SDMS DocID 000222061 . 5. S

EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES

FOR THE

NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE

NORWOOD, MASSACHUSETTS

February 2005

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region 1 - New England

Boston, MA
Norwood PCB Superfimd Site

Explanation of Significant Differences

February 2005

Table of Contents

I. Introduction.......................................................................................... 1

II. Summary of Site History, Contamination Problems, and Selected Remedy.........3

III. Basis for ESD........................................................................................ 11

IV. Description of Significant Differences......................................................... 12

V. Supporting Agency Comments................................................................. 13

VI. Statutory Determinations......................................................................... 13

VII. Public Participation............................................................................... 14

VIII. Declaration.......................................................................................... 14

Tables

Table 1 - Revised Groundwater Cleanup Standards

Table 2 - Comparison of Groundwater Standards from 1989 ROD and new RBALs

Appendices

Appendix A - Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) Tables

Appendix B - MADEP Concurrence Letter

Appendix C - Administrative Record Index for the Explanation of Significant Differences
I. INTRODUCTION

A. Site Name and Location

Site Name: Norwood PCB Superfund Site (Site)

Site Location: Norwood, Norfolk County, Massachusetts

B. Lead and Support Agencies

Lead Agency: United States Environmental Protection Agency (ERA)

Support Agency: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP)

C. Legal Authority

Under Section 117(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,

and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (c), Section 300.435(c) of the National

Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. § 300.435(c)(2)(l), and Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9355.3-02, if EPA determines that

differences in the remedial action significantly change but do not fundamentally alter the

remedy selected in the Record of Decision (ROD) with respect to scope, performance,

or cost, EPA shall publish an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD). The ESD

shall explain the differences between the remedial action being undertaken and the

remedial action set forth in the ROD and ROD Amendment, and the reasons such

changes are being made.

D. Summary of Circumstances Necessitating this Explanation of

Significant Differences

The 1989 ROD and the 1996 ROD Amendment for the Site specify a remedy that

addresses groundwater, soil, sediment, and building material contamination. In

accordance with the 1989 ROD, EPA completed the construction of a 6,000-square foot

groundwater treatment plant at the northeastern edge of the Site in November 1995.

The plant operated from March 1996 through June 2000 and removed approximately

262 pounds of groundwater contaminants. Groundwater clean-up levels were originally

based on drinking water criteria.

In accordance with EPA's 1996 Final Ground Water Use and Value Determination

Guidance, in May 2001, MADEP recommended a "low use and value" determination for

the groundwater at and in the vicinity of the Site. The determination was made based

on the aquifer's classification as a low-yield, non-potential drinking water source area as

well as the fact that nearby residential or commercial properties are supplied by public,

municipal drinking water sources.

As a result of MADEP's "low use and value" determination, new contaminant exposure

pathways were evaluated based on current and potential future use and revised

-2-
exposure assumptions. Accordingly, supplemental risk assessment activities were

initiated in 2001 and were completed in 2004. As the result of these risk assessments,

revised groundwater clean-up levels, hereafter referred to as risk-based action levels

(RBALs), were calculated for the Site groundwater in March 2003. ERA, by issuing this

ESD, has determined that these RBALs will become the new groundwater clean-up

levels for this Site.

This ESD will also document minor changes to the soil, sediment, and building material

components of the remedy that deviated from the 1996 ROD Amendment.

E. Availability of Documents

This ESD and supporting documentation shall become part of the Administrative Record

for the Site. An index of information being added to the Administrative Record for this

ESD is attached as Appendix C. The full Administrative Record, including its index, is

available to the public at the following locations and may be reviewed at the times listed:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Records Center

One Congress Street

Boston, MA 02114

(617)918-1440

Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Morrill Memorial Library

33 Walpole Street

Norwood, MA 02062

(781)769-0200

Monday through Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.

Friday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Sunday 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

II. SUMMARY OF SITE HISTORY. CONTAMINATION PROBLEMS. AND

SELECTED REMEDY

A. Site History and Contamination Problems

The Site is comprised of approximately 26 acres of mainly commercial and industrial

property and is bordered by Route 1 and the Dean Street access road to the east;

residential areas to the north (across Meadow Brook) and west (adjacent to Pellana

Road); and Dean Street to the south. The Site consists of several parcels of land,

including the former Grant Gear facility; Kerry Place; and portions of Meadow Brook. In

1979, the Site was subdivided. The northeastern portion of the Site, approximately 9

acres, was purchased by Grant Gear Realty Trust and leased to Grant Gear Works, Inc.

The southern and western portions of the Site were further subdivided, a major portion

-3-
of which was named Kerry Place and now is comprised of commercial and light

industrial buildings. Beginning in the 1940s, previous owners or operators of the Grant

Gear facility used polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the production of electrical

transformers and other electrical components. Many of these operations resulted in the

contamination of site soil, groundwater, building surfaces, and Meadow Brook

sediments.

Groundwater was contaminated with PCBs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as

trichloroethylene (up to 1,700 ppb) and vinyl chloride, and semivolatile organic

compounds (SVOCs). Soil and sediments were contaminated with PCBs (up to 26,000

ppm), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals.

In 1983, after MADEP detected high levels of PCBs in the soil on the Site, EPA

conducted an Emergency Removal Action which resulted in the removal of over 500

tons of highly contaminated soil. In 1986, MADEP installed a 4-foot high wire mesh

fence around a 1.5-acre portion of the Site and constructed a protective liner made of

gravel and fabric behind the Grant Gear building to limit access to remaining areas with

significant concentration of PCBs in surface soils.

EPA placed the Site on the National Priorities List in 1986, making the Site eligible for

Superfund clean-up funds. EPA subsequently completed the Remedial Investigation

and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and selected the remedy in a 1989 ROD. The selected

remedy included the excavation and subsequent treatment of soils/sediments by solvent

extraction; decontamination of the Grant Gear building; and the construction and

operation of a groundwater treatment system. The Ground Water Treatment Plant

(GWTP) began operating in 1996. Due to higher than anticipated solvent extraction cost

estimates, logistical problems associated with inadequate space to locate this system,

and based on the likely reuse of this property for commercial or industrial use, EPA

changed the selected remedy in a May 1996 ROD Amendment. The ROD Amendment

called for the demolition of the Grant Gear building and the excavation and consolidation

of contaminated soils/sediments under an asphalt cap and gravel cover areas. EPA

also agreed to restore portions of Meadow Brook excavated as part of the remedy, to

specifications determined by the Town of Norwood as part of their flood control project

within the area.

Between 1991 and 1998, there have been seven settlements with current and former

owners/operators and with the Town of Norwood at the Norwood PCBs Superfund Site.

One of the settlements (in 1997) was a Consent Decree that was entered between

Cornell Dubilier Electronics (CDE) and Federal Pacific Electric (FPE) Company (Settling

Parties) and the United States and Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This Consent

Decree required the Settling Parties to perform the following remedial actions: building

demolition, soil and sediment excavation, and cap/cover activities. Groundwater

treatment and Meadow Brook restoration activities were led by EPA using funds from

the Superfund Trust Fund.

Remedial Construction Activities

-4-
Three separate remediation phases were completed - one by ERA (Phase 1) and two by

the Settling Parties (Phases 2 and 3). EPA also completed Meadow Brook restoration

activities as part of Phase 3. The remediation and restoration phases are described

below.

Phase 1 - Groundwater Treatment

EPA completed the construction of a 6,000-square-foot groundwater treatment plant at

the northeastern edge of the Site in November 1995 under the construction

management of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). EPA and MADEP

performed a pre-final inspection of the plant on January 11, 1996, after which the

treatment plant began operating.

During construction of the groundwater treatment plant foundation, PCB-contaminated

soil was excavated, relocated, and stockpiled on-site. PCB-contaminated soil from four

outlying areas was also excavated, relocated, and stockpiled on-site. These soils

(approximately 2,000 cubic yards) were subsequently consolidated on site under

cap/cover areas (see Phase 3a activities below).

A series of nine extraction wells located in the northeast portion of the Site collected

contaminated groundwater. Once collected, the water was pumped into the plant and

inorganic contaminants were removed in a precipitation process where metals, in the

form of particulates, settle out of the water. After metals were removed via precipitation,

the remaining solids were removed via filtration. The sludge was then pressed and the

resulting filter cake disposed at an off-site disposal facility. Organic contaminants,

including PCBs, were removed in an air stripper/carbon adsorption system. During this

process VOCs were transferred from the water to the air stream. A catalytic oxidation

unit then destroys the VOCs in the air stream before being discharged to the

atmosphere. Water exiting the air stripper was then forced through tanks containing

activated carbon that adsorb remaining organic contaminants and serves as a last

polishing step before the treated water was tested and discharged to Meadow Brook.

Between March 1996 and June 2000, approximately 16.3 million gallons of groundwater

were treated and about 262 pounds of chlorinated VOCs were removed from the

groundwater beneath the Site. The treatment plant was constructed for a cost of

approximately $11 million (including site preparation, construction, and initial stages of

operation) and was operated and maintained for a cost of approximately $500,000 per

year. Monitoring and extraction wells were sampled quarterly and have been sampled

on 27 occasions since startup.

Operation of the groundwater treatment plant was suspended in June 2000 while EPA

considered the effect of MADEP's "low use and value" determination for site

groundwater. Based on this determination, groundwater beneath and in the vicinity of

the Site was no longer considered to be a potential drinking water source and under the

state program, the GW-3 standards would apply. The GW-3 designation considers the

impacts and risks associated with the discharge of groundwater to surface water. At the

-5-
time the GWTP operations were suspended, groundwater concentrations were below

MADEP GW-3 standards for all contaminants except for 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (TCB)

and PCBs. The original cleanup levels in the 1989 ROD were based on drinking water

criteria, namely the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs); however, no MCL existed for

PCBs at that time. Moreover, the 1989 ROD concluded that, due to the continued

presence of PCBs in the saturated soils that it would be technically infeasible to reduce

PCB levels in groundwater to a health-based groundwater cleanup level. Thus, no

clean-up level was established for PCBs. This ESD does not alter that determination

and, thus, no PCB cleanup level has been set. Risk to exposure to PCB contamination

in groundwater will continue to be controlled via institutional controls restricting the use

of groundwater.

EPA also conducted Site-specific risk assessment activities in response to the revised

groundwater classification and proposed redevelopment plans. Risk assessment activities

evaluated human exposure to VOCs volatilizing from groundwater and the vadose zone into the

indoor air of a potential building on the Site and ecological exposure to groundwater

contaminants that may discharge into Meadow Brook. Other than the inactive groundwater

treatment plant, there are currently no buildings at the Site located above areas of groundwater

contamination. As the result of these risk assessments, risk-based action levels (RBALs) were

calculated for the Site groundwater in March 2003. Because exposure to contaminants at or

below these RBALs will not present an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment,

these levels have become the new groundwater performance standards for the Site.

Table 1: Revised Groundwater Cleanup Standards

Contaminant of Potential Concern

Total 1 ,2-Dichloroethenes (DCE)

Trichloroethene (TCE)

Tetrachloroethene (PCE)

Vinyl Chloride

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (DCB)

1 ,4-Trichlorobenzene (TCB)

Risk Based Action Levels (RBALs): New

Groundwater Cleanup Standards Established by

this Explanation of Significant Differences

(mg/L)

3,660

108

37

310

34

4.6

Because no groundwater cleanup level for PCBs was established, an evaluation of the

potential impacts of residual PCB groundwater contamination on Meadow Brook was

necessary. This evaluation was completed in July 2004 and summarized in a report

entitled Phase II Ecological and Human Health Risk Summary Report. Based on an

analysis of the residual groundwater concentrations of VOCs and PCBs, no human

health concerns based on discharge to Meadow Brook were identified. In addition, the

surface water Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for PCBs was exceeded at the

-6-
midstream and downstream stations in the 26th sampling round. Notwithstanding these

exceedances, the results of a site-specific ecological risk assessment, under existing

conditions, it was determined that the levels of PCB in Meadow Brook surface water and

sediment do not represent a risk to the environment. Periodic surface water and

sediment monitoring in Meadow Brook will continue to be conducted to evaluate longterm compliance with AWQCs and to ensure that they do not increase to a level that

may pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. As outlined in

Appendix A, Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQCs) have been added as actionspecific standards for monitoring water quality in Meadow Brook.

As part of the evaluation of PCBs in Meadow Brook surface water and sediment were

collected; elevated concentrations of PCBs were detected in one surface soil sample

collected from a wooded area adjacent to the Town of Norwood Municipal Light

Department's substation on Dean Street. This data point contained 24 ppm of PCBs. A

second data point in the vicinity contained 4.2 ppm. The 1996 ROD Amendment set a

surficial soil cleanup level for PCBs in the wooded area north of Meadow Brook at 10

ppm. This concentration represented an incremental carcinogenic lifetime risk of 5 x

10~6, based on exposure assumptions associated with an older child (age 6 -16) playing

in this area. Applying a similar exposure scenario to the off-site area adjacent to the

sub-station dictates an incremental carcinogenic lifetime risk of 1 x 10~5 for the maximum

concentration detected in this area. Since this falls within EPA's 10"4 to 10~6 acceptable

risk range, no further investigation or action in this area as part of the Norwood PCB

Superfund Site is believed to be necessary.

EPA conducted quarterly groundwater monitoring from April 1996 until October 2002.

Surface water samples were also collected from Meadow Brook during the last nine

quarterly sampling rounds. EPA is in the process of completing an additional round of

groundwater monitoring before the end of 2005. EPA will use the monitoring results to

further assess the hydrological impacts since the shut down, and may use these results

to determine whether any additional (future) groundwater remediation will be necessary.

If the results of the monitoring lead EPA to determine that additional active groundwater

extraction and treatment is not necessary, the groundwater treatment plan will be

decommissioned. Additional groundwater data will be collected periodically as part of

overall Operation and Maintenance activities performed by the Settling Parties and will

be evaluated during each Five-year Review for the site.

Phase 2 - Building Demolition

In accordance with the 1996 ROD Amendment and the 1997 Consent Decree between

EPA and the Settling Parties, the 90,000-square-foot, slab-on-grade Grant Gear building

was demolished (rather than being decontaminated in accordance with the 1989 ROD).

The one-story building was originally constructed in 1942 and contained a subgrade

boiler room and two small second floor mezzanine areas. The building consisted mainly

of a large open production area with several smaller areas sectioned-off for use as office

and storage space. Demolition activities took place between October 1996 and

-7
February 1997 and were performed by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. for the Settling

Parties. USAGE provided on-site construction oversight. ERA and MADEP performed a

final inspection on February 6, 1997.

The following activities were completed during the building demolition phase:

_ inventory, consolidation, and off-site disposal of waste remaining from the former

facility operations;

_ abatement and off-site disposal of asbestos-containing materials from the building;

_ closure of building drainage system including removal and disposal of free liquids

and sediment from on-site manholes and grouting of building drain lines;

_ removal and off-site disposal/recycling of exterior steel siding;

_ removal and shredding of contaminated wooden roof decking (disposed on-site

under cap/cover areas during phase 3);

_ removal and crushing of brick, concrete, and wallboard (disposed on-site under

cap/cover areas during phase 3);

_ disposal of remaining facility equipment and certain building materials/debris in the

subgrade boiler room, filling the remaining void spaces with "flowable fill", and

constructing a 14-inch thick structural slab over the boiler room area;

_ removal and off-site recycling/disposal of two 275-gallon and one 750-gallon empty

aboveground condensation collection tanks; and

_ removal and disposal in the boiler room of a 1,000-gallon empty underground tank

(100 gallons of waste oil disposed off-site).

On January 20, 1999, ERA granted conditional approval of the building demolition

Remedial Construction Report (RCR). Final approval was granted on August 8, 2001.

Phase 3 - Soil/Sediment Remediation Phase 3a - Cap/Cover

In accordance with the 1996 ROD Amendment and the 1997 Consent Decree between

ERA and the Settling Parties, PCB-contaminated soil and sediment were consolidated

on site under cap and cover areas (rather than being treated via solvent extraction as

required by the 1989 ROD). Cap/cover activities took place between April 1997 and

August 1998 and were performed by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. for the Settling

Parties. USAGE provided on-site construction oversight. ERA and MADEP performed a

final inspection on August 11, 1998.

The following activities were completed during the cap/cover phase:

_ Consolidation of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated soil

stockpiled on-site by ERA from groundwater treatment plant construction and

outlying areas excavated during Phase 1;

Consolidation of approximately 1,600 cubic yards of PCB contaminated soil

stockpiled on the adjacent Reardon property;

_ Excavation of PCB-contaminated sediment in Reach 1, 2, and 3 of Meadow

Brook (to the excavation grades established in USAGE'S restoration plans) and

consolidation on site;
_ Removal of additional stained sediment in Reach 1 and consolidation on site;

Excavation of on and off-site PCB contaminated soils and consolidation on site;

_ Excavation of "hot spot" soils below water table and disposal on site above the

water table;

_ Removal and disposal of one 10,000-gallon and one 20,000-gallon underground

fuel oil tanks;

Installation of storm water runoff control/drainage; and

_ Installation of asphalt cap (approximately 4.5 acres) and gravel covers

(approximately 1.6 acres).

_ Construction of storm water detention basin (for both remedial and

redevelopment purposes);

_ Installation of subsurface drainage structures;

Cap/cover remediation activities were conducted in coordination with certain proposed

redevelopment activities. Redevelopment plans have not been finalized. The following

redevelopment activities were also completed during this phase:

_ Construction of two retaining walls; and

_ Installation of electrical conduit and light pole bases.

ERA received the final Soil/Brook Remediation RCR in September 2003.

In accordance with the Consent Decree, the Settling Parties will be responsible for 1)

performing all O&M activities in order to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of cap

and cover areas, and 2) conducting appropriate monitoring activities to assess the

protectiveness and performance of the remedy. These activities are documented in

O&M and environmental monitoring work plans finalized in November 2004.

The Settling Parties' estimated cost for completing phases 2 and 3a is $6.6 million.

Phase 3b - Meadow Brook Restoration

In accordance with the 1996 ROD Amendment and after excavation of contaminated

Brook sediments by the Settling Parties, EPA (under the construction management of

USAGE) restored and stabilized the side slopes and bottom of the excavated portions of

Meadow Brook to the specifications provided by the Town of Norwood as part of their

flood control project. Although the sediment clean-up level for PCBs in Brook was 1

ppm, the Brook was only excavated to the depths required to meet the contours of the

flood control project. The side slopes and bottom of the Brook were then restored with a

layer of geotextile fabric and appropriate restoration materials (i.e., rip rap, interlocking

concrete blocks, or precast concrete culvert sections) that covered any remaining

contamination located at depths below the flood control contours. Restoration activities

in Reach 1 of Meadow Brook (adjacent to the Site) took place between October 1997

and December 1997. Due to concerns related to the use of the interlocking concrete

blocks on the steeper slopes within Reach 2, a decision was made to utilize precast

-9-
concrete culvert sections. This redesign effort, as well as high water conditions, resulted

in delays in completing restoration activities in Reach 2 and 3. Reach 2 and 3 activities

took place between April 1999 and July 1999. ERA and MADEP performed a final

inspection on August 11, 1999.

The following activities were completed during the Brook restoration phase:

_ Preparation of Brook side slopes and bottom (excavate or backfill) consistent with

flood control contours and restoration materials;

_ Installation of rip rap (upstream portion) and interlocking concrete blocks

(downstream portion) on top of geotextile in Reach 1;

_ Installation of precast concrete culvert sections in upstream portion of Reach 2;

_ Installation of rip rap on top of geotextile in downstream portion of Reach 2;

_ Installation of rip rap 100 feet into Dean Street culvert (Reach 3);

_ Installation of topsoil and seed to top of slope and in voids of interlocking

concrete blocks;

_ Encasement of two sewer syphon lines across the Brook;

_ Construction of a support structure for a 30 inch sewer main adjacent to the

Brook; and

_ Restoration of work areas (replace fencing, hydroseed, plantings).

Meadow Brook restoration activities were conducted for a cost of approximately

$775,000. The final Meadow Brook Restoration Report was prepared by USAGE and

was submitted to ERA on February 1, 2002.

C. Summary of 1989 ROD

The remedial decision documented in the 1989 ROD included the excavation and

treatment by solvent extraction of approximately 34,000 cubic yards of PCBcontaminated soils and sediments. After treatment, the ROD required the on-site

backfilling of soils and sediments to be covered with asphalt or clean fill, and the off-site

incineration of extracted PCB oils. The original remedy also included the flushing and

cleaning of the Grant Gear building and drainage system.

The ROD also called for the remediation of groundwater. In particular, the ROD

required contaminated groundwater to be collected with extraction wells, treated in an

on-site treatment plant, and discharged to Meadow Brook. Groundwater treatment

included carbon absorption for PCBs, air stripping for VOCs, and precipitation/filtration

for metals. Wetland restoration, long term monitoring, and institutional controls

restricting groundwater use were also required in the 1989 ROD.

D. Summary of the 1996 ROD Amendment

In order to address higher than anticipated solvent extraction costs and logistical

problems with the citing of solvent extraction equipment and in consideration of the likely

commercial/industrial reuse of the Site, EPA issued a ROD Amendment in May 1996.

The ROD Amendment included the demolition of the Grant Gear building and

-10-
excavation and consolidation of PCB contaminated soils and sediments under asphalt

cap and gravel cover areas. The amended remedy also included remediating a "hot

spot" of soil contaminated with TCB below the water table. The groundwater remedy

remained unchanged from the 1989 ROD. Long-term monitoring, cap and cover

maintenance, and institutional controls were also requirements of the ROD Amendment.

III. BASIS FOR ESP

This ESD documents EPA's decision to modify the groundwater clean-up levels

originally established in the 1989 ROD. In addition, this ESD will also document minor

changes to the soil, sediment, and building material components of the remedy specified

in the 1996 ROD Amendment.

A. Reclassification of Groundwater

Groundwater is not currently used for drinking water in the vicinity of the Site. In May

2001, MADEP submitted a "low use and value" determination for the groundwater in the

vicinity of the Site. The United States Geological Survey has classified the aquifer as

low-yield and MADEP no longer considers groundwater beneath this site to be used as a

drinking water source; this is a significant change in status from the previous drinking

water classification in effect at the time the 1989 ROD was prepared. As a result,

drinking water standards are no longer appropriate as groundwater cleanup standards.

Instead, RBALs have been calculated which are protective of current and future

expected groundwater use.

As a result of the revised groundwater classification, site-specific risk assessment

activities were conducted to ensure that revised groundwater cleanup levels would not

pose an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. Additional risk

assessment activities were required to evaluated the following:

• human exposure to VOCs volatilizing from groundwater and/or on-site

contaminated soils into the indoor air of a potential building on the Site,

• human exposure to contaminated soil and groundwater which may arise from a

construction worker exposure scenario, and

• ecological exposure to groundwater contaminants that may discharge into

Meadow Brook.

Other than the inactive groundwater treatment plant, there are currently no buildings at

the Site located above areas of groundwater contamination. However, based on the

updated assessment, it was determined that a vapor barrier (or other means of

mitigating indoor vapors) would be required if a structure were built on site. Any specific

redevelopment proposal would need to comply with restrictions outlined in the

Institutional Controls for the Site called for in the ROD and Amended ROD.

Regarding the ecological effects of contaminant(s) discharging to Meadow Brook,

RBALs were calculated based in the expected attenuation of groundwater contamination

across the site (prior to discharge) and the dilution of any discharge with the remainder
of the stream. With the exception of PCBs, for which a clean up gal has not been

proposed, all contaminants meet the RBALs. These new RBALs are appropriate

because they do not present an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment,

are cost effective because active treatment will not be necessary, resulting in $500,000

savings per year. As noted above, site groundwater as well as Meadow Brook surface

water and sediment will continue to be monitored to ensure that the remedy remains

protective in the long-term. ERA will also continue conducting Five-year Reviews of the

remedy to ensure that it remains protective and to evaluate compliance with the

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) outlined in Appendix A

to this BSD.

B. Soil, Sediment, Building Material Component Changes

The 1996 ROD Amendment required that the underground storage tank (LIST) that

served the Grant Gear building's boiler be decommissioned in accordance with

applicable regulations. A second LIST was discovered during the 1997 building

demolition phase of remediation. Therefore, both USTs were removed and disposed

off-site as directed by the State Fire Marshall. Stained soils below the tanks were

excavated and also disposed of off-site. The Settling Parties completed this work for

approximately $118,000, a minimal amount when compared to the total cost of the Site

remedial action.

The 1996 ROD Amendment required that Meadow Brook sediments be removed only to

the elevation required for the restoration of the bottom and side-slopes of the Brook.

However, stained sediments in Meadow Brook in the area of the former Grant Gear

building roof drain outfall were discovered during the 1997 soil/brook phase of

remediation. Additional stained soil was identified during detention berm construction

activities. The Settling Parties excavated the stained sediments and soils and then

disposed these materials on-site under the asphalt cap. The Settling Parties completed

these activities for approximately $63,000, a minimal amount when compared to the

total cost of the Site remedial action.

IV. DESCRIPTION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES

EPA is changing the groundwater clean-up levels due to a change in the groundwater

classification. Other minor changes to the soil, sediment, and building material

components of the remedy are also being documented. As a result of these changes,

EPA considers the modified remedy to be adequately protective of human health and

the environment. A description of the changes follows below.

A. Revised Groundwater Cleanup Levels

In response to the revised groundwater classification, supplemental risk assessment

activities were conducted. These efforts resulted in the calculation of RBALs for the

Site. Table 2 below shows a comparison of the 1989 ROD-specified groundwater cleanup levels and the new RBALs. The assessments have also demonstrated that levels for

the contaminants of concern at the Site can be set at the revised levels without causing

-12-
unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. Moreover, the United States

and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will incur a significant savings in Site related

costs from long-term groundwater extraction and treatment.

Table 2: Comparison of Groundwater Clean-up Goals from 1989 ROD and new RBALs

Contaminant of Potential

Concern

Total 1 ,2-Dichloroethenes (DCE)

Trichloroethene (TCE)

Tetrachloroethene (PCE)

Vinyl Chloride

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (DCB)

1 ,4-Trichlorobenzene (TCB)

Groundwater Cleanup Standards

Established in 1989 Record of

Decision

(mg/L)

0.175

0.005

0.005

0.002

0.35

0.005

Risk Based Action Levels

(RBALs): New Groundwater

Cleanup Standards Established

by this Explanation of Significant

Differences

(mg/L)

3,660

108

37

310

34

4.6

B. Soil, Sediment, Building Material Component Changes

During building demolition and soil/brook remediation activities, different Site conditions

were encountered than were originally anticipated. Two USTs were identified rather

than one and additional stained soils and sediments were discovered. In order to

prevent the migration of contaminants into groundwater or surface water, both USTs and

the stained soils and sediments were removed and disposed of properly at minimal

additional cost.

V. SUPPORT AGENCY COMMENTS

MADEP has participated with ERA in developing this BSD and concurs with the

changes. See Appendix B for the MADEP concurrence letter.

VI. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS

ERA has determined that the selected remedy specified in the ROD and ROD

Amendment, and the changes pursuant to this ESD, remain protective of human health

and the environment, comply with Federal and State requirements that are applicable or

relevant and appropriate, and are cost-effective. The revised remedy utilizes permanent

solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent practicable for

-13-
this Site. A list of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) is

provided as Appendix A to this ESD.

VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

This ESD and supporting information are available for public review at the locations

identified within this document. In addition, a notice of availability of the ESD will be

provided to a local newspaper of general circulation.

VIII. DECLARATION

For the foregoing reasons, by my signature below, I approve the issuance of an

Explanation of Significant Differences for the Norwood PCB Superfund Site in Norwood,

Massachusetts and the changes and conclusions stated therein.

jgusarvSfuttfien,

/Office off Site

i US ERA Regk

frector

lediation and Restoration

Date

1

-14-
Appendix A

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) Tables
AUTHORITY REQUIREMENT

CHEMICAL SPECIFIC ARARs:

Federal Criteria, Technical Basis for Deriving Sediment

Advisories, and Guidance Quality Criteria for Non-ionic Organic

Contaminants for the Protection of Benthic

Organisms Using Equilibrium Partitioning

(EPA-822-R-93-011) cleanup levels.

Clean Water Act Sec. 304

Federal Ambient Water Quality Criteria

33 USC 1314;40CFR 122.44

EPA Carcinogenic Assessment Group

Potency Factors

EPA Risk Reference Doses (RfDs)

STATUS REQUIREMENT SYNOPSIS

To be This guidance is used to establish criteria to

Considered protect the aquatic organisms in streams and to

determine environmental risk

within the sediment and to set sediment.

Relevant and Federal AWQC are criteria for protection of

Appropriate human health and aquatic organisms which have

been developed for carcinogenic and Brook

noncarcinogemc compounds.

AWQC are developed under the Clean Water Act

(CWA) as guidelines from which states develop

water quality standards.

To be Potency factors are developed by the EPA from

Considered Health Effects Assessments or Evaluation by the

Carcinogenic Assessment Group.

To be RfDs are does levels developed by the EPA for

Considered non-carcinogenic effects.

ACTION TAKEN TO ATTAIN

ARARs

The criteria established were used to

evaluate risks to aquatic organisms

exposed to contaminated water entrained

AWQC were used to characterize risks

to fresh water aquatic life in Meadow Brook

EPA Carcinogenic Potency Factors were

used to complete the individual

incremental cancer risk resulting from

exposure to site contaminants.

EPA RfDs were used to characterize

risks due to exposure to contaminants on

site.

LOCATION SPECIFIC ARARs

Federal Regulatory Wetlands Executive Order (EO 11990) Applicable

40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A

Floodplains Executive Order (EO 11988) Applicable

40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A

Clean Water Act (CWA) - Section 404 Applicable

Dredge and Fill Requirements

(33 U.S.C. 1344, 40 CFR Part 230)

Under this regulation. Federal agencies are

required to minimize the destruction, loss, or

degradation ol wetlands, and preserve and

enhance natural and beneficial values of

wetlands.

Federal agencies are required to reduce the risk

of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods,

and to restore and preserve the natural and

beneficial values of floodplains.

No activity that adversely affects a wetland shall

be permitted if a practicable alternative that has

less effect is available.

Any redevelopment or O &M will include all

all practicable means of minimizing

harm to wetlands.

The remedial action was designed to

keep all activities out of the floodplain to

the greatest extent practicable.

Ongoing monitoring and O&M activities in and

adjacent to Meadow Brook or any other Site

wetlands will meet these standards.

1-ish and Wildlif e Coordination Act

16 U.S.C'. 6(>l

Applicable Before undertaking any Federal action that causes

the modification of any body ol" water or affects

fish and wildlife.

Federal and State fish and wildlife agencies will be

consulted concerning any monitoring and O&M

activities in and adjacent to Meadow Brook.

A-l
AUTHORITY REQUIREMENT

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA) Location Standards

(40 C.F.R. 264.18)

STATUS REQUIREMENT SYNOPSIS

Relevant and This regulation outlines the requirements for

Appropriate constructing a RCRA facility on a 100-year

floodplain.

State Regulatory Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act

(M.G.L. c.131 Section 40

:310CMR 10.00)

Massachusetts Waterways Regulations

(M.G.L. c.2l. Sections 26-53; 314 CMR 9.00)

Applicable These regulations outline the requirements

necessary to work within 100 feet of a wetland.

Applicable Regulates work within waterways, including

water quality protection.

ACTION SPECIFIC ARARs

Federal Regulatory Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Requirements (RCRA) Subtitle C (40 C.F.R. 260-262)

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA),

15 U.S.C. §§ 260l,e/.«?<7, 40 C.F.R.

761.75

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA),

(40 C.F.R. 760.60)

C'lean Water Act - Sec. 304

Federal Ambient Water Quality Criteria

33 USC' 1314;40CFR 122.44

Applicable RC'RA regulates the generation, transport,

(for generated storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous

wastes)/; Waste CERCI.A specifically requires (in

Relevant and Section 121(d)(3) that hazardous substances

Appropriate from response actions be disposed of at facilities

(for closure/ in compliance with Subtitle C of RCRA

post closure)

Applicable Establishes standards for PCB landfills, including

permitting waivers for clay soils, synthetic liner,

50 feet to water table, and leachate collection

requirements upon a finding by the Regional

Administrator.

Establishes treatment and disposal standards for

PCB wastes generated as part of redevelopment,

monitoring or O&M activities.

Relevant and AWQC are developed under the Clean Water Act

Appropriate (CWA) as guidelines from which states develop

water quality standards.

ACTION TAKEN TO ATTAIN

ARARs

Hazardous waste disposed of or generated within the

floodplain of Meadow Brook will be managed to

prevent a release of hazardous waste in the event of a

flood event.

All redevelopment, monitoring, or O&M work within

areas regulated under this standard will be conducted

in compliance with these regulations.

All redevelopment, monitoring, or O&M work within

or adjacent to Meadow Brook will comply with these

standards.

Wastes generated during monitoring

or O & M activities will be characterized

and handled in accordance with applicable RC'RA

regulations. Wastes left in place under the cap

will be managed in compliance with closure

and post-closure standards.

Closure/post closures standards (incorporating

waivers invoked under the ROD amendment) for

the capped PCB wastes will be followed.

Treatment and disposal standards for

PCB generated wastes will be satisfied.

AWQC' are used to monitor water quality

in Meadow Brook to assess the protectiveness

of the remedy

State Regulatory

Requirements

Guide on Remedial Actions at Superfund To be

Sites with PCB Contamination (OSWER considered

Directive 9355 4-01, August 1990)

Massachusetts Groundwater Protection Relevant and

Regulations Appropriate

314 CMR 6.00

Sets forth guidelines for implementing remedial

actions for PCBs

These regulations establish the criteria for

classifying ground water and for establishing

monitoring standards.

Ongoing monitoring and O&M activities will

be conducted consistent with the goals of this guidance

Groundwater has been reclassified as Class III,

designated for uses other than as a source of potable,

water supply. The regulations also set standards that

will be used lor monitoring.

A-2
AUTHORITY RKQUIRKMENT STATUS

Massachusetts Ambient Air Quality Applicable

Standards

REQUIREMENT SYNOPSIS

These regulations specify emissions standards for

particulates and lead.

ACTION TAKEN TO ATTAIN

ARARs

All redevelopment, monitoring and O&M activities

will be conducted in a manner to minimize the

generation of dust or other hazardous wastes.

Massachusetts Air Pollution Control

Regulations

310 C.M.R. 7.00

Applicable

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Regulations Applicable

310 C.M.R 30.00

Regulations specific to control of odor and

requirements for handling asbestos wastes and

fugitive dust emissions.

Regulations governing the generation, treatment,

storage, and disposal of hazardous waste.

Any odors and fugitive dust generated by O&M,

redevelopment, and monitoring will be controlled,

under these standards.

These regulations will be followed in conducting

O&M, monitoring, and redevelopment activities.

Potions of these regulations, which are specific to

on-site PCBs are not applicable since PCB are

adequately regulated under TSCA.

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Regulations Applicable

310C.M.R. 30.125(b)

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Regulations Applicable

310 C.M.R. 30.302

Requirements for Toxic Characteristic Leaching

Procedure (TCLP).

Requirements for any generator of a waste to

determine if the waste is hazardous.

Wastes generated for off-site disposal in conducting

O&M, monitoring, and redevelopment activities

will be charactenzed and handled in accordance with

these standards.

Wastes generated for off-site disposal in conducting

O&M, monitoring, and redevelopment activities

will be characterized and handled in accordance with

these standards

A-3
Appendix B

MADEP Concurrence Letter
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500

MITT ROMNEY ELLEN ROY HERZFELDER

Governor

 Secretary

KERRY HEALEY ROBERT W. GOLLEDGE Jr.

Lieutenant Governor Commissioner

February 15,2005

Ms. Susan Studlien, Director RE: Explanation of Significant

Office of Site Remediation and Restoration Differences for Norwood PCBs

US EPA, Suite 1100 (HIO) Superfund Site

One Congress Street Norwood, MA.

Boston, MA 02114-2023

Dear Ms. Studlien:

The Department of Environmental Protection (the Department) has reviewed the proposed

Explanation of Significant Differences (BSD) dated February 2005 for the Norwood PCBs

(Norwood) Superfund Site. This BSD amends the original 1989 Record of Decision (ROD) and

the 1996 Amended ROD. The Department concurs with the BSD for the Site.

The purpose of this BSD is principally to adopt new groundwater clean up goals. Minor changes

are also documented for the soil/source remedy as well as for the remedy implemented along

Meadow Brook. The Department believes that these changes to the remedy will not affect its

overall protectiveness.

The Department has evaluated the BSD for consistency with M.G.L. Chapter 2IE and the

Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP). This BSD establishes new groundwater cleanup goals

based on the Department's revised regulatory classification for groundwater at the site. At the

time the ROD was finalized, the groundwater at the site was classified as a potential drinking

water source area. In 1993 the groundwater classification was revised with the groundwater at

and in the area of the site no longer considered a potential of current drinking water source area.

This change in classification is discussed in the 2001 Groundwater Use and Value Determination

prepared by the Department and reflected in the "low use and value" determination assigned to

the site groundwater. In consideration of the new classification, EPA re-evaluated the potential

groundwater exposures and risks and revised the cleanup goals. The new cleanup goals

contained in the ESD reflect updated risk information including human health and the

environment.

This Information Is available in alternate format. Call Aprel McCabe, ADA Coordinator at 1-617-556-1171. TDD Service - 1-800-298-2207.

DEP on the World Wide Web: http://www.mass.gov/dep

£J Printed on Recycled Paper
The Department appreciates the opportunity to provide input on this BSD and looks forward to the

continuing implementation of the remedy at the Site. If you have any questions please call

Daniel Keefe, Project Manager for the Site, at (617) 292-5940.

Sincerely,

Richard Chlalpin, Assistant Commissioner

Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup

e-copy:Bob Ciaciarulo, US EPA

e-file: 05.00 Record of Decision/DEP Concurrence Letter Norwood PCBs BSD 2005
Appendix C

Administrative Record Index for the Explanation of Significant Differences
Norwood PCBs

NPL Site Administrative Record

Explanation of Significant Differences

Operable Unit 1

Index

Prepared by

EPA New England

Office of Site Remediation & Restoration
Introduction to the Collection

This is the Administrative Record for the Norwood PCBs Superfund site, Norwood, MA, OU 1,

Entire Site, Explanation of Significant Differences (BSD), released February 2005. The file

contains site-specific documents and a list of guidance documents used by EPA staff in selecting

a response action at the site.

This file includes, by reference, the administrative record files for the Norwood PCBs, OU 1

Record of Decision, issued September 29, 1989 and OU 1 Record of Decision Amendment,

issued May 17, 1996.

The administrative record file is available for review at:

Morrill Memorial Library

Walpole Street

Norwood, MA 02062

(781)769-0200 (phone)

http://www.ci.norwood.ma.us/librarv/index.html

EPA New England Superfund Records & Information Center

1 Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HSC)

Boston, MA 02114 (by appointment)

617-918-1440 (phone)

617-918-1223 (fax)

http://www.epa.gov/region01/superfund/resource/records.htm

Questions about this administrative record file should be directed to the EPA New England site

manager.

An administrative record file is required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and

Reauthorization Act (SARA).
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

03: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI)

FINA^

Author: FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORP

Addressee: u§ ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Doc Date: 04/01/2000 #ofPages: 122

Doc Type: REPORT

4569p ^;;'FlB|^;1i;C»pW<^'JM^pI^^I^ DEVELOPMENT OF: RISK-BASED ACTION LEVELS FOR THE

e

;

Si:ftift|^^ CONCERN IN .

ItiSllli^ "I 2?t •';"''•• • '. "' ; •-•. . : ,. \ ...'..'

Author: FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORP

Addressee:

us ARMy CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Doc Date: 03/01/2002 # of Pages: 40

Doc Type: REPORT

;El|:<p^^

' '." ? : V. :; \w

Author: FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORP

Addressee: us ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Doc Date: 05/01/2002 # of Pages: 10

Doc Type: REPORT

Author: FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORP

Addressee: u§ ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Doc Date: 05/01/2002 # of Pages: 128

Doc Type: REPORT
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

03: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI)

t£^Q^

Author: TETRA TECH FW INC

Addressee:

Doc Date: 07/01/2004 # of Pages: 52

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - NEW ENGLAND DIVISION

Doc Type: REPORT

05: RECORD OF DECISION (ROD)

Author: US EPA REGION 1

Addressee:

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Type: RECORD OF DECISION

Author: US EPA REGION 1

Addressee:

Doc Type: REPORT

Author: RICHARD J CHALPIN MA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Addressee: SUSAN STUDLiEN ys EpA REGION 1 - OFFICE OF SITE REMEDIATION & RESTORATION

Doc Type: LETTER

Doc Date: 09/29/1989 # of Pages: 306

Doc Date: 05/17/1996 # of Pages: 87

Doc Date: 02/15/2005 # of Pages: 2
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

05: RECORD OF DECISION (ROD)

Author: US EPA REGION I

Addressee:

Doc Type: EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIP

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 02/23/2005 # of Pages: 23

07: REMEDIAL ACTION (RA)

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee:

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 11/11/1997 # of Pages: 225

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee:

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 11/11/1997 SofPages: 507

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 491
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

07: REMEDIAL ACTION (RA)

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 324

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 667

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 536

i5*Jl|Sl^a«fjrte^JT»VD'l^:En^W

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 450
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

07: REMEDIAL ACTION (RA)

PHASE, VOLUME 5

Author: GZA GEOENV1RONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Author:

Addressee:

GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 488

Doc Date: 09/01/2003 # of Pages: 459

Doc Type: REPORT

Author: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC

Addressee: NORWOOD PCB SUPERFUND SITE REMEDIATION TRUST

Doc Type: REPORT

Author: TETRA TECH FW INC

Addressee: US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - NEW ENGLAND DIVISION

Doc Date: 09/01/2003

Doc Date: 07/01/2004

# of Pages: 398

# of Pages: 55

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Type: SAMPLING & ANALYSIS DATA
AR Collection: 2077

ESD

AR Collection QA Report

***For External Use***

2/23/05

08: POST REMEDIAL ACTION

Author: FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORP

Addressee: ys ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - NEW ENGLAND DIVISION

Doc Date: 01/01/2003 # of Pages: 47

Doc Type: REPORT

Author: US EPA REGION 1

Addressee:

Doc Type: FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT

Doc Type: REPORT

Doc Date: 12/29/2004 # of Pages: 81

09: STATE COORDINATION

Author: JAY NAPARSTEK MA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Addressee: DANIEL COUGHLIN US EPA REGION 1

Doc Type: LETTER

Doc Date: 05/11/2001 # of Pages: 6

Number of Documents in Collection:23
GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

ERA guidance documents may be reviewed at the ERA Region I Superfund Records Center in

Boston, Massachusetts.

TITLE

EVALUATION OF THE B.E.S.T. SOLVENT EXTRACTION SLUDGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY. TWENTY-FOUR HOUR TEST.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

___________EPA 600/2-88/051____C027_____________________________________________________

TITLE

NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

___________________________C063_____________________________________________________

TITLE

PROTECTION OF WETLANDS: EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990. 42 FED. REG. 26961 (1977).

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

5/24/1977____________________C003_____________________________________________________

TITLE

APPLICABILITY OF PCB REGULATIONS TO SPILLS WHICH OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE 1978 REGULATION

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

8/3/1979____________________C057_____________________________________________________

TITLE

DEVELOPMENT OF ADVISORY LEVELS FOR POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS) CLEANUP.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

5/1/1986_____EPA 600/6-86/002____C019_____________________________________________________

TITLE

HANDBOOK FOR STABILIZATION/SOLIDIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/1/1986_____EPA/540/2-86-001 2308_____________________________________________________

TITLE

SUPERFUND REMEDIAL DESIGN AND REMEDIAL ACTION GUIDANCE

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/1/1986_____OSWER #9355.0-4A 2011_____________________________________________________

TITLE

DRAFT GUIDANCE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS FOR CONTAMINATED GROUND WATER AT SUPERFUND SITES.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

10/1/1986 OSWER #9283.1-2 C022_____________________________________________________

TITLE

SUPERFUND PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION MANUAL

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

10/1/1986_____OSWER #9285.4-1 5014_____________________________________________________

TITLE

COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980. AMENDED BY PL 99-499, 10/17/86.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

10/17/1986___________________C018_____________________________________________________

TITLE

INTERIM GUIDANCE ON SUPERFUND SELECTION OF REMEDY

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

12/24/1986 OSWER #9355.0-19 9000

Thursday, January 20, 2005 Page 1
GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

ERA guidance documents may be reviewed at the ERA Region I Superfund Records Center in

Boston, Massachusetts.

TITLE

DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR REMEDIAL RESPONSE ACTIVITIES: DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

3/1/1987 EPA/540/G-87/003 2101

TITLE

PCB SEDIMENT DECONTAMINATION - TECHNICAL/ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF SELECTED ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS. PROJECT

SUMMARY.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

3/1/1987_____EPA/600/S2-86/112 C077______________________________________________________

TITLE

CHEMICAL DESTRUCTION OF HALOGENATED ALIPHATIC HYDROCARBONS.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/23/1987____________________C014______________________________________________________

TITLE

INTERIM GUIDANCE ON COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

7/9/1987_____OSWER #9234.0-05 C055_____________________________________________________

TITLE

COMPENDIUM OF TECHNOLOGIES USED IN THE TREATMENT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

9/1/1987_____EPA/625/8-87/014____2300______________________________________________________

TITLE

COMMENTS ON THE PCB CONTAMINATION-REGULATORY AND POLICY BACKGROUND MEMO.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

10/14/1987___________________C050_____________________________________________________

TITLE

PCB SEDIMENT DECONTAMINATION PROCESSES SELECTION FOR TEST AND EVALUATION (TAKEN FROM HAZARDOUS WASTE &

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, VOL. 5, NUMBER, 3, 1988).

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

1/1/1988____________________C068_____________________________________________________

TITLE

APPLICATION OF INTERIM SEDIMENT CRITERIA VALUES AT SULLIVAN'S LEDGE SUPERFUND SITE.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

4/11/1988____________________C049________________________________________________

TITLE

COMMUNITY RELATIONS IN SUPERFUND: A HANDBOOK (INTERIM VERSION). INCLUDES CHAPTER 6, DATED 11/03/88.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/1/1988_____OSWER #9230.0-036 7000________________________

TITLE

SEDIMENT QUALITY VALUES REFINEMENT: 1988 UPDATE AND EVALUATION OF PUGET SOUND AET.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

9/1/1988____________________C095_____________________________________________________

TITLE

INTERIM FINAL GUIDANCE FOR CONDUCTING REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES UNDER CERCLA.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

10/1/1988 OSWER #9355.3-01 2002

Thursday, January 20, 2005 Page 2
GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

ERA guidance documents may be reviewed at the ERA Region I Superfund Records Center in

Boston, Massachusetts.

TITLE

BASIC EXTRACTIVE SLUDGE TREATMENT (B.E.S.T.) DEMONSTRATED AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPAID DOCNUMBER

12/16/1988___________________COOS________________________________________________________

TITLE

LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS. SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/1/1989_____OS-520__________C123_______________________________________________________

TITLE

SUPPLEMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE FOR THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM. DRAFT FINAL.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

6/1/1989_____EPA 901/5-89-001____C104________________________________________________________

TITLE

GUIDANCE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS FOR SUPERFUND SITES WITH PCB CONTAMINATION.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

8/1/1990_____OSWER #9355.4-01 2014________________________________________________________

TITLE

GUIDE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS AT SUPERFUND SITES WITH PCB CONTAMINATION. QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

8/1/1990_____OSWER #9355.4-01 FS C254_______________________________________________________

TITLE

GROUNDWATER USE AND VALUE DETERMINATION GUIDANCE. A RESOURCE-BASED APPROACH TO DECISION MAKING. FINAL DRAFT.

DOCDATE OSWER/EPA ID DOCNUMBER

4/3/1996 C273

Thursday, January 20, 2005 Page 3