (MCL 10 µg/L) by reducing surface infiltration through wastes. The MCL for 1,1,2-trichloroethane is 5 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and an upgradient groundwater diversion wall

Reported Results: Tables in the most recent five-year review (2010) show contaminant concentrations above MCLs in some wells during 2004-2009 monitoring (for example, M0479-A: arsenic 653 µg/L and 1,1,2-TCA 10,600 µg/L in May 09).

MCLs Achieved? No, contaminant concentrations are still above MCLs in some wells.

ICs in Place? Yes. There are perpetual easements, a restrictive covenant, and prohibitions against the use of groundwater or intrusive activities.

Vapor Intrusion: There is a building immediately north of monitoring well M00379A and upgradient of the constructed chemical fill cover which raises the possibility of vapor intrusion. The concentration of 1,1,2-TCA in this well is less than 5 µg/L (the screening level for 1,1,2-TCA in the 2002 EPA Vapor Intrusion Guidance).

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

69. Waverly Ground Water Contamination

State: NE

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: November 20, 2006

Date of Last Five-Year Review: August 13, 2009

COCs: Carbon tetrachloride and chloroform

RAOs: Restore the contaminated aquifer for future use as a source of drinking water by reducing the carbon tetrachloride and chloroform concentrations below health-based criteria described in the ROD (5 µg/L carbon tetrachloride and 100 µg/L chloroform).

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: Most recent sampling (second quarter FY2009) indicated that carbon tetrachloride and chloroform were not detected in monitoring wells.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? No

Vapor Intrusion: No. Soil gas compliance results indicated that the contaminants were at such a depth (30 to 35 feet below ground surface) that it was highly unlikely that any vapors would reach any potential receptors.

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

70. White Farm Equipment Co. Dump

State: IA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: October 30, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 22, 2009

COCs: Benzene, cadmium, chromium, and lead

RAOs: Prevent further migration of contaminated groundwater and reduce levels of contaminants below established health-based standards for drinking water [benzene 1 µg/L (MCL is 5), cadmium 5 µg/L, chromium 100 µg/L, and lead 50 µg/L—action level is 15].

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat

Reported Results: As of 2009, the levels of benzene, cadmium, chromium, and lead in the groundwater remain below the performance standards set for the site. It should be noted that the concentrations of all four analytes were below detection limits during both the 1999 and 2004 monitoring efforts. During the 2008 monitoring effort, there were detectable concentrations of cadmium, chromium, and lead, but still below performance standards.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, there is a restrictive covenant

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

71. Rose Park Sludge Pit

State: UT

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: June 3, 2003

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 25, 2007

COCs: PAHs

RAOs: “Prevent exposure to the acid waste sludge, eliminate potentially unhealthy odors and vapors, and prevent off-site migration of the sludge through surface water and groundwater.” No specific cleanup goals were established for the groundwater at the Site (http://epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/d030630.htm).

Technologies Applied: Slurry wall/cap

Reported Results: Results from groundwater monitoring suggest that contamination from the waste material remains contained.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as no specific cleanup goals were set for groundwater this Site. The goal was containment.

ICs in Place? Yes. There is a five-party agreement between Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City/County Health Department, Utah State Health Department, EPA, and Amoco Oil Company to provide Site access for all five entities and to prohibit any excavation activities on-site.

Vapor Intrusion: Although the RAOs state that a primary objective is to eliminate potentially unhealthy odors and vapors the five-year review does not elaborate on vapor intrusion.

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

72. Whitewood Creek

State: SD

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 13, 1996

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 27, 2007

COCs: Arsenic, copper, zinc, selenium, and mercury

RAOs: Reduce contaminant concentrations below MCLs (arsenic 10 µg/L, copper 1,000 µg/L, zinc 5,000 µg/L, selenium 50 µg/L, and mercury 2 µg/L). Five-year review suggests a waiver from complying with the arsenic MCL.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: No groundwater results provided in the most recent five-year review.

MCLs Achieved? No. The fact sheet says that “Since waste is left in place which precludes unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, EPA will continue to conduct five-year reviews.”

ICs in Place? Yes, ordinance restrictions on future digging in remediated areas

Vapor Intrusion: Not applicable

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

73. Del Norte Pesticide Storage

State: CA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: September 18, 2002

Date of Last Five-Year Review: June 14, 2010

COCs: 1,2-Dichloropropane and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid

RAOs: Restoration of contaminated on-site groundwater to 100 µg/L for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (federal MCL is 70) and to the health-based level of 10 µg/L for 1,2-dichloropropane (federal MCL is 5)

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: By October 1997, both the groundwater and soil cleanup levels for 2,4-D had been achieved. Although the 10 µg/L heath-based level for 1,2-DCP has not been achieved, 1,2-DCP concentrations in groundwater continue to decline slowly and the plume is contained within the original contaminated area.

MCLs Achieved? No, the MCL for 1,2-DCP has not yet been met. “EPA’s 2000 ROD Amendment concluded that the 5,000 foot plume was not migrating and that it was technically impracticable to restore the 1,2-DCP plume to the 5 µg/L MCL. The 2000 ROD Amendment therefore waived this ARAR on the basis of Technical Impracticability” (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WASTE/2002/August/Day-08/f20099.htm).

ICs in Place? Yes, ordinance restrictions on future digging in remediated areas

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

74. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Salinas Plant)

State: CA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: April 21, 2005

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 28, 2001

COCs: VOCs

RAOs: Reduce GW contamination to the following levels:

Contaminant

MCL (µg/L)

federal MCL


1,1 dichloroethylene

6

7

1,1 dichloroethane

5

none

1,1,1 trichloroethane

70

200

1,2 dichloroethane

0.5

5

Tricholorethene

0.7

5

Benzene

0.7

5

Toluene

20

1000

Ethylbenzene

10

700

Xylene

70

10,000


Technologies Applied: Pump and treat, groundwater monitoring, and natural attenuation

Reported Results: The final sampling occurred on July 28, 1998 with only two wells showing contamination above cleanup standards: well S09 containing 55 µg/L of 1,1-DCE and OW4 containing 11 µg/L of 1,1-DCE. These wells are in the shallow zone and are located approximately 250-300 feet from the facility. No contamination above cleanup standards was found in the intermediate or deep zones. The Regional Water Quality Control Board noted a declining trend in 1,1-DCE concentrations in the shallow aquifer (from 130 µg/L in 1995 to 55 µg/L in 1998) and stated that, due to the low concentrations and significant separation by tens of feet from underlying water zones, the shallow zone contamination would not be expected to impact the downgradient groundwater and deeper aquifers in the future. They also stated that they believed that the wells would slowly attenuate to below the cleanup standard. After the last sampling event, wells were destroyed and sealed. No further monitoring has occurred at the site.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

MCLs Achieved? Yes, MCLs were achieved in the deep aquifer (but not the shallow).

ICs in Place? No, there are no institutional controls required as part of the remedy for the Firestone site.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

75. Schofield Barracks

State: HI

Site Lead: U.S. Army

Date Deleted from NPL: August 30, 2000

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 24, 2007

COCs: Trichloroethene

RAOs: Reduce level of TCE contamination to drinking water standards only at point of use. A technical impracticability (TI) waiver was prepared, which supports the idea of point-of-use treatment. Because of the TI waiver, the cleanup goals apply only at the wellhead and not throughout the aquifer.

Technologies Applied: Point-of-use treatment

Reported Results: No results provided

MCLs Achieved? No, because water is only being treated at the point of use

ICs in Place? Yes. There are prohibitions on the use or disturbance of groundwater, prohibitions on excavation activities, disturbance of the landfill cover, and any other activities that might interfere with the implemented remedy.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

76. Southern California Edison Co. (Visalia Poleyard)

State: CA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 27, 2009

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 21, 2010

COCs: Pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, and TCDDeqv

RAOs: Reduce contamination to the following levels: pentachlorophenol 1 µg/L, benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 µg/L, and TCDDeqv 30 pg/L.

Technologies Applied: Physical and chemical groundwater treatment system (steam)

Reported Results: The table below shows site-wide average groundwater concentrations over a three-year compliance demonstration period.

 

Pentachlorophenol

Benzo(a)pyrene

TCDD eqv.


Cleanup Levels

1.0 µg/L

0.2 µg/L

0.03 ng/L

UCL95 Int. Aquifer

0.075 µg/L

0.055 µg/L

0.019 ng/L

UCL95 Deep Aquifer

0.054 µg/L

0.03 µg/L

0.0053 ng/L


The statistical analysis of the groundwater data demonstrated that the cleanup levels had been met in both the intermediate and deep monitoring zones at the Site, except for two outliers, which were found during a period with low water table elevations.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, deed restrictions

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

77. Western Pacific Railroad Co.

State: CA

Site Lead: EPA

Date Deleted from NPL: August 29, 2001

Date of Last Five-Year Review: September 18, 2008

COCs: 1,1-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1-DCA, and TCE

RAOs: Reduce contamination to the following levels: 1,1-DCE to 7 µg/L; 1,1,1-TCA to 200 µg/L; 1,1-DCA to 5 µg/L; and TCE to 5 µg/L.

Technologies Applied: Groundwater monitoring and pump and treat

Reported Results: Analytical results indicated that 1,1-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, and TCE continue to be present in the groundwater at concentrations below the Federal and State MCLs. The concentration of 1,1-DCA in well MW8902 was 5.4 µg/L, which is above the cleanup level of 5.0 µg/L.

MCLs Achieved? No. Concentrations of 1,1-DCA are still slightly above the MCL.

ICs in Place? Yes, a land use covenant

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

78. Bonneville Power Administration Ross Complex

State: WA

Site Lead: U.S. Department of Energy

Date Deleted from NPL: September 23, 1996

Date of Last 5 Year Review: September 2, 2009

COCs: dichloroethylene and chloroform, found in on-site groundwater at slightly elevated levels. CERCLIS does not consider this to be a site with contaminated groundwater.

RAOs: Protection of human health and the environment. Results of the site-specific risk assessment indicated that exposure to either on- or off-site groundwater would not pose a risk to human health.

Technologies Applied: None for groundwater

Reported Results: None reported

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as there was likely little groundwater contamination to begin with

ICs in Place? Yes, but not for groundwater

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

79. Northwest Transformer

State: WA

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 28, 1999

Date of Last Five-Year Review: July 27, 1999

COCs: PCBs in soil

RAOs: None for groundwater

Technologies Applied: None for groundwater

Reported Results: The PRPs continued to monitor groundwater at the site for five years after cleanup was completed and no contaminants of concern were detected in perimeter or off-site wells.

MCLs Achieved? Not applicable, as groundwater was never contaminated

ICs in Place? A Consent Decree with the owners executed prior to cleanup required a deed notice with requirements to notify the Washington State Department of Ecology before excavating below 15 feet and to notify EPA before using groundwater at the site. A deed notice to that effect was recorded August 30, 1999.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? Yes, for five years after cleanup to make sure there was no contaminant migration from soil to groundwater.

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

80. Union Pacific Railroad Company

State: ID

Site Lead: State

Date Deleted from NPL: September 22, 1997

Date of Last Five-Year Review: N/A

COCs: Heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and organic compounds

RAOs: Reduce contamination to federal drinking water standards

Technologies Applied: Pump and treat and groundwater monitoring

Reported Results: Since the completion of the cleanup, groundwater monitoring results have met or were lower than federal drinking water standards.

MCLs Achieved? Yes

ICs in Place? Yes, there are deed, land, and groundwater use restrictions.

Vapor Intrusion: Not mentioned

Long-Term Monitoring? No

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 301
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 302
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 303
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 304
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 305
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 306
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 307
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 308
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 309
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 310
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 311
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 312
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 313
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 314
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 315
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 316
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 317
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 318
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 319
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 320
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 321
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 322
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 323
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 324
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 325
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 326
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 327
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 328
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 329
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 330
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 331
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 332
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 333
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 334
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 335
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 336
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 337
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 338
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 339
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 340
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 341
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 342
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 343
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 344
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 345
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 346
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 347
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 348
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 349
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 350
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 351
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 352
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 353
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 354
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 355
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 356
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 357
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 358
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 359
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 360
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 361
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 362
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 363
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 364
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 365
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 366
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 367
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 368
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 369
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 370
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 371
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 372
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 373
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 374
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 375
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 376
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 377
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 378
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 379
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 380
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 381
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 382
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 383
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 384
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 385
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 386
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 387
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 388
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 389
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 390
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 391
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 392
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 393
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 394
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 395
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 396
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 397
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 398
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 399
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 400
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 401
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 402
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 403
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 404
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 405
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 406
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 407
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Analysis of 80 Facilities with Contaminated Groundwater Deleted from the National Priorities List." National Research Council. 2013. Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14668.
×
Page 408
Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites Get This Book
×
Buy Hardback | $79.00 Buy Ebook | $64.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Across the United States, thousands of hazardous waste sites are contaminated with chemicals that prevent the underlying groundwater from meeting drinking water standards. These include Superfund sites and other facilities that handle and dispose of hazardous waste, active and inactive dry cleaners, and leaking underground storage tanks; many are at federal facilities such as military installations. While many sites have been closed over the past 30 years through cleanup programs run by the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. EPA, and other state and federal agencies, the remaining caseload is much more difficult to address because the nature of the contamination and subsurface conditions make it difficult to achieve drinking water standards in the affected groundwater.

Alternatives for Managing the Nation's Complex Contaminated Groundwater Sites estimates that at least 126,000 sites across the U.S. still have contaminated groundwater, and their closure is expected to cost at least $110 billion to $127 billion. About 10 percent of these sites are considered "complex," meaning restoration is unlikely to be achieved in the next 50 to 100 years due to technological limitations. At sites where contaminant concentrations have plateaued at levels above cleanup goals despite active efforts, the report recommends evaluating whether the sites should transition to long-term management, where risks would be monitored and harmful exposures prevented, but at reduced costs.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!