goider associates inc. - us environmental protection … · goider associates inc. consulting...

54
Goider Associates Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM OK HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, INDICATOR PARAMETERS, AND EXPOSURE SCENARIOS fh O Prepared By: Goider Associates Inc. and Engineering-Science, Inc. Distribution: 3 Copies 2 copies 2 Copies 2 Copies 1 Copy i copy - Waste Management of North America, Inc. Oak Brook, Illinois - Waste Management of North America, Inc. Irving, Texas - Goider Associates Inc s Lakewood, Colorado - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 Dallas, Texas - PRO Environmental Dallas, Texas - AFRCE-CR/ROV Dallas, Texas October 1990 903-2223 G0LQ f i A S S O C i A ' t S -W. iMOUMON 3CULEVARO Ss,rP -()C LAHEWOOD .DENVER). COLORADO LJ 3 A S Q M f l * H=i,. .3031 380-OMO * **• J0;> <#5 2CBO OFFICES IN U N t r C Q S T i ' E S • CANADA » U N I T E D K I N G D O M SWE36N AuSlPAuA 004244

Upload: dinhdien

Post on 13-Jul-2018

219 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

G o i d e r Asso c ia t e s I n c .C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S

F I N A LT E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M O K

H A Z A R D O U S S U B S T A N C E S ,I N D I C A T O R P A R A M E T E R S ,

A N D E X P O S U R E S C E N A R I O Sfh

O

Prepared By:G o i d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c .andE n g i n e e r i n g - S c i e n c e , I n c .

D i s t r i b u t i o n :3 C o p i e s2 c o p i e s2 C o p i e s2 C o p i e s1 C o p yi copy

- W a s t e M a n a g e m e n t o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , I n c .Oak Brook, I l l i n o i s- W a s t e Management o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , I n c .I r v i n g , T e x a s- G o i d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c sL a k e w o o d , C o l o r a d o- U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y Region 6D a l l a s , T e x a s- PRO Environmenta lD a l l a s , T e x a s- A F R C E - C R / R O VD a l l a s , T e x a s

October 1990 9 0 3 - 2 2 2 3

G 0 L Q € f i A S S O C i A ' t S - W . • i M O U M O N 3 C U L E V A R O S s , r P - ( ) C L A H E W O O D . D E N V E R ) . C O L O R A D O L J 3 A S Q M f l * H = i , . .3031 380-OMO * * * • J 0 ; > < # 5 2CBO

O F F I C E S I N U N t r C Q S T i ' E S • C A N A D A » U N I T E D K I N G D O M • S W E 3 6 N • A u S l P A u A

004244

C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S

October 10, 1990

Ms. Monica Chapa (6H-EO)Mosley Road Project CoordinatorO k l a h o m a / N e w Mexico Enforcement Sec t i onU . S . Environmental Protection A g e n c y , Region 61445 Ross AvenueD a l l a s , T e x a s 75202-2733RE: R E S P O N S E S TO EPA C O M M E N T S ON M O S L E Y ROAD SANITARY LANDFILL

" D R A F T T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M O N H A Z A R D O U S S U B S T A N C E S ,I N D I C A T O R P A R A M E T E R S , A N D E X P O S U R E S C E N A R I O S "

Dear Ms. Chapa:T h i s l e t t er provides responses to comments made by the U . S . Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) on the "Draft Technical Memorandum on Hazardous Subs tance s , I n d i c a t o r Parameters,and Exposure Scenarios" submi t t ed as part o f the M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r y Landfi l l RI/FS. EPAcomments were received by W a s t e Management of Oklahoma, Inc. (WMO) on S e p t e m b e r 21,1990.The f o l l o w i n g responses to the EPA comments referenced above are submitted on b e h a l f ofWMO. T h i s le t ter responds to the 20 comments provided by the EPA. The EPA comments arereproduced verbatim below along with responses.G E N E R A L C O M M E N T SGeneral Comment JEskL 1:The f o l l o w i n g documents , considered essential in conduc t ing a risk assessment consi s tent withthe EPA g u i d e l i n e s and p o l i c y , are not inc luded in the reference l i s t in Sec t i on 5.0 of t h i sdocument.

a. Risk Assessment Guidance for S u p e r f u n d : Volume I - H u m a n H e a l t hEvaluation Manual and Volume 2-EnvironmentaI Evaluation Manual,December, 1989.

b. Nat i ona l Oil and Hazardous Substances P o l l u t i o n Cont ingency Plan, 40CFR 300.

I T :«d-(M«tfo

3 O U L E . ' A M D S u i r £ ' ' V . L A K g W O O D O F N V E F H C O L O R A D O U S A :J02Z3 • T £ ~ . J O J H O 0540 • = A X .

' N U N I T E D S T A T E S • C A N A D A • U N f T E C K I N G D O M * S W E D E N • A U S T B A L . A

004245

October 10. ..1390 SQ3-2223c. CERCLA Compliance with other Laws Manual, Parts I and II, August1988 and August 1989.

Obviously, these documents were used in preparing this technicalmemorandum. I n c l u d e them in the reference li s t .Response:

EPA is correct that the above-mentioned documents were used in prepar ing thistechnical memorandum. They were not included in the reference l i s t becausethey were not cited in the text of the memorandum. The text of Sec t i on 2.0, 3,0and T a b l e 3-1 have been revised to reference these documents, and the referencel i s t ( S e c t i o n 5.0) has been undated to r e f l e c t the cited references.General C o m m e j a t . J 4 q . J 2 :The evaluat ion of the s a m p l e r e su l t s to de t ermine the l i s t of chemicals of p o t e n t i a l concern ispremature since the contaminant characterization tasks and the evaluation of background data arei n c o m p l e t e . However, the p r e l i m i n a r y evaluation does not appear to f o l l o w the proceduresou t l ined in the EPA risk assessment guidance. Chemicals shou ld not be e l imina t ed f romcons iderat ion based s o l e l y on t h e i r de t e c t i on below the Contract Required Quanl i ta t i on L i m i t sand media not p o t e n t i a l l y e f f e c t e d by contaminant transport f r o m the i n d u s t r i a l waste p i t s .Response:

The text of Sect ion 2,2 has been revised to incorporate EPA's comment. Thetables presented in the memorandum did not require revision, since the tablesincorporated all re sul t s , whether below the CRQL or above the CRQL. The EPAcomment will be used to assist in preparing the "Draft Technical Memorandumon Pate and Transport Model s , and Toxicological and Epidemiological Studi e s "to be submitted as the third risk; assessment document.S P E C I F I C C O M M E N T SS e c i f i c Comment No^i:Page 1, 1st paragraph - The f o l l o w i n g sentences should read "... risk assessment task, (on)b e h a l f of Waste Management of Oklahoma. . ."Response:

The text of Sec t ion 1.0 has been revised to incorporate the EPA comment.

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004246

n c K m e m o ™ d u m states that i t in c lude s a l i s t o f p o t e n t i a l l y hazardoussubstances that have been detec ted in various environmental media sampled at the sitea. T h i s paragraph s h o u l d reference T a b l e 2-1 where th i s l i s t appears.

Response:a.

b.

c.

4 0 r p p40 CFR e d e f i n i l i o n of a hazardous

, they ais hazardous substances.° f d e t C C t e d concentrarions f o r each

The t ex t of S e c t i o n i.O has been revised to reference f o r m e r T a b l e2*1, now renumbered as T a b l e 1-1.The word " p o t e n t i a l l y " was used to ind i ca t e that some of thec ompounds contained in T a b l e 2-1 are essential human nu t r i en t sand are toxic only at r e l a t i v e l y h igh concentrations. A f o o t n o t ewas also p laced at the bottom of each page of the tab l e to p r o p e r l yi d e n t i f y those c ompound s that f a l l into t h i s category. The t i d e o fT a b l e 2-1 and the text of S e c t i o n 1.0 have been revised to d e l e t ethe reference to " p o t e n t i a l l y " hazardous substances, and thef o o t n o t e has been retained.

T a b l e 1-1 ( f o r m e r l y T a b l e 2-1) i s intended to ind i ca t e o n l y whethera chemical was detected in a given medium. M a x i m u m concentra-tions are indi ca t ed in T a b l e s 2-1 through 2-7 to provide i n f o r -mation on ambient chemical concentrations. Concentrat ion rangesfor all chemicals in each medium have p r e v i o u s l y been presentedto the EPA in other technical memoranda, i n c l u d i n g the " F i n a lT e c h n i c a l Memorandum on Source Characterizat ion", and the" F i n a l Techni ca l Memorandum on Ref inemen t of RemedialObject ives". The risk assessment por t i on of the RemedialI n v e s t i g a t i o n report currently scheduled to be s u b m i t t e d to the EPAin J a n u a r y , 1991 w i l l include a range of detected concentrationsfor each chemical, as well as a range of sampl e quantisation l i m i t s ,frequency of detection, and background levels.

Q o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004247

October 10. 1990 903-2223S p e c i f i c CommentPage I, 2nd paragraph, last sentence - T h i s statement is not consistent with the f i n d i n g of f a c t sin the Admini s t ra t ive Order on Consent (CERCLA 6-21-89). Strike the word po t ent ia l ly .Response:

The EPA-approved RI/FS Work Plan (Colder Associates, 1989) consistently usesthe phrase "may have been disposed of when referring to the industrialhazardous wastes (See pg 1-1, 2-2, and 3-2). In a d d i t i o n , the EPA-approvedStat emen t of Work also uses the phrase "may have been di spo s ed of" (page 1).The use of the phrase " p o t e n t i a l l y d i sposed of is consistent with the use of thephrase "may have been d i s p o s e d of that appears throughout other EPA-approveddocuments. In a d d i t i o n , other documents submit t ed to the EPA such as the"Technical Memorandum on Phys i ca l Characterization", and the "TechnicalMemorandum on Source Characterization" also use the phrase " p o t e n t i a l l y "d i spo s ed of. Both of these documents have been reviewed by the EPAprev iou s ly and no comment was made regarding the use of the phrase " p o t e n t i a l l yd i s p o s e d of. C o n s e q u e n t l y , use of the word " p o t e n t i a l l y " appears to be j u s t i f i e d .However to maintain the consi s tency with the E P A - a p p r o v e d " F i n a l T e c h n i c a lMemorandum on R e f i n e m e n t of Remedial Objectives" , the text of S e c t i o n 1 .0 hasbeen revised to i n d i c a t e that the wastes were r e p o r t e d l y d i s p o s e d of in the wastep i t s .

S p e c i f i c Comment No._4:Page 2, Section 2. 1 - According to the EPA risk assessment guidance, s a m p l e re sul t s should beconsidered as positive only if the concentrations in the sample exceeds f i v e times the maximumdetected (ten times for the "common laboratory contaminants") in ajiy. b lank, not j u s t theassociated blank,Response:

The text of Section 2. 1 has been revised to incorporate the EPA comment. Basedon the EPA comment, the f o l l o w i n g compounds previously considered as posi t ivein at least one medium have now been screened out of all media: (1) 1,2-dichloroethane; (2) ch l oro f orm, and (3) methylene chloride. In add i t i on , certaincompounds have been screened out of selected media based on the EPA comment.Table s 2-1 through 2-7 have been revised accordingly.S p e c i f u L - C o m m e n t No^-S:Page 2, Sec t i on 2. 1 - The memorandum states, "Inorganic chemicals that are essential humannutrients, are present at low concentrations, and are toxic on ly at high doses were not considered

G o l d e r Assoc ia t e s

004248

October 10. IQQfl 903-2221as chemicals of potential concern". According to T a b l e 2-1, these inorganic chemicals arecalcium, iron, magnesium, potas s ium, sodium and zinc.A l t h o u g h consistent with the risk assessment guidance, the toxic values and the associatedtechnical references used in making these detent laiions should bt cited in the memorandum.Resonse:

Sec t i on 2.1 of the memorandum has been revised to incorporate the referencesneeded to s uppor t these determinations. **S p e c i f i c Comment Mo. 6:Page 2 , Sec t i on 2 .1 - The memorandum states, ° . , . I d e n t i f i e d inorganic chemicals that weredetected w i t h i n the range of naturally-occurring or background concentrations were e l iminat edf rom f u r t h e r evaluation".

a. A c c o r d i n g to the f oo tno t e s in T a b l e 2-1, the criterion for e l imina t ingchemicals f rom f u r t h e r consideration was if the chemical was within acommon soil range referenced in the 1983 EPA guidance document onhazardous waste land treatment (EPA 5 3 0 / S W / 8 7 4 ) . Backgroundconcentrations du not appear to be a criterion.b. What were the actual common soil ranges used in the evaluations? Whatis the geographic basis for these values? S i n c e th i s reference is f r e q u e n t l yused throughout various memorandums, these common soil ranges shouldbe inc luded when compared to.

co

c.

d.

Response:a.

The document should present the background concentrations used in theevaluation?Concentrations of inorganics f ound in the soil samples should be comparedto actual background sample results or to publ i shed common soil rangesfor the s tudy area.

Background soil concentrations were a criterion used. I n f o r m a t i o npresented in the "Draft Technical Memorandum on RemedialTechnologies Screening" was incorporated into the "DraftTechnical Memorandum on Hazardous Substances, IndicatorParameters, and Exposure S c e n a r i o s ' . The text of Section 2.1 hasbeen revised to reference the "Draft Technical Memorandum onRemedial Technologies Screening".

Q o l d e i - A s s o c i a t e s

004249

b. The actual common soil ranges used in the evaluation are thosethat were presented to the EPA in the "Technical Memorandum onSource Characterization" (Golder Associates, I 9 9 0 b ) , the"Technical Memorandum on Refinement of Remedial Objectives"(Golder Associates, I 9 9 0 a ) , and the "Technical Memorandum onRemedial Technologies Screening" ( G o l d e r Associates, 1990e).Section 2.1 has been revised to reference these other documents.As described in these other memoranda, the geographic basis fortiiese values is e s s ent ia l ly various areas of the United Sta t e s . TheEPA Hazardous Waste Land Treatment document incorporatedinformation gathered dur ing a number of studies throughout theU n i t e d Sta t e s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , the common soil ranges representthe best avai lable i n f o r m a t i o n obtained from a number of studies.c. As described above, the text of the "Technical Memorandum onHazardous Subs tance s , I n d i c a t o r Parameters, and ExposureScenarios" has been revised to reference the common soil rangespresented in other documents previous ly submitted to the EPA.d. The concentration of inorganics f o u n d in the soil sample s has beencompared to actual background sampl e resul t s in the "DraftTechnical Memorandum on Remedial T e c h n o l o g i e s Screening"p r e v i o u s l y submit t ed to the EPA. EPA comments on t h i sdocument indi ca t e that the comparisons made are acceptable . Asdescribed above, the text of the "Technical Memorandum onHazardous Subs tance s , I n d i c a t o r Parameters , and ExposureScenarios" has been revised to reference the "TechnicalMemorandum on Remedial Techno log i e s Screening".

S p e c i f i c Comment No. 7:Page 3, S e c t i o n 2.2 - Accord ing to the EPA risk assessment guidance, S a m p l e Quant i ta t i onLimit s (SQLs) are the most a p p r o p r i a t e l i m i t s to consider when evaluat ing the s a m p l e data.S Q L s take into account sample characteristics, s a m p l e preparation, and analytical a d j u s t m e n t s .A detected chemical should not be e l i m i n a t e d based so le ly on being detected below the ContractRequired Quant i la t ion Limi t ( C R Q L ) .Response:

S Q L s generally d i f f e r f rom CRQLs for results of sol id sample s (i.e., sur face andnear s u r f a c e soils, waste pit soils, sediments) and for selected l iquid samples thatwere d i lu t ed by the analytical laboratory to assist in determination of results.S Q L s have been u t i l i z ed consistently throughout the evaluat ion of analytical

oI T ,CVJrCc

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004250

October 1Q. 199Q 903-2223results. The EPA comment has been incorporated by omitting portions of the textthat refer to s p e c i f i c chemicals above CRQL.

S p e c i f i c Comment No. 8:Page 3, S e c t i o n 2.2, 2nd paragraph - The 1988 references by Chamley, et al and C.W. Fetterare cited throughout the memorandum to show that several hazardous substances detected in thesamples are commonly associated with sanitary l a n d f i l l s . The purpose of citing these referencesappears to be to "screen out" these chemicals. In f a c t , these references actually seem to supportthe sample results to indicate a potential release of hazardous substances may have occurredfrom the site. The important issue s p e c i f i c a l l y is to determine if a hazardous substance releasehas in fac t occurred f r o m the s i t e , regardless whether or not the release is common.Response:

As documented in Section 1 of the Technical Memorandum on PhysicalCharacterization1 1, "Technical Memorandum on Source Characterization","Technical Memorandum on Baseline Risk Assessment", "TechnicalMemorandum on Refinement of Remedial Objectives, 0, "Technical Memorandumon I d e n t i f i c a t i o n and Literature Survey of C a n d i d a t e Techno l og i e s " , and"Technical Memorandum on Techno log i e s Screening", the Mosley Road Sani taryLandfill was proposed for inc lu s ion on the Nat iona l Priorities List based on theacceptance of indus tr ial hazardous waste and the potent ial for a release into thegroundwater. Section VI, Paragraph 13 of the Admini s t ra t iv e Order on Consentstates that, "The industrial hazardous wastes disposed of between February 20 andAugus t 14, 1976, al the site are de f ined as "hazardous substances" in Sect ion1 0 1 ( 1 4 ) of C E R C L A , 42 U . S . C . 9601(14)". Paragraph 14 of th i s section s tate sthat "past , pr e s en t , and/or po t ent ia l migrat ion of hazardous substances f r o m theSite c on s t i tu t e s an actual and/or threatened 'release' as d e f i n e d in S e c t i o n 1 0 1 ( 2 2 )of C E R C L A , 42 U . S . C . 9601(22)". Fur th ermore , the EPA-approved S t a t e m e n tof Work incorporated into the Admini s t ra t iv e Order on Consent states that theobjectives of the RI/FS are to:

* Determine the nature and extent of potential contaminationr e s u l t i n g f rom indus tr ia l hazardous wastes accepted at thesite.

* Assess the po t en t ia l risk to human hea l th and theenvironment resulting f rom actual or potential releasesfrom the industrial hazardous wastes; and,* Develop and evaluate potential remedial alternativesto mit igate the e f f e c t s of such releases and toprotect human heal th and the environment.

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004251

October 10. 1990 903-2223The intent of this investigation has been to target releases f rom industrialhazardous wastes reportedly disposed of in the waste pits. Based on the HazardRanking S y s t e m (HRS) scoring records (BPA, 1987) the site would not have beeninc luded on the NPL if it had not accepted industrial hazardous waste as requiredby the Oklahoma State Department of H e a l t h , T h e r e f o r e , it is appropr ia t e toevaluate impacts f rom the industrial hazardous wastes reportedly di sposed in thewaste pits. The EPA-approved RI/FS Work Plan focuses the investigation on theindustrial hazardous wastes reportedly disposed in the waste pit s as well as otherpotential sources such as p u m p i n g oil wells, p ip e l in e s , and underground storagetanks.Based on the above s ta t emen t s , the important issue is to de termine if a hazardoussubstance release has in f a c t occurred from the indus tr ia l hazardous wastesreportedly disposed in the waste p i t s . Chamley, et al and Fet t er are referencedin order to provide the EPA with background information to assist ind i f f e r e n t i a t i n g potential impact s f rom the industrial hazardous waste p i t s f romthose that would normal ly be encountered at a municipal solid waste landfill. The" D r a f t Techn i ca l Memorandum on Contaminant Characterization" submi t t ed tothe EPA on October 3, 1990 for receipt on October 4, 1990 evaluates c ompoundsdetected in groundwater agains t u p g r a d i e n t (background) concentrations to provideaddit ional i n f o r m a t i o n regarding the pos s ib le sources of compounds detected inthe various media near the landfill.

S p e c i f i c CommentJio_^ 9 jPage 4, S e c t i o n 2.2, 1st paragraph - Potent ia l Chemica l s of concern should not be screened outbased on the ir presence in u p g r a d i e n t media locat ions. Other f a c t o r s need to be considered suchas concentration l eve l s , historical i n f o r m a t i o n , migration pa thways and loca t ing actual pointsources.Response:

The text of Sec t ion 2.2 has been revised to accurately describe the fa c t or s thatw i l l be considered prior to screening out potential chemicals of concern. Thesef a c t o r s inc lude frequency of d e t e c t i on , historical i n f o r m a t i o n (as a v a i l a b l e ) ,migration pathways and other potential sources. The "Technical Memorandumon Remedial Technolog i e s Screening" previously submitted to the EPA uti l ize sthese criteria for screening remedial technologies.S p e c i f i c _Cojnment J N o ^ l Q :Page 4, las t paragraph - The f o cu s of the risk assessment should be on hazardous substancesbeing released from the site, not j u s t the industrial waste pi t s .

G o l d e r Associate s

004252

Response:See response to Comment No, 8 above.

S p e c i f i c Comment N o . l j :Page 5, 1st paragraph - Sec t i on 121 (d) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensat ion, and L i a b i l i t y Act ( C E R C L A ) , 42 Q.S.C. 9604, as amended requires (notgenera l ly) that remedial actions attain a standard of performance that is equivalent to ARARspromulga t ed under f edera l and state laws.Response:

The text of S e c t i o n 3.0 has been revised to remove the word "generally".S - p e £ i j f i c _ C o n i m e n t No. 1 %:Page 5, last paragraph - The t e r m i n o l o g y in t h i s paragraph should be " a p p l i c a b l e (requirement s)"and "relevant (and) a p p r o p r i a t e (requirements)". When c i t i n g the NCP, the d e f i n i t i o n s shou ldbe accurate.For c l a r i t y , the d e f i n i t i o n s in 40 CRF 300.5 shou ld be used for both terms in t h i s paragraph .Response;

The text of S e c t i o n 3.0 has been revised ac cord ingly.S p e c i f i c Com.meat.NA J 3 :Page 6, 1st paragraph - C h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c requirements can be me thodo l og i e s as we l l as ,numerical values (concentration l i m i t s or ranges).Response;

The text of S e c t i o n 3.0 has been revised to incorporate the EPA comment.S r e c i f f c - C o j i i m e n t No. 14;Page 6, 2nd paragraph - The d i s cu s s ion should acknowledge that National Emissions S t a n d a r d sf or Hazardous Air P o l l u t a n t s (NESHAPs) are also considered ch emi ca l - sp e c i f i c A R A R s .

O

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004253

October IQ.J£90 10. 903-2223

NESHAPS were not i n c l u d e d in the d r a f t version of thi s document because theair medium is not considered to be a medium of concern based on health andsa f e ty air monitoring data collected during source characterization activities. TheEPA-approved " F i n a l Technical Memorandum on Source Characterization",recommends that air monitoring (other than for health and sa f e ty purposes) notbe conducted as part of contaminant characterization activities. The text ofSec t i on 3.0 has been revised to incorporate a reference to NESHAPs.

Page 6, 2nd paragraph - What is the basis for the statement, "WQC are considered ARARs forgroundwater o n l y if they r e f l e c t current s c i e n t i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n and there are no f ed era l M C L sor state A R A R s . " ?

The intended reference was the 1988 National Contingency Plan Proposed Rule.However, this statement has been changed to r e f l e c t the intent of the 1990N a t i o n a l C o n t i n g e n c y P l a n Final Rule as stated in the preamble .

S p e c i f i c - C o m m e n t No._ 16:Page 7, 2nd paragraph - According to the CERCLA Compliance W i t h Other Laws manuals,chemical- spec i f i c criteria or gu id e l in e s to be considered (TBCs) such as health advisories andreference doses w i l l be used in the absence of ARARs or where ARARs are not s u f f i c i e n t l ypro t e c t i v e to d e v e l o p c l eanup goal s .The memorandum states that "... ARARs are not available for all chemicals of concern. . ."A summary of T B C s for these chemicals of concern should be provided in th i s memorandum.Response:

The text has been changed to address th i s comment. C l e a n u p goal s , i n c l u d i n gT B C s , will be discussed in the f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y where c l eanup goals are required.S p e c i f i c ,Page 8, last paragraph - The memorandum states, "Eighteen domestic wells are currently locatedwithin a one-mile radius of the landfill, two of which are located downgradient of the s i t e , butsite-related contamination of the we l l s has not been documented. The p r o b a b i l i t y of thi s p a t h w a y

G o l d d r A s s o c i a t e s

004254

October ID_199D IIbeing comple t ed is considered low". The basis for ihis de t erminat ion should be e xp la inedfur ther .Response:

Of the eighteen domestic we l l s located within a one-mile radius of the landfill,fourteen are ei ther located south of the landfill, which has been shown to beupgrad i en t of the landfill, or are located across the N o r t h Canadian River orCrutcho Creek, which act as alluvial groundwater discharge areas. None of thesewell s could be impacted by potential migration of industrial ha/ardous wastes outof the l a n d f i l l . The r-Mir remaining we l l s include one well located at the Mos l eyRoad Sani tary L a n d f i l l , one well located at the East Oak Sani tary Landfill, onewell located north of NE 36th Street approx imate ly 1/4 mile northeast of theM o s l e y Road Sani tary Landfill, and one well located a p p r o x i m a t e l y 350 f e e tnortheast of the Mos l ey Road Sanitary Landfil l .Both of the w e l l s located at the l a n d f i l l s are owned by Wast e Management ofOklahoma ( W M O ) , which ensures that water drawn from these w e l l s is not usedfor dr ink ing purpose s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , these w e l l s are not considered to bepotential pathways for human exposure under current use scenarios.The remaining w e l l s are those referred to in the memorandum. A l l u v i a lgroundwater data presented in the " F i n a l Technical Memorandum on PhysicalCharacterization" and c o n f i r m e d by the data presented in the " D r a f t TechnicalMemorandum on C o n t a m i n a n t Characterization" i n d i c a t e that the well locatednorth of NE 36th Stre e t is l i k e l y u p g r a d i e n t of the l a n d f i l l due to a north to southcomponent of a l luvial groundwater f l o w near NE 36th street. A l l u v i a lgroundwater data pre sented in the two aforement ioned memoranda also sugge s tthat the well located at the summer house may not be downgradi en t of thelandfill, since alluvial groundwater near this well appears to be recharged byN o r t h Pond, a f t e r which the water travels towards Crutcho Creek. Cons equen t ly ,the p r o b a b i l i t y of p o t e n t i a l current human exposure to contaminants p o t e n t i a l l ycontained in the a l l u v i a l groundwater in these areas is considered low.In order to account for p o s s i b l e f u t u r e variations in groundwater f l o w d i r e c t i o n sand p o t e n t i a l changes in the use of the WMO w e l l s , the p r o b a b i l i t y of th i spathway being completed in the fu ture is considered to be moderate (Tabl e 4-2).Groundwater h y d r a u l i c head data to be col lec ted during the remainder of theRI/FS wil l be reviewed to determine if these de s ignations require revision.The text of Section 4.0 has been revised to incorporate the response.

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004255

Qctoter JO. \m________________\2_________________________S p e c i f i c . Comment No. 18:Page 11, last p a r a g r a p h - The memorandum states , "... the detected chemical concentrationsare g e n e r a l l y within ranges considered typical of so i l s and are below concentrations reported ascausing adverse p h y t o t o x i c e f f e c t s , "T h i s general statement needs to be sub s tant ia t ed with s p e c i f i c concentration values and theassociated technical references.Response:

T o x i c i t y evaluations w i l l be inc luded in the third technical memorandum for riskassessment. The text has been revised to indicate that chemicals in so i l s are notl i k e l y to be a v a i l a b l e for p l a n t uptake in neutral soil pH condi t ions .

S i n c e r e l y ,COLDER A S S O C I A T E S I N C .

Ward E. H e r s t , P.O.P r o j e c t H y d r o g e o l o g i s t

C o l d e r Asso c ia t e s

JfasJerry W. Rowe, P.E.P r i n c i p a lW E H / J W R / c j lcc: C h i e f o f S u p e r f u n d Enfor c emen t BranchRobert M e l t o n / P R C

Vince Lopez, A F R C E / R O VMark S n y d e r , W M N ADavid Guier , W M N ALisa S e g l i n , W M N ARich O ' H a r a , W M N ADavid Dolan, WMNA

004256

F I N A L

f A B L E QP C

1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.0 IDENTIFICATION OP CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL C O N C E R N . . . .

2.1 Data S c r e e n i n g Procedure*2 .2 S c r e e n i n g Resul t* . . . .3.0 A P P L I C A B L E O R R E L E V A N T A N D A P P R O P R I A T E R E Q U I R E M E N T S( A R A R S ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.0 E X P O S U R E SCENARIOS . . . - -

4.1 H u m a n R e c e p t o r s . . . .4.2 Environmenta l R e c e p t o r s5.0 R E F E R E N C E S . .

LIflT 0?

1-1 H a z a r d o u s S u b s t a n c e s D e t e c t e d by M e d i u m2" = ?«t,« «SS? .„•-.«£-P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s o f ConcernC o n c e n t r a t i o n s i n W a s t e P i t S o i l s and M a x i m u m

M a x i m u m

Maximum

2-3 P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s of Concern andC o n c e n t r a t i o n s in Leacha t e2-4 P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s of Concern andC o n c e n t r a t i o n s in A l l u v i a l Ground W a t e r2-5 P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s of Concern and MaximumC o n c e n t r a t i o n s in G a r b e r - W e l i i n g t o n Ground W a t e r2*6 P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s of Concern and MaximumConcen tra t i on s in S u r f a c e W a t e r2-7 P o t e n t i a l C h e m i c a l s of Concern and Maximum Detec t edConcentra t ions in S a d i m e n t s3-1 A p p l i c a b l e or Relevant and A p p r o p r i a t e Requirements4-1 M a t r i x o f P o t e n t i a l H u m a n Exposure P a t h w a y s , M o s l e y RoadS a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l Current U s e S c e n a r i o

G o l d s r A s s o c i a t e s

004257

F I N A L

ass00I T .CV^oo

G o l d e r Asso c ia t e s

004258

F I N A L1.0

T h i s t echnical memorandum on h a z a r d o u s subs tance s , ind i ca t orparameter s , and exposure scenarios is the second of three memorandato b e submit t ed t o th e U . S . Environmental Pro t e c t i on A g e n c y (EPA)for the b a s e l i n e risk assessment t a s k , on b e h a l f o f W a s t eManagement o f Oklahoma (WHO) to meet the c o n d i t i o n s of theA d m i n i s t r a t i v e Order on Consent (CERCLA 6-21-89) for th e M o s l e yRoad S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l s i t e . T h e f i r s t memorandum e n t i t l e d" S c o p i n g M e m o r a n d u m on the Base l ine Risk Ass e s smen t" was submi t t edto the EPA in f i n a l f o r m on May 4, 1990. EPA a p p r o v a l of thedocument was received by WMO on May 29, 1990.

T h i s second memorandum in c lud e s a l i s t o f h a z a r d o u s sub s tance s thathave been d e t e c t e d in the various environmental media s a m p l e d atthe s i t e d u r i n g source and contaminant charac t e r i za t i on a c t i v i t i e sconducted t o d a t e ( T a b l e l - l ) . T h e l i s t o f h a z a r d o u s subs tance s i scomprehens ive and w i l l be r e f i n e d based on a d d i t i o n a l d a t ac o l l e c t e d d u r i n g c on taminant c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n ta sks and e v a l u a t i o nof background c onc en tra t i on d a t a . The goal w i l l b e to r e f i n e thel i s t o f c ompound s t o i n c l u d e those hazardou s subs tance s t ha t s h o u l dbe cons idered to e v a l u a t e risks a s s o c i a t e d wi th the wastesr e p o r t e d l y d i s p o s e d in the waste p i t s .

T h i s memorandum a l so i n c l u d e s a l i s t o f p r o p o s e d i n d i c a t o rparamet er s a l o n g with maximum ambient c o n c e n t r a t i o n s , a l i s t o fc h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a b l e or re l evant and a p p r o p r i a t erequirements (AJRARs), and a d e s c r i p t i o n o f exposure scenarios thatw i l l be considered in the ba s e l ine risk asse s sment.

I T ,CV

S o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004259

October 1990 F I N A L2 £03-1223

2 .0 IDENTIFICATION OF C H E M I C A L S OF P O T E N T I A L CONCERN

Data pre s ented in the " F i n a l T e c h n i c a l Memorandum on SourceC h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n " ( G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , 1 9 9 0 b ) , and in th e" D r a f t T e c h n i c a l Memorandum on R e f i n e m e n t of Remedial O b j e c t i v e s "( G o l d e r Assoc iate s I n c . , 1990a) were compiled in this technical

meiHorandum. T a b l e l-l l i s t s detected chemicals by medium.C h e m i c a l s of p o t e n t i a l concern were s e l e c t ed based on m e t h o d o l o g yp r e s e n t e d in t h e risk assessment guidance ( U . S . Environmenta lP r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y , 1989b a n d I 9 8 9 c ) .

2.1 Data S c r e e n i n g Procedure s

The d a t a were eva lua t ed f or s u i t a b i l i t y in the ba s e l ine riskassessment based on the data v a l i d a t i o n q u a l i f i e r s , b lankcon tamina t i on , pr ev iou s ly-de t e c t ed concentrations, and t o x i c i t y tode t e rmine chemical s o f p o t e n t i a l concern. Q u a l i f i e d d a t ai n d i c a t i n g u n c e r t a i n t y in the r epor t ed c onc en t ra t i on but not inas s igned i d e n t i t y were used in the same manner as p o s i t i v e d a t awith no q u a l i f i e r s or codes. Only those chemicals de t ec t ed in oneor more sampl e s were inc luded in the evaluat ion. Common l a b o r a t o r yc on taminan t s such as ace tone, m e t h y l e n e c h l o r i d e , t o l u e n e , andp h t h a l a t e esters were eva lua t ed based on concen tra t i on s d e t e c t e d inblanks ( i . e . rinseate blanks, f i e l d b lanks , and t r i p b l a n k s ) . Forthese chemicals , if the concentration in the s a m p l e was less than10 times the level noted in any b l a n k , that d a t a po int was t r ea t edas a non~d@tect and the b lank r e l a t e d c onc en tra t i on was consideredto be the basis of the quant i ta t ion l i m i t for that chemical. Forchemicals not g enera l ly recognized as laboratory contaminants,samples containing l e s s than f i v e t imes the amount in any b lankwere treated as non-detect s . The inorganic ch emi ca l s , c a l c i u m ,iron, magnes ium, po ta s s i um, and sodium are e s s ent ia l humannutrients, are present at low concentrations, and are toxic only athigh doses ( U . S . Environmental Protect ion Agency , I 9 8 9 b ) .T h e r e f o r e they were not considered am chemical s of p o t e n t i a l

G o l d e r Associates

004260

October 1990 F I N A L__3__ 9Q_3-22_21

concern. I d e n t i f i e d inorganic chemicals that were detec ted wi thina common soil range as pre s ented in the " F i n a l T e c h n i c a l Memorandumo n Sourc e C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n " ( C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s , 1 9 9 0 b ) , t h e " F i n a lT e c h n i c a l Memorandum on R e f i n e m e n t o t Remedial O b j e c t i v e s " ( C o l d e rA s s o c i a t e s , 1990a) and the "Draf t Technical Memorandum RemedialT e c h n o l o g i e s screening" (Gol^e^ Asso c ia t e s , 1990e) were e l imina t edf r o m f u r t h e r eva lua t i on because i t i s l i k e l y that these chemicalsare At n a t u r a l l y - o c c u r r i n g background concen tra t i on s . T h e s ec h e m i c a l s and their common soil range as p r e s e n t e d in U . S .Environmental Prote c t i on Agency ( 1 9 8 3 ) inc lude: arsenic (1-50 p p m ) ,aluminum (10,000-300,000 p p m ) , barium (100-3,000 p p m ) , b e r y l l i u m(0.1-40 p p m ) , cobal t (1-40 p p m ) , cadmium (0.01-0.7 p p m ) , chromium(1-1,000 p p m ) , manganese ( 2 0 - 3 , 0 0 0 ) , lead ( 2 - 2 0 0 p p m ) , nickel ( 5 ~500 p p m ) , vanadium (20-500 p p m ) , and zinc (10-300 p p m ) .

T e n t a t i v e l y - i d e n t i f i e d compounds f T I C s ) were n o t in c luded a sc h e m i c a l s o f p o t e n t i a l concern because T I C s i n d i c a t e u n c e r t a i n t y i nboth i d e n t i t y and c onc en tra t i on .

2 . 2 ^Greening _Re_sult_s

<M<tfOo

C h e m i c a l s o f p o t e n t i a l concern and the ir maximum d e t e c t e dconcentrat ions are l i s t e d by medium in T a b l e s 2-1 through 2-7.T w e n t y chemical s of p o t e n t i a l concern were i d e n t i f i e d in s u r f a c es o i l s . Of the s e , 10 chemical s are p o l y c y c l i c aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs) which may b e a s s o c i a t e d with non- s i t e - r e la t ed sources. Inwaste p i t s o i l s , 45 chemical s o f p o t e n t i a l concern were i d e n t i f i e d ,and 53 chemicals of p o t e n t i a l concern were i d e n t i f i e d in leachate.

S e v e n t e e n chemical s of p o t e n t i a l concern were i d e n t i f i e d ina l l u v i a l groundwater , and 8 were i d e n t i f i e d in theG a r b e r - W e l l i n g t o n grcundwater. The chemicals included 3 p e s t i c i d e si d e n t i f i e d in the a l l u v i a l groundwater which may be associated witha g r i c u l t u r a l prac t i c e s rather chan with d i s p o s a l o f i n d u s t r i a lhazardou s waste. The d e t e c t ed m e t a l s may be at n a t u r a l l y - o c c u r r i n g

G older Assoc iate s

004261

F I N A LOctob_er__199_0. 9 Q 3 - 1 2 2 3l e v e l s in groundwater , and manganese is commonly a s soc ia t ed withsani tary l a n d f i l l s ( C h a r n l e y , e t . a l . , 1 9 8 8 ) . I n s u r f a c e wa t er s ,6 ch emi ca l s of p o t e n t i a l concern were i d e n t i f i e d i n c l u d i n g kp e s t i c i d e s , 2 p o t e n t i a l l y naturally-occurring inorganics , andmanganese* Manganese is commonly as soc iated with sanitaryl a n d f i l l s ( C h a r n l e y , e t a l . , 1 9 8 8 ) . Of the 30 c h e m i c a l s o fp o t e n t i a l concern i d e n t i f i e d in s e d i m e n t s , 5 ch emi ca l s are PAHs,and 12 are p e s t i c i d e s .

T a b l e s 2-1 to 2-7 w i l l be r e f i n e d a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n of thecontaminant c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n ta sk s and f u r t h e r d e t a i l e d e v a l u a t i o nof chemical data. P o t e n t i a l chemicals of concern that are presentin media at u p g r a d i e n t locat ions w i l l be screened out if theyi n d i c a t e e l eva t ed background l e v e l s or a n t h r o p o g e n i c sources nota s so c ia t ed wi th t h e i n d u s t r i a l waste p i t s . T h e p o t e n t i a l f o ranthropogenic sources is high since the area contains tierous oilf i e l d f a c i l i t i e s i n c l u d i n g o i l w e l l s a n d p i p e l i n e s , agricul turalland which can be e x p e c t e d to be a f f e c t e d by a g r i c u l t u r a lc h e m i c a l s , and s u r f a c e waters which are s u b j e c t to d i s c h a r g e s f r o mups tream sources. In a d d i t i o n , chemicals that are i n f r e q u e n t l yde tec t ed ( l e s s than 5 percent in a given medium) may be a r t i f a c t sin the d a t a due to s a m p l i n g , a n a l y t i c a l , or other p r o b l e m s and maynot be r e la t ed to s i t e o p e r a t i o n s or d i s p o s a l p r a c t i c e s ( U . S .Environmental Protec t ion Agency, I 9 8 9 b ) . T h e s e chemical s , i f any,w i l l be e l iminated as chemical s of concern f o l l o w i n g evaluat ion ofthe c o m p l e t e d d a t a based.

P o t e n t i a l chemicals of concern as determined in thi s memorandum arethose chemicals which were not related to blank contamination, werenot e s s en t ia l human nutrient s or were not w i t h i n common soil rangesbased on the r e su l t s of waste pit s o i l , l eachat e and s u r f a c e soilsample s and the f i r s t round of groundwater, sur face water andsediment sample s . The re f inement of p o t en t ia l chemicals of concernw i l l continue based on the second round of groundwater , s u r f a c ewater and sediment s a m p l e s and f u r t h e r eva lua t i on of all r e s u l t s .

G o l d e r Assoc iate s

004262

OctoberT h i s f u r t h e r w i l l consider s i t e s p e c i f i c natural background l e v e l s ,a n t h r o p o g e n i c background l e v e l s and f r e q u e n c y o f d e t e c t i o n . Therisk assessment w i l l f o c u s on hazardous subs tances that are r e l a t e dto the i n d u s t r i a l hazardous wastes d i s p o s e d at the site.

vOCM«xfOo

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004263

October _ 19 9.0 _ F I N A L_ 6_ 9Q3-222_3

3 . 0 A P P L I C A B L E O R R E L E V A N T A N D A P P R O P R I A T E R E Q U I R E M E N T S f A R A R S )

S e c t i o n 121 of the S u p e r f u n d Amendment s and R e a u t h o r i z a t i o n Act( S A R A ) e s tab l i sh e s c l eanup criteria f o r S u p e r f u n d sites. T h i sse :tion of the s tatute sets f o r t h the need for a p p r o p r i a t e remedialactions, consistent with t h e N a t i o n a l Contingency Plan ( N C P ) , thatprovide a c o s t - e f f e c t i v e response. Subs e c t i on (d) o f S e c t i o n 121requires that r emedia l actions a t ta in a s tandard of p e r f o r m a n c ethat is equivalent to ARARs p r o m u l g a t e d under f e d e r a l or s t a t elaws .

I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of ARARs is p e r f o r m e d on a s i t e - s p e c i f i c basi s andinvolve s a two-part a n a l y s i s : f i r s c , d e t e r m i n i n g whether a givenrequirement is a p p l i c a b l e ; and th en , if it i s not a p p l i c a b l e ,d e t e r m i n i n g whether it is n ever th e l e s s both relevant anda p p r o p r i a t e . W h e n the a n a l y s i s d e t e rmine s that a requirement i sboth re levant and a p p r o p r i a t e , c o m p l i a n c e with such a requirementis the same as if it were a p p l i c a b l e .

" A p p l i c a b l e requirements" are those c l e a n u p s t a n d a r d s , s tandard s ofc o n t r o l , and other subs tantive environmental pro t e c t i onrequirements, cri teria, or l i m i t a t i o n s p r o m u l g a t e d under f e d e r a l ors ta te law that s p e c i f i c a l l y addres s a hazardous substance,p o l l u t a n t , contaminant, remedial act ion, l o c a t i o n , or otherc ircumstance at a C E R C L A s i t e . "Relevant and a p p r o p r i a t erequirements" are those c l e a n u p s t a n d a r d s , s t a n d a r d s of control andother sub s tant ive environmental p r o t e c t i o n r equ irement s , c r i t e r ia ,or l i m i t a t i o n s p r o m u l g a t e d under f e d e r a l or s t a t e law t h a t , w h i l enot " a p p l i c a b l e , " to a hazardous subs tance, p o l l u t a n t , c o n t a m i n a n t ,remedial ac t ion, l o c a t i o n , or other circumstance at a CERCI*A s i t e ,addre s s p r o b l e m s or s i t ua t i on s s u f f i c i e n t l y s i m i l a r to those©ncountsr^d at a C E R C L A s i t e that their use is we l l sui ted to thep a r t i c u l a r site. N o n - p r o m u l g a t e d advi sor i e s or guidance documentsissued by f e d e r a l or s ta t e governments do not have the s tatus ofpo t en t ia l ARARs. However, they may b& considered in de t ermining

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004264

October 1990 F I N A L7 5 0 3 - 2 2 2 3the necessary level of c l e a n u p for p r o t e c t i o n of human h e a l t h orthe environment. The EPA has i d e n t i f i e d three ca t egor i e s o f A R A R s :

• C h e m i c a l s p e c i f i c ;• Loca t i on s p e c i f i c ( e . g . , w e t l a n d l i m i t a t i o n or h i s t or i ca ls i t e s ) ; and,» A c t i o n s p e c i f i c ( e . g . , p e r f o r m a n c e and d e s i g n s t a n d a r d s ) -

C h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c requirements set h ea l th or risk-based concen-t ra t ion l i m i t s or m e t h o d o l o g i e s in various environmental media fors p e c i f i c h a z a r d o u s sub s tance s , p o l l u t a n t s , o r c on taminant s . T h e s erequirements may s e t p r o t e c t i v e c l e a n u p l e v e l s for the ch emica l s o fconcern in the d e s i g n a t e d m e d i a , or may i n d i c a t e an a c c e p t a b l el evel of d i s charge ( e . g . , air emission or vastewater d i s c h a r g e )when one occurs during a remedial a c t iv i ty . Only c h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i cARARs are evaluated in th i s technical memorandum.

inO

CMrac

At the pre s en t t ime EPA cons ider s d r i n k i n g water maximumcontaminant l e v e l s ( M C L s ) p r o m u l g a t e d under t h e S a f e D r i n k i n g W a t e rA c t ( S D W A ) , S D W A maximum contaminant level g o a l s ( M C L G s ) f o rnoncarcinogens, f e d e r a l ambient water q u a l i t y cri teria ( W Q C ) ,national ambient a i r q u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s ( N A A Q S ) , N a t i o n a l Emi s s i onsS t a n d a r d s f o r H a z a r d o u s A i r P o l l u t a n t s ( N E S H A P 3 ) a n d p r o m u l g a t e dand u n i f o r m l y - e n f o r c e d s t a t e environmental s t a n d a r d s to bep o t e n t i a l l y a p p l i c a b l e o r relevant and a p p r o p r i a t e requirements f o rambient concentrations ( U . S . Environmental Protec t ion Agency, I 9 8 8 aand I 9 8 9 a ) . W Q C , a d j u s t e d to r e f l e c t dr inking water use, may beused as ARARS for groundwater wh©r$ a contaminant does not have anM C L o r M C L G i U . S , Environmenta l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y , 1 9 9 0 ) . W h e n n op r o m u l g a t e d s t a n d a r d s exiat f o r a given c on taminan t , p r o p o s e d M C L s(known as "To Be Cons i d e r f cd" or TBCa) are to be g i v & n greatercons iderat ion among th@ o t h & r criteria, advisorie s , and guidance.T B C s w i l l be deve loped in the f e a s i b i l i t y s tudy in c o n j u n c t i o n witha d i s cu s s i on of c l e a n u p g o a l s .

G o i d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004265

October. 199.0 _ F I N A L903-3223

Potent ia l state ARARs inc lude numerical water qua l i ty criteriapromulga t ed in the Oklahoma G r o u n d w a t e r Q u a l i t y S t a n d a r d s , waterq u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s a n d e f f l u e n t l i m i t a t i o n g u i d e l i n e s f o r was t ewaterd i s charge p r o m u l g a t e d in the Oklahoma P o l l u t i o n RemediesR e g u l a t i o n s , and numerical criteria for sur fac e waters promulgat edin the Oklancma Water Q u a l i t y S t a n d a r d s . Based on i n f o r m a t i o ns u p p l i e d to WMO by the Oklahoma S t a t e Depar tment o f H e a l t h d u r i n gp r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e R I / F S W o r k P l a n , Oklahoma G r o u n d w a c e r Q u a l i t yS t a n d a r d s are not commonly and u n i f o r m l y a p p l i e d at CERCLA sites.Consequently.- a l t hough these s tandards are included in thismemorandum, they w i l l not continue to be r e f e r e n c e d dur ingsubsequent ba s e l in e risk assessment or r e l a t e d eva lua t i on s .

ARARs are not a v a i l a b l e for all chemicals of concern, and theyc u r r e n t l y do not exist for contaminant s in s o i l s . In accordancewi th EPA ( I 9 8 9 a ) , chemical s p e c i f i c c r i t e r ia or g u i d e l i n e s t o b econsidered (TBCs) such as h ea l th advisories and r e f er ence dosesw i l l be used in the absence of ARARs or where ARARs are nots u f f i c i e n t l y p r o t e c t i v e t o d e v e l o p c l e a n u p g o a l s . P o t e n t i a lc h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c ARARs ar e l i s t e d in T a b l e 3-1 f or th e i d e n t i f i e dp o t e n t i a l chemical s of concern.

C o l d e r Associate s

004266

October 1 9 9 Q _ F I N A L

4 . 0 E X P O S U R E S C E N A R I O S

4 * 1 Human _Re_captor_s

Potent ia l exposure pathways to humans f r o m po t en t i a l contaminantsat the M o s i e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l are i d e n t i f i e d in T a b l e 4-1.The t ab l e is separated into current-use and fu ture-use pathways.Pathways s e l e c t ed for eva luat ion wi l l be q u a n t i t a t i v e l y addre s s edin the human h ea l th evaluat ion.

W h e n t h e E P A conducted i t s H a z a r d Ranking S y s t e m ( H R S ) scoring o ft h e M o s i e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l s i t e t h e m i g r a t i o n o fcon taminat ed groundwater was i d e n t i f i e d a s the o n l y s i g n i f i c a n tp a t h w a y f o r exposure . Recent s a m p l i n g b y C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c .c o n f i r m s thi s conclusion. Poten t ia l receiving media forcontaminated groundwater inc lude the a l l u v i a l a q u i f e r and theu n d e r l y i n g G a r b e r - W e l i i n g t o n f o r m a t i o n a q u i f e r . Other p o t e n t i a lreceiving media may inc lude the local s u r f a c e water bodies ofcrutcho Creek, the N o r t h C a n a d i a n River and the N o r t h Pond.S u r f a c e water in the south swamp and inac t ive sand and gravel pitis h y d r a u l i c a l l y u p g r a d i e n t of the waste p i t s and is u n l i k e l y to bea p o t e n t i a l receiving m e d i u m , based on water level contoursp r e s e n t e d in the f i n a l T e c h n i c a l Memorandum on Sourc eC h a r a c t e r i z a t i c i ( C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , 1 9 9 0 b ) . H o w e v e r , i t h a sbeen retained as a p o t e n t i a l medium p e n d i n g the r e su l t s of thecontaminant characterization tasks.

CM«$•oo

Current use pathways i d e n t i f i e d on T a b l e 4-1 inc lude exposure ofre s ident s and nearby workers through d r i n k i n g contaminated groundand s u r f a c e waters. E i g h t e e n domes t i c w«ll s are current ly locatedwithin a one-mile radiu s of the l a n d f i l l . Based on d a t a gathereddur ing p h y s i c a l and contaminant charac t er i za t i on a c t i v i t i e s ,f i f t e e n o f these w e l l s are e i ther u p g r a d i e n t o f the l a n d f i l l or arel o ca t ed across a groundwater d i s charge area such as tha N o r t hC a n a d i a n River and would not be impacted by p o t e n t i a l migra t i on of

C o l d e r Associates

004267

October 1990 F I N A L_ 10. 903--2 223

indus tr ia l hazardous wastes f r o m the waste p i t s . The threeremaining we l l s include one located in the M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r yL a n d f i l l , one located in the East Oak S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l and onelocated a p p r o x i m a t e l y 350 f e e t northeast of the mosley RoadS a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l . N e i t h e r o f the w e l l s located at the l a n d f i l l sare used for dr inking water. H y d r a u l i c head data presented in the" F i n a l Techni ca l Memorandum on Physical Character izat ion" ( C o l d e rA s s o c i a t e s , 1990c) and in the "Draf t Techni ca l Memorandum onContaminant characterization" ( G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s , I 9 9 o d ) suggestthat the well located a p p r o x i m a t e l y 350 f e e t northeast of thel a n d f i l l may not be downgradient of the waste p i t s . Thep r o b a b i l i t y of th i s pa thway currently being c ompl e t ed i s t h e r e f o r econsidered low. However , in order to account for p o s s i b l e changesin use of the w e l l s located in the l a n d f i l l s and to account forp o t e n t i a l var iab i l i ty in groundwater f l o w d i r e c t i on s , thep r o b a b i l i t y of this pa thway being c ompl e t ed in the f u t u r e isconsidered moderate ( T a b l e 4 - 2 ) .

In a d d i t i o n , c on taminant s f r o m th e l a n d f i l l ma> have migrated intothe N o r t h C a n a d i a n River and Crutcho Creek. T h e s e water bodie s arec l a s s i f i e d f o r i n d u s t r i a l proce s s c o o l i n g water , a g r i c u l t u r e ,warmwater f i s h e r y , pr imary recreat ion, and a e s t h e t i c s , with theN o r t h C a n a d i a n River a l s o c l a s s i f i e d f o r emergency water s u p p l y( G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , 1 9 8 9 ) . T h e l i k e l i h o o d o f exposure o frecreat ional users to c on tamina t ed s u r f a c e waters or s e d i m e n t s iscons idered very low and th i s p a t h w a y was e l i m i n a t e d f r o m f u r t h e re v a l u a t i o n . Expo sure o f r e s i d en t s to the N o r t h C a n a d i a n Riverthrough emergency water s u p p l y i s c ons idered l ow , Lat the p a t h w a yhas been retained for q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s .

Other p o t e n t i a l p a t h w a y s in c lud e exposure of ons i t e workers andt r e spa s s e r s to contaminants in s u r f a c e s o i l s and air above thel a n d f i l l , as well as expo sure of downwind r e s id en t s to airbornecontaminants . The p r o b a b i l i t y o f these p a t h w a y s being c o m p l e t e d i scons idered very low; these p a t h w a y s ware not s e l e c t ed for f u r t h e r

G o l d e r Assoc ia t e s

004268

OctQb.er__l99Q F I N A L... 11 905-2223

eva lua t i on . T h e i r e x c l u s i o n was based on the l o w - p e r m e a b i l i t y c l a yc a p , f e n c i n g , and eros ion-reducing v e g e t a t i o n covering thel a n d f i l l .

Future-use pathways ( T a b l e 4-2) are e s s e n t i a l l y ident i ca l tocurrent-use pathways because conditions are not expec ted to changes i g n i f i c a n t l y in the f u t u r e . However, the p r o b a b i l i t y of exposureof recreational users to contaminated media is expected to remaini n s i g n i f i c a n t . All other land use c ond i t i on s are e xp e c t ed toremain the same.

P a t h w a y s for human expo sure to waste pi t s o i l s and l e a c h a t e werenot i n c l u d e d because these contaminant sources are buried and areexp e c t ed to remain so. No p a t h w a y could be i d e n t i f i e d t h r o u g hwhich r e c ep tor s would come into direct contact with either thewaste pit s o i l s or the leachate. The p o s s i b i l i t y of contaminantsf r o m these sources reaching the groundwater is addressed with thegroundwater pa thways ,

4*2 Environmental Becep_tors

The d iver s e a s s e m b l a g e o f p o t e n t i a l b i o t i c r e c e p t o r s around th el a n d f i l l i s o rganiz ed into f o u r broad g r o u p i n g s o f r e l a t e d l i f ef o r m s . G r o u p i n g s are based on s i m i l a r i t , " in the ways its membersg e n e r a l l y r e l a t e to basic phys i ca l media ( e . g . , soil or s u r f a c ewater) and the p a t h w a y s by which p o t e n t i a l contaminants may enterthe group , The groups inc lude vegetat ion (which i s s t r o n g l yi n f l u e n c e d by s o i l s , s u r f a c e r u n o f f , and a l l u v i a l groundwaterm e d i a ) , w i l d l i f e (which i s s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d by s o i l m and sur fa c ewater m e d i a ) , and aquat i c l i f e (which i s s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d bys u r f a c e water, j s e d i m s n t , and soil m a d i a ) . F r e s h w a t e r w e t l a n d s ,which represent a s p e c i a l - i n t e r e s t community compri s ed of the otherthree g r o u p s , i s in c luded s e p a r a t e l y because cf its r e g u l a t o r y andp u b l i c - i n t e r e s t s t a tu s . P o t e n t i a l current and f u t u r e exposure

C o l d e r Associates

004269

October J199(X F I N A L903-2223

p a t h w a y s f r o m contaminant sources to each group are e xp e c t ed to bes i m i l a r and are i d e n t i f i e d in T a b l e 4-3 and 4-4, r e spe c t ive ly .

Pathways i d e n t i f i e d f or f u r t h e r evaluatiori w i l l b e q u a l i t a t i v e l yaddre s s ed in the environmental risk asses sment. T h a t assessmentw i l l f o c u s on th e s p e c i f i c s p e c i e s i d e n t i f i e d a s p o t e n t i a lr e c ep t or s in T a b l e 4-3 and 4-4. Each sp e c i e s has been s e l e c t ed tof u n c t i o n as a general g r o u p i n d i c a t o r based on its abundance at ornear the l a n d f i l l , i t s r epre s enta t ivene s s of other sp e c i e s in thegroup, and on overall t o x i c o l og i ca l knowledge regarding itsreactions to chemicals of p o t e n t i a l concern de t e c t ed at the site.

C o m p a r i s o n s of maximum lead and DOT concen tra t i on s r epor t ed in someo f th e l o c a l s u r f a c e waters with aquatic l i f e ARARs suggestp o t e n t i a l exposure pathways to organisms in Crutcho Creek ( f o rl e a d ) and the N o r t h Canad ian River ( f o r DDT) . It i s p o s s i b l e thatthese compounds ara present due to a n t h r o p o g e n i c f a c t o r s notr e l a t e d to the i n d u s t r i a l hazardou s wastes d i s p o s e d at the M o s l e yRoad S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l . A n t h r o p o g e n i c f a c t o r s w i l l b e e va lua t ed i nmore d e t a i l in subsequent document s . M a x i m u m c o n c e n t r a t i o n s forboth chemical s exceed s tate and f e d e r a l chronic t o x i c i t y thr e sho ld sand were recorded at s u r f a c e water s a m p l i n g s ta t i ons locateddownstream o f t h e l a n d f i l l . C o r r e s p o n d i n g ups tream s a m p l i n gs t a t i on s produced lower concentrat ions that do not exceed A R A R s .A l t h o u g h there a r e n o p r o m u l g a t e d A R A R s f o r p r o t e c t i n g aquat i c l i f ef r o m s ed iment c o n t a m i n a n t s , the p a t t e r n o f lead and DDTconcentrat ions in pairea stream sediment s a m p l i n g l o c a t i o n s r e f l e c tincreased contaminant concentrations downstream of the l a n d f i l lsite. Downstream Crutcho Craek sadimants are & l e v a t a d in l ead.Compare /- , to the up s t r eam s ta t i on , downstream sediments £rGm theN o r t h C a n a d i a n River have e l eva t ed DDT and l©ad concentrat ions .T h e s e sediment c o n d i t i o n s t<and to s u p p o r t a p o t e n t i a l axpo sur sp a t h w a y f r o m c o n t a m i n a t e d g r o u n d w a t e r / s u r f a c e water t o aquatic l i f e

G o l d e r Associates

004270

October._199_0 F I N A L 9(13-2223in both streams. P r e l i m i n a r y c ompar i s on s of up s t r eam anddowns tr eam sediment concentrat ions o f other p e s t i c i d e s and m & t a l ssuggest the same trend of elevated chemical concentrations atsediment s ta t ions located downstream of the l a n d f i l l . For thesereasons, the p o t e n t i a l c o m p l e t i o n of a s u r f a c e water pa thway toaquatic l i f e should b e e v a l u a t e d .V e g e t a t i o n

Pot en t ia l exposure pathways to t erres trial (i.e., u p l a n d )vegetat ion f r o m contaminant-bearing s o i l s , s u r f a c e r u n o f f , ands h a l l o w a l l u v i a l groundwaters do not a p p e a r to warrant f u r t h e re v a l u a t i o n . Repor t ed soil c onc en tra t i on s o f the ch emi ca l s o fp o t e n t i a l concern are w i th in g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e ranges. A l t h o u g hc h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c ARARs have not been p r o m u l g a t e d for p r o t e c t i n gnative p l a n t s p e c i e s , most c h e m i c a l s in s o i l s are u n a v a i l a b l e foruptake by p l a n t s in neutral pH soil c ondi t i on s . s i m i l a r l y ,p o t e n t i a l s u r fa c e water and sha l l ow a l l u v i a l groundwater pa thwaysdo not r e f l e c t chemical c onc en tra t i on s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of induc ings tre s s t o u p l a n d v e g e t a t i o n .

W i l d l i f e

For s imi lar reasons, i t i s u n l i k e l y that t erre s tr ial w i l d l i f ereceptors w i l l be exposed to s i g n i f i c a n t l y e l evated contaminantconcentra t i ons f r o m ei ther direct contact s wi th s o i l s and s u r f a c ewaters or f r o m i n d i r e c t contact s through local f o o d chains.C h e m i c a l - s p e c i f i c ARARs for w i l d l i f a s p e c i e s have no t beene s t a b l i s h e d or p r o m u l g a t e d . In a d d i t i o n , d e t e c t ed chemicalconcentrations in soi l s ara considered to be too low to encouragesubs tant ial p l a n t chemical uptake and trans loca t ion into th e s i t e ' sherbivores, with subsequent chemical movement through tn® f o o dchains of local p r e d a t o r s . Tha p r o b a b i l i t y that p a t h w a y s can bsc o m p l e t e d to even tha f i r s t - o r d e r t r o p h i c level of the t e r r e s t r i a lw i l d l i f e group i s very low.

(Bolder Associates

004271

October 1190 F I N A L -903-2223

G e n e r a l p l a n t and h y d r o l o g y charac t e r i s t i c s o f r i p a r i a n andsemi-aquatic areas surrounding t h e M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l lsuggest that j u r i s d i c t i o n a l w e t l a n d s may occur in some of thesel o c a t i o n . T h e S o i l Cons e rva t i on Serv i c e h a s i n d i c a t e d that h y d r i csoil series are not present on site ( T h e Benham G r o u p , unpubl i shedd a t a ) . Furthermore, f o r m a l wetland j u r i s d i c t i o n a l evaluations andd e l i n e a t i o n s have not been conducted using the f e d e r a l method( F e d e r a l Tnteragency Committee f o r W e t l a n d D e l i n e a t i o n , 1 9 8 9 } ,which would e s t a b l i s h the pr e s enc e , l o c a t i o n , and abundance ofw e t l a n d s that are wi th in the j u r i s d i c t i o n of S e c t i o n 404 of thec l ean W a t e r A c t .

<M<rOo

P o t e n t i a l w e t l a n d r e c ep t or s m a i n t a i n a degree o f in t e ra c t i on withs u r f a c e waters a n d t h e A R A R s f o r p r o t e c t i n g warmwater aquat i c l i f ef r o m chronic t o x i c i t y e f f e c t s o f cadmium, s i l v e r , and mercury arelower than the a n a l y t i c a l CRQLs used for s u r f a c e waters. Thep r o b a b i l i t y of p o t e n t i a l pathway c o m p l e t i o n i s currently consideredlow because p r e l i m i n a r y evaluat ions of p o t e n t i a l we t land sediments(which may be considered a long-term contaminant-accumulat ionm e d i u m ) sugge s t low concentrat ions of these chemical s of concern.

GoldQs- Assoc iate s

004272

F I N A L-•**rar MM

5.0 R E F E R E N C E S

C h a r n l e y , G « , E . A . C . crouch, L . O . G r e e n , a n d T . L . L a s h . 1988.M u n i c i p a l S o l i d W a s t e L a n d f i l l i n g . A Review o f Environmenta lE f f e c t s . M e t a S y s t e m s , I n c . C a m b r i d g e , M a s s a c h u s e t t s ..*#&F e d e r a l I n t e r a g e n c y C o m m i t t e e f o r W e t l a n d D e l i n e a t i o n . 1989.F e d e r a l Manual f o r I d e n t i f y i n g a n d D e l i n e a t i n g J u r i s d i c t i o n a lW e t l a n d s , U . S . Army C o r p s o f Engineer s , U . S . EnvironmentalP r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y , U . S . F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e a n d U . S . D . A .S o i l C o n s e r v a t i o n S e r v i c e , W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . C o o p e r a t i v eP u b l i c a t i o n . 76 pp.F e t t e r , C . W .C o m p a n y . 1988. A p p l i e d H y d r o g e o l o g y . M e r r i l l P u b l i s h i n g

C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1989. R I / F S W o r k P l a n , M o s l e y RoadS a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l , Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1 9 S O a . F i n a l T e c h n i c a l Memorandum o nR e f i n e m e n t o f Remedia l O b j e c t i v e s , M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r yL a n d f i l l , Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1990b. F i n a l T e c h n i c a l Memorandum o nSourc e C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l ,Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1990c. F i n a l T e c h n i c a l M e m o r a n d u m o nP h y s i c a l C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l ,Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1990d. D r a f t T e c h n i c a l Memorandum o nC o n t a m i n a n t C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l ,Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s I n c . 1990e. D r a f t T e c h n i c a l Memorandum o nRemedial T e c h n o l o g i e s S c r e e n i n g , M o s l e y Road S a n i t a r yL a n d f i l l , Oklahoma C i t y , Oklahoma.Overcush, M i c h a e l Ray. 1979. Des ign o f Land T r e a t m e n t S y s t e m s f orI n d u s t r i a l W a s t e s - T h e o r y and Pract i ce . Ann Arbor S c i e n c e ,A n n A r b o r , M i c h i g a n . 2 4 7 p p .U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency. 1983. H a z a r d o u s W a s t e LandT r e a t m e n t , E P A Document H o . S 3 0 / S W / 8 7 4 .U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y . I 9 8 8 a . CERCLA C o m p l i a n c ewith Other Laws Manual Part I - I n t e r i m F i n a l . O f f i c e o fS o l i d W a s t e a n d Emergency Response. E P A / S 4 0 / 6 - 8 9 / 0 0 6 .

G o I c i e r A s s o c i a t e s

004273

F I N A L

U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y . 1989a. C E R C L A C o m p l i a n c eW i t h Other Laws M a n u a l Part I I , in t er im F i n a l . O f f i c e o fS o l i d W a s t e a n d Emergency Response* E P A / 5 4 0 / 6 - 8 9 / 0 0 9 .U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency . 1989b. Risk A s s e s s m e n tG u i d a n c e f o r S u p e r f u n d : V o l u m e I - H u m a n H e a l t h E v a l u a t i o nManual Part A , I n t e r i m F i n a l . O f f i c e o f Emergency a n dRemedial Respons e* E P A / 5 4 0 / 1 - 8 9 / 0 0 2 .U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency. 1989c. Risk A s s e s s m e n tG u i d a n c e f o r S u p e r f u n d : V o l u m e I I - Environmenta l E v a l u a t i o nM a n u a l , I n t e r i m F i n a l . O f f i c e o f Emergency a n d Remedia lResponse. E P A / 5 4 0 / 1 - 8 9 / 0 0 1 .U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y . 1990. N a t i o n a l O i l a n dH a z a r d o u s S u b s t a n c e s P o l l u t i o n C o n t i n g e n c y P l a n , 4 0 C F R 300.5 5 F R 8 6 6 6 .

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004274

T A B L E 1-TH A Z A R D O U S SUBSTANCES D E T E C T E D BY M E D I U M

MOSLEY ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L LI B f f l P I B H B B B f f i H C T f f l P l Q T B G i1 . 1 , t -Tricolor o e t f t a n et (1 ,2-Trichkwoetharce1 ,1 -Dichloroethane1 ,2,4-Trichtorobenzene1 ,2-D(ch(orobenzene1 .2-Dichk>roethanst ,2-Dichtoroethene1 ,2-Dichioropropan©1 ,3-DJcnkxobenzenet ,4-DiertloFobenzene2,4-Dimethytphenof2-Butanone2 - H e x a n o f j e2-Methyt Nafr f i t ha t ene

4 . 4 ' - D D D4 , 4 ' - D D T4-Methyfpheinol4-Metr ty(-2-Penta fKmeA c e n a p h t h e n eAcetonealpha-BHCalpha-chtordan©AluminumAnthraceneAntimonyArsenicBarium

XXXXX

x a /x a /X

Xx a /XX

x c /x a /Xx cfx c /

^ftacSix b /

x b /X

Xx a /Xx a /x a /

XXXX

x©/Xx e /x e /x e/

Ground Water

X

Xx a /

x a /

Xx

Ground Water

x a /Xx a /

•It Water .;:.!;

x a /

x a /X

xa/

x b /x a /x a /Xx a/XX

|!5*5X

X

xc/

x c /x c /Motes:a/ Above Instrument detection limit (IDL) but below CRQL.b/ S a m p l e {ess than 5- f OX blank.c/ With in common sol* r^nge (U.S. Envirortmenta! Protection Agency, 1983).d/ EssentSat human nwtrient or toxic only at large concentrations.e/ Within common range for municipal solid waste landfill leachate ( F e t t e r , 1988).

October f 9 9 G Page 1 of 4 903-22230 0 4 2 7 5

004275

TABLE 1-1 (Cont inued)H A Z A R D O U S S U B S T A N C E S D E T E C T E D B Y M E D I U M

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

^^^^^imi^pBenzeneBenzoic AcidBenzo(a)anithface f i eBenzo(a)pyreneBenzolb^fuofanfheneBercz0{g ,h , ()pe ryieneB e F i z o f k J f l u o f a n t n e n eBerylliumbeta-BHC

S a d r m u F OCalcium d/Carbon ete i f id

^f jp i^hata t e

eCarbon Jetraehfor ideShforobenzerceChforoethaneChloro formChromiumi G h f y s e n eCobal tC o p p e rCyanideetelta-BHCDibenzoftiranDieldrinDiethyt P n t f o a i a t e

• ^ . S o i f e • : . ' ? ;x a /x a /x a /

x c /Xx a /XXx a /X

XXx c /XXx a /

if^nifx a /XXXXx a /X

XXx a / e /x e /

x a /

x e /Xx a/x a / b / e /x e / b /Xx a /X

Ground Wfcteirx a / b /

X

X

Xx a /x a / W

P S S S e l Sx a / b /

X

Xx a /x a / b /

x a / b /

x a / b /

X

x a / b /x a /

xa /x a /X

XXX

x a /x a /

x a /x a /x a /x a /xa/x c /x a /x a /x a / c /X

XX

x c /x a /x c /X

Notes:sJ Above enstrunrcem detection limit (IDL) but betow CRQL.b/ Sampl e less than 5-1 OX btank.c/ With t o common soil range ( U . S . Environmental Protection Agency, 1983).<$/ Essential human nutrfent or toxic only at large concentrations.et Within common range for municipal solid waste lanetfitf leachate ( F e t t e r , 1988).

October 1990 Page 2 of 4 903-2223

004276

TABLE t-1 (Cont inued)R^ZARDOUS SUBSTANCES D E T E C T E D BY MEDIUM

MOSLEY ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D R L L

Df-n-Butylpntha fa t eDi-N-Octytphthafa t eEndo s i r f f an f(E n d o s u f f a n S u f f a t eEndrinEndrin ketoneEthyl BenzeneFluorancheneFitiorenegamma-chlordaneH e p t a c h l o rf n d e n o ( t ,2 ,3- edJpyfemeIron d/LeadMagnesium d/ManganeseMercuryW e t h o x y e h l ' o cM e t h y f e n e chlorideM a p t h a l e n eM i c k e fM - N ^ r o s o d p t T e f i y l a m m eM - N i t r o s o d i - n - p r o p y J a m i n ePhenanthrenePhenol1

Potassium $tPyrene

;^|^aMe-Fft H^ Softs -x a /

XXX

XXXx c /Xx b /XX

XXXX

'-•:,:,.._^^yg^' - t ^ a c f S t e N -

x a /x a /X

XXx a /x a /x e /x e / b /x e/x e /

x b /XXx a /XXx e /X

4l|^Ku^feI^||OraundWarer

xa/x a /

Xx b /XX

X

X

;;<3arbef WelifeTfgtbrR,.% QrtHffwi'Water^

x b /XX

yrt

^tif^Si^•^Mt^f

x a /

XXX

x a / b /

xa /x a /xa/x a /x a /x a /

XXXXx a /x b /

X

x a /Xx a /

lp*N>!it f & ^ l

Xx a /

x a /Xx c /Xx c /

x c /

x a /X"x a/

Notes:a/ Above instrument detection limit (IDL) but below CRQL.b/ S a m p l e less than 5-lQX blank.cl Within eotmmon soif range (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983).etf Essential human nutrient or toxic only at large concentrations.el Within common range for municipal s o f k f waste fandfill f e a c h a t e ( F e t t e r , ^ 988).

October Page 3 of 4 903-22232 ~7 "7I I

004277

TABLE t~1 ( C o n t i n u e d )H A Z A R D O U S S U B S T A N C E S D E T E C T E D B Y M E D I U M

M Q S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

StiverSodium d/StyreneTetrachtoroetheneT h a l l i u mTolueneT r i c h f o f o e t F i e n eVanadiumVtnyJ acetateVinyl ChlorideXylenesZinc

XX

x a / b /

X

o5T N o t e s :Sf aJ Above instrument detection limit (IDL) but betow CRQL.b/ Sampl e Jess than 5-1 OX blank.of Within common sotJ range (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983).d/ Es sent iaf numan nutrient or toxic only at large concentrations.e f Within common range for municipal s o f i d waste lanc f f i f l f ea cha t e (Fetter , 1988).

X

x a /

x c /

October t&9O Page 4 of 40 0 4 2 7 8

903-2223

004278

TABLE 2-1P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N DM A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N I N

S U R F A C E A N D N E A R S U R F A C E S O I L SM O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

W?M.

1 , 1 , 2 - T r i c h l o r o e t h a n e' A c e t o n eCarbon t e t ra ch i or id eC h l o r o b e n z e n e' C y a n i d eE t h y l BenzeneT e t r a c h l o r o e t h e n eX y l e n e sB e n z o ( g , h , i ) p e r y l e r t e a/8enzo(a)amhracene a/B e n z o ( a ) p y r e n e a/B e n 2 0 ( b ) f l u o r a n t h e n e a/B e n z o ( k ) f l u o r a m h e n e a/B i s ( 2 - e t h y l h e x y l ) p h t h a l a t eB u t y l b e n z y l p h t h a l a t eChrysene a/F l u r o a n t h e n e a/! n d e n o ( 1 , 2 , 3 - c d ) p y r e n e a/P h e n a n t h r e n e a/Pyrene a/

0.0755.2

0.0150.032

6.30.0250.0160.0650.0570.0790.07

0.0590.0660.110.150.0670.160.0460.0790.14

a/ Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are commonly found in soils aridsediments and may be associated with anthropogenic sources (Overcush, 1979).

October 1990903-2223

004279

TABLE 2-2P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NW A S T E P I T S O I L S

1 , 2 , 4 - T r i c h l o r o b e n z e n e1,2-Dichlorobenzene1.2-Dichloroe thene1.3-Dichlorobenzene1.4-Dichlorobenzene! 2 - M e t h y l N a p h t h a l e n e' 4 - M e t h y l p h e n o I' A c e n a p h t h e r i ei A c e t o n e

' A n t i m o n yB i s ( 2 - e t h y l h e x y l ) p h t h a l a t e' C a d m i u mChiorobenzeneChromiumChryseneC o p p e r

j C y a n i d ee thy l BenzeneF l u o r a n t h e n eF i u o r e n e| Lead

j Mercury[ N a p h t h a l e n e[ N i c k e lI P h e n a n t h r e n e•Phenol a/PyreneS i l v e rT e t r a c h l o r o e t h e n eT o l u e n e a/X y l e n e s2 J n c

.^ 11

416.39

133910

2.15.819830

56253

29.3005.32872414342.67481.831

3,35011

0.741.6

14Z239.882

329

C<rCM*=CCC

Commonly associated with sanitary landfills (Chamtey, Qt at., 1988).

October 1990 Page 1 of 2 903-2223G o i d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004280

TABLE 2-2P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NW A S T E P I T S O I L S

_ — ^ t v t i l V / M O

l 2 - H e x a n o n e4 - M e t h y l - 2 - P e n t a n o n eA n t h r a c e n e.BenzeneBenzo(a)anthracene' B e n z o l e A c i d

' B u t y l b e n z y l p h t h a l a t eCarbon D i s u l f i d e! D i ~ n ~ b u t y l p h t h a f a t eD i b e n z o f u r a nT r i c h l o r o e t h e n e

C h l o r i d e __________.,.Motes:a/ Commonly associated with sanitary landfills (Charnley, et a/., 1988).

CCCMroo

October 1990 Page 2 of 2G o i d e r A s s o c i a t e s

903-2223

004281

TABLE 2-3P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NL E A C H A T E

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L LW$m&$:-1 , 2 - D i c h l o r o e t h e n e1,4~DichIoroben2ene' 2 - B u t a n o n e

4 - M e t h y l - 2 - P e n t a n o n e4 - M e t h y l p h e n o lA c e n a p h t h e n eA c e t o n eA l u m i n u m' A n t h r a c e n eA n t i m o n y' A r s e n i cBariumBenzo(a)anthracene^ e n z o f a j p y r e n eB e n z o ( b ) f l u o r a n t h e n eB e n z o f k j f l u o r a n t h e n eBenzoic Acid

, B i s ( 2 - e t h y l h e x y i ) p h t h a l a t eB u t y l b e n z y l p h t h a l a t eChromium' C h r y s e n eD e l t a - B H CD i e t h y l p h t h a l a t eE n d o s u l f a n S u l f a t eE t h y l BenzeneF l u o r a n t h e n eM a n g a n e s e a/N a p h t h a l e n e' N i c k e lPhenanthr enePhenol a/PyreneT o l u e n e a/X y l e n e sZ i n c

0.0110.0230.920.1200.0270.0140.470.7980.0130.12

0.06213.690.020.0160.0250.0270.960.034

0.0810.06090.02

0.000260.0540.0130.0340.0481.980.029.176

0.0500.310.0510.18

0.0830.0274un^llu^

October 1990 Page 1 of 2G o l d c r A s s o c i a t e s

903-2223

004282

TABLE 2-3 ( C o n t i n u e d )P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NL E A C H A T E

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

2 , 4 - D i m e t h y l p h e n o l' 2 - H e x a n o n e2 - M e t h y l N a p t h a l e n eBenzeneB e n z o ( g , h , i ) p e r y l e n eCadmiumChlorobenze i . eC o b a l t

b i b e n z o f u r a nD i ~ N - B u t y l p h t h a l a t eb l ~ N - O c t y l p h t h a l a t eF l u o r e n el n d e n o ( 1 , 2 , 3 - c d ) p y r e n e

' N - N i t r o s o d i - n - p r o p y f a m i n eS l y r e n eT e t r a c h l o r o e t h e n e

T r i c h l o r o e t h e n eV i n y l C h l o r i d e

0.0050.0090.0060.0050.008

0.02350.005

0.03420.0070.0050.0020.0090.0070.0100.0030.0040.0020.004

ccCMctfce

October 1990 Page 2 of 2C o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

903-2222

004283

TABLE 2-4P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NA L L U V I A L G R O U N D W A T E R

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

1,1-Dichloroethane1 , 2 - D i c h l o r o e t h e n eArsenic b/Barium b/B i s ( 2 - e t h y l h e x y l ) p h t h a l a t eC h l o r o L - mzeneM a n g a n e s e c/N - N i t r o s o d i p h e n y l a m i n eV i n y l C h l o r i d e1 , 2 - D i e h I o r o p r o p a n e4 - 4 ' - D D D a /C h l o r o e t h a n eE n d o s u l f a n S u l f a t e a /E n d o s u l f a n I ! a /T e t r a c h l o r e t h e n eT h a l l i u m b /T r i c h l o r o e t h e n e

0.0090,011

0.07123.170.04

0.0092.92

0.0170.0170.001

0.0000310.002

0.0000270.000012

0.0020.0230.005

| !!!||l!!!^ ll l ^ :?

a/ Pesticides maybe associated with agricultural practices rather thanindustrial hazardous waste disposal.

b/ May be naturally occurring.c/ Commonly associated with sanitary landfills (Charnley, etal., 1983).

October 1990 S03-2223

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004284

TABLE 2-5P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F CONCERN A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NG A R B E R - W E L L I N G T O N G R O U N D W A T E R

MOSLEY ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

Chemical ^ K ;Arsenic a/Chlorob enzeneMangane s e b/V a n a d i u m ayA n t i m o n y a/Barium a/C h l o r o e t h a n eV i n y l A c e t a t e

^^^^^mum etected**?r • ' . V ' : ' ' ' " ( m l f H g r a r h * p t t n i 6 r ) . . - : . ' : v 4

0.02040.0110.821

0.06210.0450.1650.0090.002

or

o

Notes:a/ May be naturally occurring,b! Commonly associated with sanitary landfills (Chamley.et ai,

903-2223G o l d e r Assoc ia t e s

004285

TABLE 2-6P O T E N T I A L C H E M I C A L S O F C O N C E R N A N D

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I NS U R F A C E W A T E R

M O S L E Y R O A D S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

(Chemica l

Barium b/

Mangane s e c/4 . 4 ' - D Q T a /Arsenic b/

Concentration(mill igfania per l i t er)

0.440.03590.331

0.000010.0046

0.000016E n d o s u t f a n S u l f a t a a /N o t e s :a/ P e s t i c i d e s may be associated with a g r i c u l t u r a l practices ratherthan indus tr ia l hazardous waste d i s p o s a l ,b/ May be n a t u r a l l y occurring,c/ Commonly associated with sanitary landfills (Charn l ey , m al.,1988).

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s

004286

TABLE 2-7P O T E N T I AL C H E M I C A L S O F CONCERN

M A X I M U M D E T E C T E D C O N C E N T R A T I O N SI N S E D I M E N T S

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L Lhemical Jlaximuni beteeted Soncerm atiorT

AcetoneAluminumArsenicBariumChromiumC o b a l topperLeadManganese c/N i c k e lS i l v e rVanadiumZinc4.4--DOT a/a l p h a - B H C a/a lpha-ch lordane a/Anthracene b/BenzG(a)amhracene b/beta-BHC a/B i s ( 2 - e t h y l h e x y l ) p h m a l a t ed e l t a - B H C a/Dieldrin a/Endosul fan I I a /Endrin K e t o n e a/Endrin a/Ruoranthene b/gamma-Chlordane a/H e p t a c h l o r a/Methoxychior a/P h o n a n t h r e n e b/

I P y r e n e b / _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

0.06137,000

21.732230.610.620.210250026.43.5

64.868.7

0.00220.002

0.00220.037

0.120.0021

0.10.0030.00150.00320.00740.0024

0.260.003

0.000360.0092

0.200.280

OC(M<s±CO

«•**»* »M agricultural practices rather than wtowaste disposal." **»* aromatic hydrocarbon, are commonly found in soils andsource* (Overcush.

^ Commonly as^ciated with sanitary landrais^hamtey, eta/., 1988).

G o l d e r Assoc ia t e sOctober 1990 903-2223

004287

•CMioen

OCOCCV«COc

o*•»CD<0CL

oOJ

Golder Associates

004288

Goider Associates

004289

H f l j

TABLE 3- t ( C o n t i n u e d )A P P L I C A B L E O R R E L E V A N T A N D A P P R O P R I A T E R E Q U I R E M E N T S

F O R C H E M I C A L S O F P O T E N T f A L C O N C E R N A T M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L L

ao

C f tO2.Q*••*•CDCO

. f l ^ j f ^ f i|Bhyf Sefl20n« Q.Tnt 0.7 n/Fluoranthen f fRucwane(jamfi sa-Cit io fdas i e^ &,OQ2n/H»ptach for 0.Q3O4 nflncteno{ii.2,3-adfepiyrofta 0.0004 n/Lead 0.05/0.005 n/Manganese 0,05Mercury O.ooa/O-OOS n/ O.OO2 n/Mstt ioxyet i to f 0.1/0.4 rtf 0.4 n/Methytene Chloride 0.005 rtfN ' a f M h a l e q #Ntefcet a.t n/ 0.1 o/M - N f c r o s o d i p h e n y l a r o f f f l rN - N f t r o f i o d f c - n - p f o p v & iPhanarrthwnePhenolPyrane -SttvaF 0.05Stywne. 0.006/0.1 V 0/0.1 1/Tatrachtofoe*hene 0.005 n/T h a l K u m 0.001/0.002 1/ 0.0005 n/Toluene 2 n/ 2 n/Tric f tk t ro e e tv e f ia 0.005UanadtuKi\flny* AoetataNAciyt CWoekle 0.002Xylene« 10 rW 10 n/

f^^iXiAfl*(m^y"r : ",1ff f i ' . : l 3 ^^ y.ih* hl^ k- l . i ^ i S i ^ f e S ' A ^::•:;;-:- --.WQC;^ ' V'l '- ^W"'" W^ ^4c^' :U(^r /'^ -^ w \" ' : / -:|- B»«fBt ' : ^ SurWi*;y. Opfn*i(X(VVal^(^::-i:|-:-^i^ ii|itJm(!i^«^^i :|!^Ppl/

2.4 32m/0.188 3.8m/ - -

0(0.0000031) Jc/p/ - - -0(0.000022) k/ 0.0024 0.00000430(0 .0000 1 1 ) W 0.00052 0.0000038

0(0.0000031) k / p / - -0.05 0 . 1 S » S 7 r / 0.0077r/ 0.1 0.10(

0.20.01 0.0024 0.000012 O.OOS 0.00

0.00003m/ - - 0.10(0(0.00019) k/ - -

2.3m/ O.S20m/O . O T 5 4 2.5493 r/ 0.2834 rt 1.0

0(0.007) fc/ - - -

0(0.0000031) k / p / - -3.5 10 2.5 0.2

0(0.0000031) k / p / - -0.05 0.01 34 ft - 0.1 0.05(

- -0(0.00083) k/ S.2m/ 0.84m/

0.017S 1.4m/ 0.04m/fS 17m/ - -

0(0.0028) \ti 45 m/ 21 m/

- - -. . _0(0.002) k/ - -

- -

rt^i&nt;wli::$:|& •: :. *Va(er j V .W^^^ . ^ S j w t f J S . ' S * ' ^ ^ ^ .jv | ^l^ci f f i tHJwiii^^ -i :! ^ ' ^ p i h i w i l i s ^

0.0004--

0.0024 0.0000043O.OOO52 0.000003&

_> - G.1973 0.0077

_ _Z - 0.0024 0.000012> - - 0.000030

0.01- -

3.5403 0.2834-

-0.3

-> - 0.0134

0.00080.00 Ifl

-0.0005 - 0,87$0.0003

— -i _o.oota0.0006

October 1990 Page 3 of 40 0 4 2 Q 0

903-2223

004290

CM(ft

Goider Associates

004291

Golder Associates

004292

TABLE 4-1 (Continued)M A T R f X O F P O T E N T I A L H U M A N E X P O S U R E P A T H W A Y S

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L LC U R R E N T U S E S C E N A R I O

oD£>&*COo2.5*!•*•f l >CO

<)F PATHWAY"-

S u r f a c eS o f t s

Tracking of S u r f a c e soils Directa f f e c t e d soiis at landfil l contact

Onsite Workers

Sedimentel a f f e c t e dsediments

A i r

Sediments tnCrutcho Creek.W o r t h CanadianRiver. S o u t hS w a m p , N o r t hPond, GravelP f tContaminants

generation an In air

Directcontact

Trespassers

RecreationalUsers

(nges t ion.Dermal

tngas t f on ,Dermal

I n g e s t i o r t .Dsrrna!

Very Low: I n c i d e n t a l contact withsoils would be in frequent . O n s f t ev e g e t a t f o n reduces p o t e n t i a l f o refosion.Very Low: Access to the site isrestricted. Onsfte vegetationreduces potential for erosfon.Very Low: S u r f a c e water may beuseei for recreation and f i s h i n gbut exposure would be l imi t ed

A f f abovef i i n d f i i l

O n s f t e WorkersTrespas s er sDownwind Residents

f n h a i a t i o n ,Dermal

Very Low: Ctay cap and vegetationover l a n d f i l f e f f e c t i v e l y containscontaminants f r o m wind erosion orvolati l ization.

October Page 2 of 2 0 0 4 2 9 3

S - E C t H D ' F O R

N o

N o

N o

N o

903-2223

004293

004294

TABLE 4-2 (Cont inued)M A T R I X O F P O T E N T I A L H U M A N E X P O S U R E P A T H W A Y S

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L LF U T U R E U S E S C E N A R I O

PRIMARY

Track ing ofa f f e c t e d s o f t s Contaminatedsoils

OoaCD

69tff-O2.ST»»<g

arid trackingof a f f e c t e dsediments

Contaminatedsediments

Air

S u r f a c e s o f t sat landf i t t

ancjv o l a t i l i z a t i o n in air

S e d i m e n t s I nCrutcho Creek,W o r t h CanadianR f v e r p S o u t hSwamp. W o r t hPond. GravelPit

Air abovel a n d f i l l

Trespassers

RecreationalUsers

OnsSte Workers

f n g e s t t o n .Dermaf

Dermal

I n h a l a t i o n .DernniafDown wl rtd Raatdents

__________ ...____.__._r^---- 7__-j-;:tgagj!Very Low; I n c l d e r r t a f contact withs o r f l s would continue to be Infre-quent. Erosion -reducing vegetationexpected to remain.

Very Low: Access to the sJtd isrestricted* and vegetationreduces the po t en t ia l for erosion.V e f y L o w : Exposure f romrecreational use of surface waterIs expected to remain l i m i t e d .

Very Low; C l a y cap and vegetationover i a n d f i t t are expected to remain.

October 199Q2 at 2

903-2223

0 0 4 2 0 5004295

j Aquatic\Ute

I Fresh water( W e t l a n d s

T A B L E 4-3M A T R . X O F P O T E N T O L E N V . R Q N M E N T A L E X P O S U R E P A T H W A Y S

M O S L E Y ROAD S A N I T A R Y L A N D F I L Ls ^ _________________

^

waterseepage,surface r u n o f fSoil , groundwater, surfacerunof f

S o f t . surfacewatar, vega-t a t f o o

surface r u n o f f

Contaminatedsur fac e water,Qfoundwatar.and sedimentsContaminatedsoil and ground1

w a f e rContaminatedsoil, surfacewatef . andvegesatkmContaminatedground water,sediments,s1 .ce water

Crutcho Creekand NorthCanadian RiverS o i l s aroundland r i f t

L a n d f l U .Crutcho Creek,W o r t h CanadianRiver, we t lands

P o t e n t i a lw e t l a n d sadjacent toS a n d f i l f

Greensun f i s h

C o t t o n wood,Johnson grass

C o t t o n t a i l

M a t l a r a ,C a t t a i l

(nge s t t on

A b s o r p t i o nt n r o w f l h rootsystem

I n g e s i J o n

Absorp t i onI r t g e s t f o n

Moderate: Surfac e waterssuppot t aquattc l i f e community.DOT anj (ead exceed chronictoxiciv s tandards .Ve»y Low. Sotf contaminant concan-Erat.'ons not e f evated aboveB K p e c t e d c o n c s n t r a t f o n . Bio-accumutation not ant i c ipated .Vary Low: sol! contaminant concen-trat ions not elevated aboveexpected levels. Food chaine f f e c t s not anticipated.

Low: S u r f a c e water parameterCRQLs are higher man f e d e r a lor state chronic thresholds fufp r o t e c t i n g warmw&t&r aquatic l i f efor Cd, Ag, and Hg; howevor. highconcentrations are no* apparaniin sediments. No a p p a r e r t fl ong -term accumulation f romcontaminant sources).

Yes

Yas

October 199QPage l of ^

0 0 4 2 9 6 903-2223

004296

aCO«a-Oc

}

Gofder Associates

004297