SOMS DocID 2102408
v ® / E F ^
; United States 'Environmental Protection ' Asency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5102G)
EPA-542-R-00-010 September 2000 www.epa.gov clu-in.org
Solidification/Stabilization Use at Superfund Sites
AR305166
Notice and Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Technology Innovation Office under EPA Contract Number 68-W-99-003. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. For more information about this project, please contact: Carl Ma, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Innovation Office, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (MS 5102G), Washington, D.C, 20460; (703) 603-9903, e-mail: [email protected].
This document may be obtained from EPA's web site at www.epa.govltiol, or at clu-iti.org. A limited number of hard copies of this document are available free of charge by mail from EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publicadons, at the following address (please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery):
U.S. EPA/National Service Center for Environmental Publications RO. Box 42419 Cincinnati, OH 45242 Phone: (513) 489-8190 or (800) 490-9198 Fax: (513) 489-8695
AR305167
Summary
Solidification/stabilization (S/S) is an established technology that has been used for almost 20 years to treat a variety of wastes at Superfund remedial sites throughout the country. Historically, S/S has been one of the top
I five source control treatment technologies used at Superfund remedial sites. To provide interested stakeholders i such as project managers, technology service providers, consuking engineers, site owners, and the general public \ with the most recent information about S/S applications at Superfund sites, as well as information about trends
in use, specific types of applications, and cost, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) performed a review and analysis of S/S applications and prepared this summary.
Highlights of S/S use at Superfund remedial sites include:
• Trends in Use - S/S is one of the top five source control treatment technologies used at Superfund remedial sites, having been used at more than 160 sites since FY 1982. The frequency with which S/S was selected as a remedy increased during the late 1980s and early 1990s, reaching a peak in FY 1992, and then generally decreasing through FY 1998.
• Project Status - Many of the S/S projects (62 percent) have been completed, with an estimated 21 percent in the predesign/design stage. Overall, completed S/S projects represent 30 percent of all completed projects In which treatment technologies have been used for source control. In addition, the average operational time for S/S projects was I.I months, which is shorter than other technologies such as soil vapor extraction, land treatment, and composting.
• Types of Applications - A majority of S/S projects at Superfund remedial sites are ex s/tu applications where inorganic binders and addidves were used to treat metal-containing waste. Organic binders were used for specialized waste such as radioactive wastes and those containing specific hazardous organic compounds. S/S was used to treat wastes containing only organics for a small number (6 percent) of the projects.
• Performance - Most performance testing for S/S waste products is conducted after curing is completed, and only limited data are available on long-term performance of S/S at Superfund remedial sites. Available performance data for metals for these projects showed that S/S met the established performance goals. Only limited data were available on organics; however, S/S met the established performance goals for several projects.
• Cost - Information about the cost of using S/S to treat wastes at Superfund remedial sites was available for 29 completed projects. The total cost ranged from $75,000 to $16 million. The average cost per cubic yard for these S/S projects was $264, including two projects with relatively high costs (approximately $1,200 per cubic yard each). Excluding those two projects, the average cost per cubic yard for S/S was $ 194.
Sources of information about S/S used for this summary included Superfund Records of Decision (RODs), ROD amendments, and Explanations of Significant Differences (ESDs) issued by EPA through FY 1998; data and analyses contained in EPA's Treatment Technologies for Site Cleanup: Annual Status Report {ninth edition) (ASR); informadon being collected for the tenth edition of the ASR, expected to be published later this year; and EPA's REmediation And CHaracterization Innovative Technologies (EPA REACH IT) system.
What is Solidification/Stabilization
The term "solidification/stabilization" refers to a general category of processes that are used to treat a wide variety of wastes, including solids and liquids. Solidification and stabilization are each distinct
technologies, as described below (EPA, 1997, Portland Cement Association 1991):
• Solidification - refers to processes that encapsulate a waste to form a solid material and to restrict contaminant migration by decreasing the surface area exposed to leaching and/or by coating the waste with low-permeability materials. Solidification can be accomplished by a chemical reaction between a waste and binding (solidifying) reagents or by mechanical processes. Solidification of fine waste particles is referred to as microencapsulation, while solidification of a large block or container of waste is referred to as macroencapsulation.
I AR305168
• Stabil ization - refers to processes that involve chemical reactions that reduce the leachability of a waste. Stabilization chemically immobilizes hazardous materials or reduces their solubility through a chemical reaction. The physical nature of the waste may or may not be changed by this process.
For S/S applications at Superfund sites, the regulatory definition of stabilization under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) may be relevant to a project. Under the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program (40 CFR part 268), stabilization is the required treatment standard for certain types of waste.QrTaddition,-!!?
'^tabilizatiohnTTay^be|TjseOcrTendeT'T"RCRAlhazar^^ '^rior'to~dis^osan RCRA defines stabilization (40 CFR 268.42) as "[a process that] involves the use of the following reagents (or waste reagents): (I) Portland cement; or (2) lime/pozzolans (e.g., fly ash and cement kiln dust) - this does not preclude the addition of reagents (e.g., iron salts, silicates, and clays) designed to enhance the set/cure time and/or compressive strength, or to overall reduce the leachability of the metal or inorganic."
In addition, S/S processes can involve the use of very high temperatures (usually greater than 1,500 °F) to vitrify wastes, forming glass-like waste products. However, these S/S processes are not addressed in this summary.
Use of S/S at Superfund Sites
Recent information about the use of S/S at Superfund remedial sites indicates that S/S has been used at 167 sites since FY 1982. Exhibit I shows the number of projects by status for the following stages -
predesign/design, design completed/being installed, operational, and completed. Data are shown for in situ and ex situ S/S projects. In addition, information about all source control technologies is provided. With respect to S/S projects, the majority of both in situ and ex situ projects (62 percent) are completed, followed by projects in the predesign/design stage (21 percent). Overall, completed S/S projects represent 30 percent of all completed Superfund projects in which treatment technologies have been used for source control. (Appendix A contains summary information, where available, for these S/S projects).
u
M—
o w DO CO C W
u
Exhibit 1 : Percentase of Superfund Remedial Projects by Status
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
ES3 In Situ S/S • • Ex Situ S/S
All Source Control Technologies
26%
7% TTW
Predesign/Design Design Completed/ Operational Being Installed
Project Status
Data Source: ASR (9th Edition), FV"98 RODs Number of Projects: Source Control = 682, Ex Situ S/S = 139, In Situ S/S = 28
. . 5 1 % 50%
Completed
AR305169
Remedy Selection Trends
Exhibit 2 shows the top five source cont ro l t reatment technologies used at Superfund remedial sites
f rom FY 1982 through FY 1998. Cumulatively, S/S projects are the second most common type of source control treatment technoiogy implemented at these sites, representing 24 percent of all source control treatment technology projects. Soil vapor extraction (SVE) is ,the most common technology implemented, representing 28 percent of all source cont ro l t reatment technology projects.
Exhibit 3 shows the trend in selection of S/S as a remedy at Superfund remedial sites between FY 1982 and FY 1998 and compares the selection of S/S remedies wi th all other treatment technologies. The frequency with which S/S was selected as a remedy increased during the late 1980s and early 1990s, reaching a peak in FY 1992, and then generally decreasing through FY 19981 The trend in S/S remedy selection during this time iframe is similar to that for all source control treatment technologies.
[Remedy Clianges
t u t Exhibit2: Top 5 SourcejControi Trcatmeirtitttt ^fechnolosieslUsedtatSuperfund Remedial ;Sites»
Exhibit 3: RODs Selectins Solidification/Stabilization Remedies vs. All Source Control RODs
!.»-SoliriiFj.:o:ion/5tal)i!rialron RODs
|-*-All Source Conlrol Treatment RODs
82 83 34 65 86 87 88 89 90 91 93 93 94 95 96 97 98
Fiscal Year
Note: Source control treatment RODs are defined as RODs selecting one or
more treatment technologies to treat the source of the contamination
Exhibit 4 compares the number of RODs in which S/S was selected with the actual number of S/S projects implemented each year from FY 1982 through FY 1998. The differences between the number of
RODs where S/S was selected as the remedy and the number of S/S projects implemented reflects changes in the remedies that occurred during the remedial process. Between FY 1982 and FY 1987 and between FY 1994 and FY 1998, the number of S/S remedies implemented is close to the number of S/S remedies selected in RODs. From FY 1988 through FY 1993, there is a larger gap between the number of S/S remedies selected and the number implemented. As shown in Exhibit 3, this time frame corresponds to the fiscal years in which S/S was most frequently selected as a remedy.
Exhibit 5 shows the remedies that were selected to replace S/S. Off-site disposal was the most frequently selected (27 percent) remedy, followed by on-site containment (15 percent).
Exhibit 4: Selection Versus Implementation of Solidification/Stabilization Remedies
-^Sohdificalion/Stobi lizotion - selected
-*-Solid>!:cafion/5tGbili7otron - implcmcnicd
.38 .
PA
\J"A 7 A l \ \
/ jC, "^^ i f M ^ - ^ iiN\ /
i-KQArfc;™—
A'3
^ j 7«
'>
/ i.
6 / 8.? e.l R'-> 66 37 88 fl'7 90 91 92 9.? 94 9:5 96 97
Fiscal Year
Exhibit 5: Remedies Selected to Replace Solidification/Stabilization
Total Nunnber of Projects = 59
No Further Action (3) 5% \
Institutional Controls (2)
3%
ita Not Available (23)
40%
- Other Treatment
10%
Containment (on site) (9) [*'•"""'—•i'*...,.«^J 15% k - ' ' i - J a t f } T ' ! l
' • ' ; ; •
Disposal (offsite) (16)
2 7 %
Data Source: ASR(9tti Edition) Fy'98 RODs
Note: Does include 4 projects in which other treatment technologies were changed to S/S
AR305170
Reasons cited by project managers for replacing S/S as a remedy are presented in Exhibit 6.
,, JUiltttleieiiirioK^
l(5)i|Th44!Commun
sSiojiiTneRelwerei
; J(7): 5/S: :colildl rtoti igHiifiea^^;reaa«; th^
.^€i^
:S::|f Specific Types of S/S Applications
Exhibit 7 shows a breakdown of the S/S projects by type of application which include ex situ solidification/ j stabilization, in situ solidification/stabilization, ex situ stabilization only, and in situ stabilization only. A specific type of ' S/S application was identified for 88 percent of the projects. Solidification/stabilization {in situ and ex situ) • represents 63 percent of the S/S projects compared to 15 percent for stabilization only {in situ and ex situ).
I Exhibit 8 shows the types of binder materials used for S/S projects at Superfund remedial sites, including ! inorganic binders, organic binders, and combinadon organic and inorganic binders. Many of the binders used
include one or more proprietary additives. Examples of inorganic binders include cement, fly ash, lime, soluble silicates, and sulfur-based binders, while organic binders include asphalt, epoxide, polyestiers, and polyethylene. More than 90 percent of the S/S projects used inorganic binders. In general, inorganic binders are less expensive and easier to use than organic binders. Organic binders are generally used to solidify radioactive wastes or specific hazardous organic compounds.
Exhibit 7: Solidification/Stabilization Projects by Type
Total Nunnber of Projects = 167
Type of S/S TBD or
Unknown (37)* v ^ r l ^ f l
22% j | -H!r '^
Solidification/Stabilization n situ (21) .
13%
Stabilization Only • ex situ (22)
13%
Stabilization v^riiy in situ (4)
2%
* Includes 3/n s/tu projects Data Source: EPAand State Proje rtManagers
Solidification/Stabilization ex situ (83)
50%
Note: Number of projects tor each type is shown in parenthese. TBD = to be determined
Exhibits: Binder Materials Used for Solidification/Stabilization Projects
Total Number of Projects = 59
Inorganic and O r g a n i r _ Organics Binders Only (2) Binders (2i
3%.
Inorganic Binders Only (55) 94%
Data Source: EPAand State Project Managers Note: Inorganic binders consist of cement, fV ash, lime, soluble silicates, or sulfur
Organic binders consist of asphalt, organophilic clay, or activated carbon.
AR305171
Exhibit 9 summarizes the specific types of binders and reagents used in S/S projects at Superfund remedial sites. Cement is the most common binder (47 projects), followed by proprietary additives (22 projects), and phosphate (14 projects).
Exhibit 10 shows the types of contaminant groups and combination of contaminant groups treated by S/S at Superfund remedial sites. S/S was used to treat metals only in 56 percent of the projects, and used to treat metals alone or in combination with organics or radioactive metals at approximately 90 percent of the sites. S/S was used to treat
I organics only at 6 percent of the sites.
I Exhibit I I provides a further breakdown of the metals I treated by S/S at Superfund remedial sites. The top five i metals treated by S/S are lead, chromium, arsenic, cadmium, i and copper.
'*--rA project m^y'use more than pne binder or reasent ^
Exhibit 10: Contaminant Types Treated by S/S
Total Number of Projects = 163
Radioactive Metals Nonmetals only (2) and Organics (1)^ j 1%
'Org'anic and Nonmetals (1) _ ^ _ _ _. 1%
Metals and Organic (50)
. 3 1 %
RadioactiveMetals and Metals (4)^
2% Radioactive Metals (3)
2%
• Metals Only (92)
56%
Organics Only (10) 6%
Data Source: EPAand State ProjectManagers Note: Metals are defined as heavy metals. Data indicates how many projects are
addressing each type of contaminant group and are not necessarily indicative of how well the technology has treated each type of group
Exhibit 11: Number of S/S Projects Treating Specific Metals
120
100 105
> s ^ Z ' x ^ J " J> ^ f J " r " 0< .XA' XO ..>i-' J " ^''\s>'' o° ' ^ ^ <> ^ v ^ v%-^oo^ G C
Type of Metal Contaminant
Exhibit 12 shows the types of sites treated by S/S projects. Waste management/disposal areas, organic chemical manufacturing, petroleum refining, and metal ore mining, smeking and recycling facilities were the most common site types addressed by S/S.
Time of Operation
Data on completed S/S projects were analyzed to determine the average operational time for S/S projects compared to other technologies. For this analysis, operational time was defined as the period from when
operations began (following design and installation) to the time the project was determined to have been completed by the project manager. Assuming treatment of 1,000 cubic yards of waste, the average operational time for S/S projects was I.I months. For the same volume of waste, the average operational time was
AR305172
o"
£ z
Exhibit 12: Superfund Remedial Actions: Site Types for Solidification/Stabilization
.< /^^y'./y^.' ^Ae .<>' Ci J ^ ^ / ^
-^-^ i>^
.•5--"v>^\xC'"
/
. ^ <^a- ..c^<5> r .o
v^^^ .p^"
\<>
/- ° " ^°\.^^^y J^ 'c / .i>' °
.p ^
19 .0° 0
. 0 <i>
c^^ ^e-O^^
Site Type
approximately 0.75 months for thermal desorption, I month for incineration (on site), 2.5 months for soil vapor extraction, 3 months for land treatment, 3.8 months for composting, and 5.8 months for soil washing.
Post Cure Testing and Performancee
The performance of S/S at Superfund remedial sites often is measured after the solidified material has cured. As shown in Exhibit 13, post cure tesdng was performed for 67 percent of the S/S projects. Exhibit 14
lists the types of post cure tests used for S/S projects, which include; ( I ) physical tests - to provide informadon about the physical characteristics of the treated waste, such as its moisture content or strength; and (2) chemical tests - to measure the potential of a stabilized waste to release contaminants to the environment; to define the composition of the waste and assess the performance of the binder. The most common post cure tests used were the toxicity characterisdc leaching procedure (TCLP) test and the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) test.
Available performance data for treatment of metals by S/S f rom completed projects indicated that
concentrations of metals before treatment
typically ranged from 50 mg/kg to 70,000 mg/kg, with concentrations as high as 424,000 mg/kg for lead and 170,000 mg/kg
for cadmium. In general, post-treatment concentradons of metals met the RCRA TCLP standards.
Performance data for completed S/S projects where organics had been treated were limited. Typical organics treated by S/S at Superfund sites included tr ichloroethene, benzene, methylene chloride, pentachlorophenol.
Exhibit 13: Percentage of Completed S/S Projects Conducting Post Cure Testing
Total Number of Projects = 102
Post Cure Testing Not Conducted or
No Information Available (34)
33%
Post Cure Testing Conducted (68)
67%
AR305173
100
Exhibit 14: Type of Post Cure Testing Used for S/S Projects
Total Number of Projects = 66
i5 o
ex O 1-.
i 2
90 80
70 60
50 40 30
20
10
0
<^e> . . < ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ . < ^ ^ "
.<5^ > * >>
Type of Test (J>
<^
£^ o
A project may use more than one type of test. ANSI 16.1 is the American Nuclear Society test 16.1 which is a leaching test.
Synthetic precipitation leaching procedure.
ExhibitriS: S/S P<^tt6iman^
\€mMmMM: Pentachlorophenol
€(lsaiiiyp)-€g©0*
<200/Js/l Passed
Diox in? '^^
polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons, pesticides (dieldrin, endrin, isodrin, and aldrin), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Concentrations of contaminants before treatment typcially ranged f rom about 100 mg/kg to 1,100 mg/kg (PCBs).
Whi le only limited post-treatment performance data were available for organic wastes, the data indicated that S/S met the established performance goals for several projects. For example, at the American Creosote, a wood preserving site in Tennessee, soils were contaminated with wood preserving compounds such as pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenz(a,h) anthracene, and dioxin. As shown in Exhibit 15, S/S met the cleanup goals for each of these constituents.
Limited data are available on long-term performance of S/S at Superfund sites. The long-term environment and conditions to which the solidified waste is exposed can affect the stability of the treated waste. For example, studies (Klich et al) have shown that cement-based stabilized wastes are vulnerable to the same physical and chemical degradation processes as concrete and other cement-based materials (that is, have the potential to disintegrate over a period of 50 to 100 years).
, Results reported as concentration of SPLP extract. * *''ppq = parts per quintillion
Cost Data
Information about the cost of using S/S to treat wastes at Superfund remedial sites was available for 29 completed projects. Total costs for S/S projects ranged from' $75,000 to $16 million including the cost of excavation (if ex situ), treatment, and disposal (if ex situ). The cost per cubic yard treated ranged from $8 to approximately $ 1,200 per cubic yard. The average cost per cubic yard for these projects was $264, including two projects with relatively high costs (approximately $1,200 per cubic yard). Excluding those two projects, the average cost per cubic yard was $194.
AR305174
Disposal/Long Term Management Options
The waste forms produced by ex situ S/S processes are either disposed of off-site or disposed of on-site
(with or without capping). The waste products of in situ S/S processes are left in place at the site (i.e., disposed of on-site) with or wi thout capping. For completed S/S projects at Superfund remedial sites, on-site disposal of waste forms produced by ex situ processes and capping were used for the majority of projects, as shown in Exhibit 16.
f Additional Information
Exhibit 16: Long Term Management Options for
140-
120-
Pro
ject
s
CO
O
o o
1 1
o
E 60-E
^ 40-
20 -
0
S/S Projects
122
^ H ^M
HH ^ 1
1 1 35
1 ll • tapping O n - S i t ^ ^ ^ ™
Disposal Disposal
Ions Term Manasement Option*
* A project may implement more than one option.; on-site disposal is for wastes
from ex situ processes.
The following sources provide additional information about S/S processes in general and their use
at Superfund sites:
EPA's SolidificationlStobilization Resource Guide (EPA/ 542-B-99-002) contains summaries of information f rom 125 references, including technical, guidance and policy documents, and provides an easy-to-use matrix that cross-references resources by technology type, medium, and contaminant to help readers easily locate resources that meet their specific needs.
EPA's Treatn)ent Technologies for Site Cleanup: Annual Status Report (ninth edition) includes information about Superfund remedial action sites at which S/S projects are being or have been implemented.
EPA's REACH IT system, <www.epareachit.org>, provides detailed data, in a searchable system, about specific applications of S/S at Superfund sites, as well as a wide range of informadon about technologies, technology vendors, and other technology applications.
EPA's Updating Remedy Decisions at Select Superfund Sites Summary Report, FY 1996 and FY 1997 contains additional information about remedy changes that affected S/S projects.
The Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable (FRTR) site includes case studies of S/S applications, available at <www.frtr .gov/cost>.
References
ERA. 1999. Treatment Technologies for Site Cleanup: Annual Status Report (ninth edition) (EPA-542-R99-001). April.
EPA. 1997. Innovative Site Remediation Technology, SolidificationlStabilization. Design & Application, Volume 4. (EPA 542-B-97-007)
Klich, I., B. Batchelor, L.P. Wilding, LR. Press. 1999. Mineralogical alterations that affect the durability and metals containment of aged solidified and stabilized wastes. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 29.
Means, Jeffery et al. 1995. The Application of SolidificationlStabilization to Waste Materials. Lewis Publishers.
Portland Cement Association. 1991. Solidification and Stabilization of Waste Using Portland Cement.
Wiles, C C . 1987. A Review of SolidificationlStabilization Technology. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 14:5-21.
AR305175
List of Superfund Remedial Sites Using Solidification/Stabilization
Region
"'v-' l ' .
• • • " • 1
• - ~ f .
2 ,.
'''riy
;:'.2>:.
2 ' • ' " ' . •
2
2 - • , • '
•. '2
Site Name
W.R. Grace (Acton Plant)An'd Co., Inc.
PSC Resources
Chemical Control
NL Industries, Inc.
Waldick Aerospace Devices, Inc.
Asbestos Dump - New Vernon Road and White Bridge Road Cleanup
Nascolite Corp. - OU 2
American Cyanamid Co. - Group 1 lmpoundments(11,13,19,And24)
NL Industries, Inc.-0U1
State
MA
MA
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
ROD
Year
1989
1992
1987
1991
1991-
1^91;'
j991: •
,,'1993..'*.
1994
Contaminants
Arsenic
Trichloroethylene (TCE) Methylene chloride Acetone Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Benzene Trans 1,2-Dichloroethylene 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Arsenic Lead Zinc Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 1,1-Dichloroethane Polyaromatic hydrocartDons (PAHs) Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene
Pesticides Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Arsenic
Lead Cadmium
Chromium Cadmium
Asbestos
Lead: .
Toluene Ethylbenzene: 1^2,4-Trichlorpbenzene ' ;: .Zinc .. Lead ; ; : Acetone . , • Chromium . Xylene Copper Nickel Naphthalene Chlorobenzene Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Benzo(a)anthracene
Cadmium Lead
Project Status
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Designed/ . Not Installed
Operational;
Design
Project Manager
Dave Lederer 617-573-9665
Don Mcelroy 617-223-5571
0
Nigel Robinson .212-637^394
Joseph Gbwers 212-637^413
Daniel VVeissman 212-637-4384
Maryanne Rosa 212-637-4407
FarnazSaghafi 212-637-4408
. James Haklar 212-637^14
Joseph Gowers 212-637^13
A-1 continued on next page AR305176
Appendix A (continued)
Region
2
2
«
-
\'% ' . . i
2 \
2
2
'
2 >
2 •
2
"tl 1
^c2^>-^:
S'ite Name
Caldwell Truckirig -Amendment
AmencanCyar
f
1
• •
amid Co.-Group II ImpoundmentsjjIS, 16,17, And 18)
•
! Cosden Chemii
Marathon Batte
••'
. ' '
°
al Coatings
ryCorp -Areas!, II,AndII
Yori<OilCo -01J1
1
-i
1
, ,
-
41 Facet Enterprses , . '
1 Prefenred Platir
FMCCorp (Dul
1 f
Yorl<OilCo.-G
'••'• '• • . • 1
gCorp - 0 U 2
}lin Road)
U02
•
State
NJ
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
ROD
Year
1995
1996
.=
1998
1986
1988
-
1992
1
1992
1993
1998
Contaminants
1',1,1-Trichloroethane Lead Cadmium Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) Chloroform Trichloroethylene (TCE)
Naphthalene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Toluene Zinc 2-Methylnaphthalene Nickel Benzo(a)anthracene Copper Nitrosodiphenylamine Acetone Ethylbenzene Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Chromium Xylene Lead Anthracene Chlorobenzene Benzene
Beryllium Lead Chromiunh
Cobalt Nickel Cadmium
Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCBs) Lead Total petroleum hydrocarbons
(TPH) Cis-1,2-dichloroethene
Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCBs) Cadmium
Cadmium Chromiurri
Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD)
Zinc . . . ; •: Mercury Lead Dichloradiphenyldichloroethylene
(DDE) Copper Arsenic Alpha BHC
Lead Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Project
Status
Completed
Predesign
Predesign
Completed
Operational
Completed
Completed
Completed,
Designed/ Not Installed
Project IWahager
Rictiard Robinson , .212-637-4371
James Haklar 212-637-4414
' :• ':
, ' . • ' . ' ' ^
Edward Fihrierty :212-637-4367,;., "
PamTames -• . -.212-637^4255,,
Joel SIngerriian, 212-637-4258 ' •
IsabelRodrigues. J 212-637-4248
Janet Cappelli . 212-637:4275 ' ^
•Kevin Lynch 212.637-4287... .
Joel Singenman , 212-637-4258
A-2 continued on next page AR305177
A p p e n d
Region
3
3,
3
'•3
3
'3
3
3
3 ,
3
3
3
3
3
'3
3 .
^ , 3 i
3
,•^3
3
X A (cont inued)
Site Name
Brum Lagoon
Hebelka Auto Salvage Yard
Douglassville Disposal
Craig Farm Dmm
LetterkennyArmy Depot (BE Area) -' Fonner Solvent Disposal Lagoon/Earthen
Whitmoyer Laboratones - OU 2 (BIdg Structures)
Eastern Diversified Metals
Whitmoyer Laboratories - OU 3
Paoli Rail Yard
Tonolli Corp
C&D Recycling
Hunterstown Road
1 . . •
Jacks Creek/Sitkin Smelting And Refining
Whitmoyer Laboratones - OU 04 and OU 5
1
M W Manufactunng
C&R Battery Co Inc
First Piedmont Rock Quarry (Route 719)
RhinehartTire Fire Dump
Abex Corporation OU 1 - Innei" Focus Area
Ordnance Works Disposal Areas
s ta te
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
VA
VA
VA
VA
WV
1,
ROD
Year
1982
1989
1989
1989
}
1991
1991
1991. '
1991
,1992
1992
1992
1993 "
1997
1998
1998
1990 ,
1991
1992'
1992
1989 Lead
• ? ; ; - , • • ; - : • . ! . ; ; • : •
Contaminants
Lead.'w ' . ' - ' ^ \ \ \ . -SulfuncAcid ' ' ,- "* «' , ' r Sulfur " > ' ' " " ' ' '>' Hydrogen Sulfide
Lead Chromium - . . ,^ ^
Polyaromatic hydrocartDons (PAHs) Volatiie'organic"^compoUnds(VOCs) Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCBs) -Chromium ' " j Lead
Benzene ' • ^ ,'- - - *.^ ' , Resorcinol ' - - --»- ' ^ " , Phenol . • ' ^ , '-
Lead
Arsenic • ' " " ' ..''a -''",' - - ' Tar / > ' --' ' ' ,
Lead' '•
Arsenic ^ '"' ^ '
Polychlonnated bipheriyls'(PCBs)
Lead " , Cadmium ' - ' ' „ ' . - ' Arsenic ' Z ^ ' i - ' . \ j
Copper'" o " " ' Lead ' \ - / '
Trichloroethylene (TCE) ' ^ - ' Chromium ^, ->• -Lead " ' " ' ' \ : y ' < ^ . ' ' • :
Lead " ^^--^ -»
Arsenic i
Lead' ' „ ^'^ ^ U - ' - >
Lead
Lead . * - ' ' ^ . o " / .''- * Arsenic ^ ' - " ° . T -' ' Cadmium ' '* .,
Zinc
Lead ' ' '•! , ' j
Arsenic ' - /
Project
Status
Completed
Completed
Design
Completed
Completed
Completed
Predesign
Design
Design
Being Installec
Completed
Design
Design
Completed
Design
Completed
Operational
Completed
Operational
Predesign
Project Manager
Bhupendra Khona 215-814-3213
FredenckN Macmillan 215-814-3201
Victor J Janosik 215-814-3217
Garth Connor ' 215-814-3209
J-
StacieDnscoli'*; • . 215-566-3368
Chnstopher J. CortDett 215-814-3220
Steven J Donohue . 215-566-321.5. . . . . .
Chnstopher J. CoriDett 215-814-3220
Frances Costanzi 215-566-3196 - /;
Steven J Doribhue . 215-566-3215
Joseph Mcdowell 215-566-3192 . J |
John Banks 215-814-3214
Garth Connor 215-814-3209':. ; .
Chnstopher J. CoriDett 215-814-3220
Bhupendra Khona 215-814-321,3 . . .•
Ronnie M Davis :-215-814-3230
David lacono 215-814-3231
RussellH F ish ' - ' ; 215-566-3226
David lacono
215-814-323.1
Melissa Whittingtbn •;'-215-566-3235. :•,•
A-3 continued on next page
AR305178
Appendix A (continued)
Region
" -'4
.' "4-
^ 4 .
4
4 •- •
• 4 , • ••
4
4
4
• ; , 4 . ,
4
4
4
• , - 4
4 .„
' ',-:4
• 4
4
Site Name
' 6 1 ' -••'•' Mowbray Engineering
Interstate LeadiCo. .
• • I I • "
Alabama Arniy Ammunition.Plant, Area B, Study Are^s5|i10,16,19,OU6
Alabama Arniy
Davie Landfill
Pepper Steel 8
Ammunition Plant, OU 5 . • " • • - ' .
«,llbys;inc.
Sapp Battery Salvage .
Kassauf-Kimer ing Battery Disposal - ' OU 1 (Landfill Wastes) : . . .
n Kassauf-Kimeri ng Battery - Wetlands Soils
. : ' ' M - ; : • . • • • • ^ . • . - • - .
Zellwood Soil Contamination - OU T (Amendment) {
Yellow Water F
Schuylkill Meta
62nd Street Du
! 1,
Zellwood Soil € (Amendment)
oadDump
np
ontaminatiori - bU 1
Yellow Water Road Dump
- • . . , • '
Cabot/Koppers - Koppers OU
Agrico Chemici
• 4
Whitehouseoi
1
'1
Pits-Amendment
State
AL
A L
AL
AL
FL .
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
; ROD
Year
1986
..1991 .
1992
1997
;1985 '
;Vl986s'
1986 .
.•\1989.,-'
. 1990
1990 •
1990
;.;1996.....
1990
1990
,1990
1990
1992
1992
' Contaminants ;
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Lead .
Lead . •
Lead
X e a d . ' • • " , • • • . • • • • = • • . : ' • - .
Chromium •.•>;•. Cadmium "' Mercury -• Arsenic
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Heavy metals
Cadmium Antimony Lead; • . y ^
•Chromium;. ";r ". ' Battery casings Lead.
Leab Battery casings . ^
Chlbrdarie •' - ' .
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Chromium, . ' Antimony / • , " ; . . . Cadmium Lead
Cadmium. Chrorhium.. , •, : ' . '.,.
' L e a d ' • ' ' • • , r • • • ' . " . - . " ; \ y - - :
Lead Chroriiium Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Chromium Arsenic
Arsenic •. l e a d ' • • ; ; • • ; , . - v ' - . •• , . ; ' , . • .
Fluoride.'- '•'•;
Lead ' : ' Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Cadnium .. /. •: ' Antimony -Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Polychlorinated bipheriyls (PCBs)
Project
Status
Completed
Designed/ Not Installed
Operational
Completed
Completed
Completed
Operational
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Predesign
Completed
Design
Project Manager
Humberto Guzman 404-562-8942
AstridAponte 404-562-8932 .:>^
Dann Spariosu 404-562-8552 .
Dann Spariosu 404-562-8552
Bill Denman 404-562-8939 °
JohnZimmennan :; 404-562-8936
David Lloyd 404-562-8917
MaxwellKlrfipson 404-562-8941
Maxwell Kimpson 404-562-8941
Julie Santiago 404-562-8948
David Lloyd 404-562-8917
Galo Jackson 404-562-8937
Maxwell Kimpson 404-562-8941
Julie Santiago 404-562-8948
David Lloyd 404-562-8917
John Blanchard 404-562-8934
Ken Lucas 404-562-8953 ; . - •
' ' • ' ^ . , - • • '
Randa Chichakli 404-562-8907
' • .
A-4 continued on next page AR305179
Appendix A (continued)
Region
4 ,
1. 4
1 -
\ ^ •
1 4
[•" 4
I A. ' •
r"4-
• . 4' ,
; 4 - ' '
•'• 4 ;
., 4-,,:.
• ' 4 •
.. 4 ' '
{• ' • ^
SiteNameT / . .
• • • : : • • • :• . : V ^ V & ^ l
Peak Oil/Bay Dmm-OU 3 ;" ;;
Peak Oil/Bay Dnjm - OU 1
Jacksonville Naval Air Station-OU2PSCs2;4 i ;and43 ;
Florida Steel Corp. - OU 2 ;
Jacksonville Naval Air Station-,-OU2PSC42 , " : / y V
Stauffer Chemical Co. (Tarpon Springs)
-OU01 , ! . :
Robins Air Force Base - Sludge Lagoon
Hercules 009 Landfill . , '
Cedartpwn Industries, Inc. -
Maxey Flats Nuclear Disposal '..
FlowoodSite • . i
eelanese-OU2 ...
Carolina Transfonner Co. ' •
JFD Electronics/Channel Master •. . i
Bypass 601 Groundwater Contamination -
/Amendment ° - ' ,;
State
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
GA
GA
GA
KY
MS
NC
NC
, NC.
NC
ROD: .•'Year"]
: i 993 .
^1993 /
•1994 [.
J 9 ^ . :
.'••• i . - . ' • • '
't9?5 ,,
-1998
• " • • - • - , . ' • ' ; ' . . •
; i 99 i ' '
199^ '
'1993..;:
"1991^.;
- ' • - - • ' & . ' • '
• 1 - ' . , . . . . ' .
1988
1989,
...1991^:: "v
1992:: •
. ;1.993f ••;' V
Contaminants >•
Chromium
Lead v ' •• ^ -Zinc... '• . •.:.,;. .':. ..-.' -.•':-
Lead-, „ •.•;"',- \ -Polychlorinated bipheriyls (PCBs)
Nickel . Chromium '" Cadmium . " . , ' , . Arsenic Lfead ' •'. V " .• •,.-. ^' ' • : : •''•'-
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) -Lead-. .- ".:.. •'=_-./ ' - - ••
Cadmium •Nickel .:'' .;': , V > •;'.., .Lead'" ' , : ' ""^;"" ,:.':.-'"'; ] , ' : : ' ' ; ' - y . ' Chromiurti ,, ' „ ' . . ' • . . . . ' Silver -
Antimony ' .. Carcinogenic PAHs • ' ,' Phpsphoais . . . . ' ,. • ; . . . •Thallium ' ; Radium-226 • ' -' ' "Beryiliunr; ,;.. ..:-\ , ,: '''': . . Arsenic ,•
lead, •• ; ' -V-Cadrnium- -' ' .• ' ..'
Toxaphene \
Lead •--,..''
Xylene ; " Radioactive metals
Tritiurn • " " . ' • . ' ' ' Benzene- ..:• .'., Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Ethylbenzene" : ' Toluene , - . 1: ' •'.
Lead '•: j -
- . -
Ettiylene glycol; .^
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Chromium-. <« :• Nickel ' " ' • ' .;• _. Antimony, •• '_•
Lead'v,., " . ' ' ' • ' :> ' [ :• • \ i : ' ^ ' , , ' .:.
Project
Status
Design
Design
Completed
Completed
Completed
Predesign
Completed
Completed
Completed
Being Installed
Completed
Completed
Desigried/ Not Installed
Design
Completed
) Project Manager
RandallChaffins ' 404-562-8929
Randall Chaffins i;404-562-8929 J
Martha Berry 404-562-8533
' • • '
;;Bill Dennian ;404-562-8939
Martha Berry :404-562-8533
* • ' • ' •
•John Blanchard . .404-562-8934
Elizabeth Wilde 404-562-8528 Bill Downs
'912-926-1197
Annie Godfrey 404-562-8919 |
AnnieGodfrey 404-562-8919 |
Antonio Deangelo 404-562-8826
John Mcqueen 404-562-8913 |
Ken Mallary 404-562-8802 |
Luis Flores 404-562-8807 , |
Ken Mallary 404-562-8802
David Mattison . 919-733-2801 • , Giezelle Bennett 404-562-8824 1
A-5 continued on next page AR305180
I Appendix A (continued)
Region
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5 -
5
5
5
5 .
5
' Site Name- ' - » ~
11 North Carolina'State University- ^ -Lot 86 FanmUhit#1 ' '
^ 1 : - • • : : . . • •
Palmetto Woe
Independent f
)d Preserving '• '-.. 1^ -
II - » •JailCo .. _ %
r i ^ ^ J- ^ J-
Golden Stnp Septic Tank Sen/ice' '
Geiger(C&M «l Oil)-Amendment • ''
Savannah River (Usdoe) - Old F-Area Seepage Basin, Srs Building Number i 904-49g , [
Savannah River (Usdoe) - L-AreaPil Anc Chemical BasnAnd L-Area Acid/ " Caustic Basin ' '' • , . ' ' • ' ' ;
Shuronlnc-OUOl"- " ' - '
Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) - OU 3, Pond Waste Management Project
Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE)-OU 40, Burial Complex 4 " ' '-• \ J '"-•
Oak Ridge R« Surface Impc
-• 1 VelsicolChen
, il Sangamo Ele National Wilci
Sangamo Ele National Wildl
I 'II
Acme Solvent
• . 1 1 Acme Solvent
1 Midco'l 1
i 1
servation (USDOE)-0U'14, undments '•
ical " '
stnc Dump/Crab Orchard ' ife Refuge - PCB Areas OU
;tnc Dump/Crab Orchard fe Refijge - Metals Areas OU
Reclaiming, Inc - , , ,
Reclaiming, Inc
1
State
NC
SC '
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC-
TN
TN
TN
IL
IL
IL
J L
IL
IN
ROD
^ Year
, 1996
. 1987 w
1987
1991
1993
1997
1997
1998
1991
'1996
1997
,1988
^ 1 ' •
I199O
1990-^
1991
• 1991
1989
Contaminants i
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Heavy metals ' Solvents Radioactive metajs
Chromium Arsenic
Chromium Cyanide Cadmium Zinc Nickel
Cadmium
Lead Chromium Toluene
Mercury Cesium-137 Uranium
Chromium Radioactive metals Tntum
Lead
Radioactive metals
Strontium
Cesium-137 Plutonium Radioactive metals Strontium
Phenol Benzene
Lead Cadmium
Cadmium Chromium , Lead
Lead
Chromium Arsenic '
Chromium Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCBs) Pentachlorophenol (PCP) Nickel Lead Copper * Cyanide
Project '
Status
Design
Completed
Conipleted • •'•
Completed
Completed'
Design
Being Installec
Predesign
Completed .
Completed •
.Designed/ Not Installed ;
Completed
Completed -
Completed'
Completed-
Completed
Predesign
Project Manager
MichaeLTownsend' ' .404-562-8813 ; , , : .^
AhCherry.----•'.,;•' 404-562-8828 ; '
..Terry.-Tanner..... 404-5^2-8797 ^
Craig Zeller; '• 464-562-8827 • '
Sheri Pariabaker;:' • 4.p4r562-88'l0
Tariia Smith. • 803-725-8131 • '
LesGennany ; ^8103-725-8033-" ;;;
' : : ; ' • • . j ; - ' - ^ ^ ^ - - - • : • • ,
Ralph 0. Howard Jr
.404-562-8829^::; •...-•
EdCarreras; : '•>. 404-562-8509 '
EdCarreras 404-562-8509 ; • :
EdCarreras 404-562-8509 ,. .,
EricRunkel' ••'
•217-782-0451/V-;.^
Slanjunda'Gowda i ' ' 3,1:2-353-9236.-
Nanjunda Gowda ,' 312-353-9236 V ;•
David Linnear
•312-886-1841 •;;
bayid Linnear
| l 2 - 8 8 6 - 1 8 4 l ' ; " V
.Richard Bpice ;' .':'.. :;312-886-474(Ji'^ •;"
•'.•\ y i , ^ ' ; • ' . V ' • • ' •
A-6 continued on next page AR305181
, Appendix A (continued) k^-''.f:-
: ; 1 i r. t; l l ::x\ tSite '.Name;;:: t» - >; ; | l •
f *f i'lf!'*! *'**•*•** %**•* #*» * * i i i * *«:
f 's l ,%«
V i * * * ) '
M[dcip'lliis?H*»'-'UJir
i I i , , ^ i ^ , , , . J • ( . i , 1 - ; ; . . < i I . , , i " T . T s I * :
ii-lil*i^M-'*.':.:B'£*-'
i V. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
> ».•A'^S ;*• '* '
^ ^ ^ i ¥ £ ' ^
? *s T I * 1 i ?
itttifi
Continehtal SteeliCorij: rbu, 02111' 111''-*
u . ! : ; : i ! ' : : : l ; : i . i ! ! - - ^ ! i l ! 'M lH ' *H; * uizfi P f *»».*> f t #»#
• J ; - - JI *i *; !•! I •til^*' j 11 ^ *' ? • ' * * * ' ' - * ' * '••*,J-Ji * i4f » * & JJ J * j « »'* | S » ; «i j - i t * t S ( : S
iiUUiUisiilsUu'UiiU^'.iUmui;' U ^""nT^TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ^ i ;
. . 5Rbsai,;lric:UUUhiiUHuni: -j*ji*-* ***.*» *2»* i *« t* . i . . . i *»« j* i«« i^j|<»;
l * i H l * i
^ ^ i . ^ ? J * i * j J»*«. l . - ! ,»-* |
lutolon'Chemicals**" • • u ' *' * H s snu* l'nf|'?!'!:
1 s"«.'»!'. i •* t» i . i i . ' ' ' ' : If". - ' i i- •
'rff?*'
fff^f n*; " M l i i H n J f s n s i i H i i : . , i'-'.'i: i ; : ' , : : i !*! ! t ; i n i«-*ff^! ^ i - i i r ; - ; ;
|-i*.!-*i****w>
i - i ' i i L i i * -
ttf*.-*tts,ti-ifi!,^fr:nf?trri'f«fftfi i j i ; H n : : : i : ; ' : : : ! ' ' : ; - t M ! H i ; . . u . . Organic Chemicals, ?lric; HG)U-2?rr: *"r?i'. - ; i^ - ; . , i « , H I . ; , i u ' . ' . ; i ; • ; : ; ; " " M i i
#ilf'?ll^^*'*l^**'i«**w#*f#^*3**^
riTSffs;: Organic
l.i:Jlp;£' iTifftT*:
, . :C » : J . N f S i * , , • ^ ^ ' ^ * i - i ^ ^ , , * . ^ ^ i % ,
i . , . * 1 ! , . . , i , , J i S , . . , :•• J 1 J
lipDuriip-OUO'lUt!*
A-7 continued on next page
AR305182
