HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD COVER SHEET

Name of Site: Chemfax, Inc.

EPA ID No. MSD008154486

Contact Persons

Documentation Record: Jennifer L. Wendel

National Priorities List Coordinator

EPA Region 4

61 Forsyth Street

Atlanta, Georgia 303031 HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD

N ame of Site: Chemfax, Inc

. Date Prepared: December 1992

EPA Region: 4 Date Revised: March 2012

Street Address of Site * : Three Rivers Road and Creosote Road

City, County, State , Zip Code : Gulfport , Harrison County, Mississippi 39505

General Location in the State: South

Topographic Map: Gulfport North, Mississippi

Latitude: 30.42 8888 N orth

Longitude :

- 8 9 .08 916 6 West

*The st reet address, coordinates, and contaminant locations presented in this HRS documentation record

identify the general area the site is located. They represent one or more locations EPA considers to be part of

the site based on the screening information EPA used to evaluate the site for NPL listing. EPA lists national

priorities among the known "releases or threatened releases" of hazardous substances; thus, the focus is on the

release, not precisely delineated boundaries. A site is defined as where a hazardous substance has been

"deposited, stored, placed, or otherwise come to be located." Generally, HRS scoring and the subsequent

listing of a release merely represent the initial determination that a certain area may need to be addressed under

CERCLA. Acc ordingly, EPA contemplates that the preliminary description of facility boundaries at the time

of scoring will be refined as more information is developed as to where the contamination has come to be

located.

Scores

Air Pathway 76.80

Ground Water Pathwa y Not Scored

Soil Exposure Pathway Not Scored

Surface Water Pathway Not Scored

HRS SITE SCORE 38.402 WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE

S S 2

1. Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (S

gw ) NS

2a. Surface Water Overland/Flood Migration Component

(from Table 4

- 1, line 30) NS

2b. Ground Water to Surface Water Migration Component

(from Table 4

- 25, line 28) NS

2c. Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (S

sw )

Ent er the larger of lines 2a and 2b as the pathway score. NS

3. Soil Exposure Pathway Score (S

s )

(from Table 5

- 1, line 22) NS

4. Air Migration Pathway Score (S

a )

(from Table 6

- 1, line 12) 76.80 5898.24

5. Total of S

gw 2 + S

sw 2 + S

s 2 + S

a 2 5898.24

6. HRS Site Score

Divide the value on line 5 by 4 and take the square root 38.403 HRS Table 6

- 1 Air Migration Pathway Scoresheet

Factor Categories and Factors Maximum

Value Value

Assigned

Likelihood of Releas e:

1. Observed Release 550 550

2. Potential to Release:

2a. Gas Potential to Release 500 NS

2b. Particulate Potential to Release 500 NS

2c. Potential to Release (higher of lines 2a and 2b) 500 NS

3. Likelihoo d of Release (higher of lines 1 and 2c) 550 550

Waste Characteristics:

4. Toxicity/Mobility ( a ) 2000

5. Hazardous Waste Quantity ( a ) 100

6. Waste Characteristics 100 18

Targets:

7. Nearest Individual 50 50

8. Population:

8a. Level I Concentrations ( b ) 590

8b. Level II Concentrations ( b ) 0

8c. Potential Contamination ( b ) NS

8d. Population (lines 8a + 8b + 8c) ( b ) 590

9. Resources 5 0

10. Sensitive Environments

10a. Actual Contamination ( c ) NS

10b. Potential Contamination ( c ) NS

10c. Sensitive Environments (Lines 10a + 10b) ( c ) NS

11. Targets (lines 7 + 8d + 9 + 10c) ( b ) 640

Air Migration Pathway Score

12. Pathway Score (S

a ), [ (lines 3 x 6 x 11)/82,500] d 100 76.80

a Maximum value applies to waste characteristics category.

b Maximum value not applicable.

c No specific maximum value applies to factor. However, pathway score

based solely on sensitive environments is limited t o maximum of 60.

d Do not round to nearest integer.8 REFERENCES

Ref.

No. Description of the Reference

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( US EPA). Hazard Ranking System , 55 FR 51533,

December 14, 1990. A complete copy of the HRS can be found online at

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/hrsres/index.htm

. Excerpt. 1 page.

2. US EPA. Superfund Chem ical Data Matrix (SCDM)

. January 2004 and December 2, 2011

. A

complete copy of SCDM can be obtained online at

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/hrsres/tools/scdm.htm. Exce rpt. 1 2 pages.

3. USEPA. EPA Superfund Record of Decision: Chemfax, Inc., EPA ID: MSD008154486, OU1,

Gulfport, MS. EPA/ROD/R04

- 03

- 079. November 21, 2002. 124 pages.

4. Environmental Management S ervices, Inc. Site Characterization Report, Chemfax, Inc. Si te, Three

Rivers Road, Gulfport, Harrison County, Mississippi. Prepared for Mississippi D epartment of

Environmental Quality and USEPA, Region 4. October 5, 2009. 58 pages.

5. Estes, G.E. Jr., of Estes and Estes, P.A. , Attorneys at Law. Letter to CERCLA Do cket Office,

Headquarters, USEPA. Subject: Proposed Superfund Site at Chemfax, Inc., Gulfport, MS., with

attachments. June 20, 1994. 1 5 pages.

6. Hazclean Environmental Consultants, Inc. Letter to CERCLA Docket Office, Headquarter,

USEPA. Subject: Propose d Superfund Site at Chemfax, Inc., Gulfport, Mississippi, with

attachments. February 18, 1994. 15 pages.

7. USEPA. Pollution Report #5 and Final. From Roberta M. Runge, On

- Scene Coordinator, USEPA

Region IV to Doug Lair, Branch Chief. Subject: Chemfax, Ha rrison County, Gulfport, Miss.

December 27, 1999. 5 pages.

8

- 11

. Reference s Reserved.

12. NUS Corporation, Superfund Division, “Final Expanded Site Investigation Report, Chemfax, Inc.,

Gulfport, Harrison County, Mississippi, Vol. I,” Revision 0, Prepared under TDD No. F4

- 8911

- 102 for the Waste Management Division of the EPA (September 1991). 30 pages, Appendix A,

32 pages, Tables 6

- 17; Appendix B, 8 pages, Figures 1

- 8; Appendix F, 495 pages.

13. Reference Reserved.

14. NUS Corporation, Superfund Divisio n, “Final Expanded Site Investigation Report, Chemfax, Inc.,

Gulfport, Harrision County, Mississippi, Vol. II: Air Study, “ Revision 0, Prepared under TDD

No. F4

- 8911

- 102 for the Waste Management Division of the EPA (September 1991). 20 pages;

Appendix A, 4 pages; Appendix B, 42 pages.9 15. NUS Corporation Field Logbook No. F4

- 2286 for Chemfax, Inc., TDD No. F4

- 8911

- 102.

Documentation of RHRS data collection, June 4

- 6, 1990. 18 pages.

16. Surface Water Migration Pathway Map. U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5

- min ute series Topographic

Quadrangle Maps of Mississippi: Gulfport North 1954 (Photorevised 1985), Biloxi 1954

(Photorevised 1970, 1976), scale 1:24,000. 1 map.

17. Reference Reserved.

18. NUS Corporation, Superfund Division, “Final Site Screening Investiga tion Report, Chemfax, Inc.,

Gulfport, Harrison County, Mississippi, “ Revision 1, Prepared under TDD No. F4

- 8804

- 31 for

the Waste Management Division of the EPA (April 1989). 32 pages.

19

- 20

. Reference s Reserved.

21. Cynthia K. Gurley, B & V Waste Scienc e and Technology Corporation, Calculations generated by

using James E. Brady and John R. Holum, “Ideal Gas Law,” Fundamentals of Chemistry , 2nd ed.,

pp. 272

- 275 (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1984). 8 pages.

22. Brooke Bittinger, NUS Corporation, telephone conversation with Rhonda Dingman,

Administrative Assistant, Gulfport Chamber of Commerce, October 10, 1990. Subject: The

number of employees at Chemfax, Inc. 1 page.

23. Reference Reserved.

24. U.S. Department of Commerce, Proof Copy of table generated for 1990, CPH

- 1: Summary

population and housing characteristics, issued by Bureau of Census (April 1991). 1 page.

25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Graphical Exposure Modeling System (GEMS) Data

Base , compiled from U.S. Bureau of the Census data ( 1980). 1 page.

26. U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5

- minute series Topographic Quadrangle Maps of Mississippi:

Gulfport NW 1956 (Photorevised 1985), Gulfport North 1954 (PR 1985), Gulfport South 1954

(PR 1986), scale 1:24,000. 1 map.

27. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gulf Coast Ecological Inventory , Mobile 1982, scale 1:250,000.

11 pages, 1 map.

27A

. Reference Reserved.

28

- 29

. Reference s Reserved.

30. Brooke Bittinger, NUS Corporation, telephone conversation with Susan Spears, Assistant to the

County Engin eer, City of Gulfport Engineering, Gebruary 13, 1991. Subject: The Location of any

Surface Water Intakes off of Bernard Bayou, Big Lake or Back Bay. 1 page.

31

- 38

. Reference s Reserved.10 39. NUS Corporation Field Logbook No. F4

- 2317 for Chemfax, Inc., TDD No. F4

- 9001

- 85.

Documentation of air sampling, May 30, 1990

– June 5, 1990. 18 pages.

40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compendium Method TO

- 14, The Determination of

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Ambient Air using Summa Passivated Canister Sampling

and Gas Chromatographic Analysis , from Quality Assurance Division, Environmental Monitoring

Systems Laboratory, May 1988. 122 pages.

41. Cynthia K. Gurley, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, telephone conversation with Gigi

Rainer, Information Specialist, Harrison County Development Commission, November 17, 1992.

Subject: The number of employees at the Alpine Masonite Company. 1 page.

42. Gary Bennett, Chemist, U.S. Environmental Services Division

. M emorandum to Al Hanke, Chief,

Site Assessmen t Section, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November 30, 1992. Subject:

Qualified Analytical Data Used for Chemfax, Inc. 3 pages.11 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

Chemfax, Inc. (Chemfax) is composed of five identified sources on the Chemfax, Inc. facility prop erty,

along with an observed release to air . The Chemfax facility is an inactive and abandoned 11

- acre facility

located in an industrial section of Harrison County just north of Gulfport, Mississippi. See Figures 1 and 2

of this HRS documentation record. The facility manufactured synthetic hydrocarbon resins and waxes

from 1955 until 1995. The primary operation was a paraffin blending process in which different grades of

paraffin wax were heated to a liquid state, blended and then cooled with water (Ref

. 1 2, p. 3). The cooling

water reportedly did not come into contact with the wax (Ref. 12, p. 3) ; however, samples collected from

a cooling water pond during a 19 88 sampling investigation at the facility contained a number of volatile

and semi

- volatile organi c compounds (Ref. 18, Tables 1 and 4)

. A 1990 sampling investigation also

documented an area of contaminated soil at the facility in which volatile and semi

- volatile organic

compounds were detected. This area of contaminated soil was located a few hundred feet to the north and

northwest of the cooling pond (Ref. 12, pp. 16, 17, Table 8 , Figure 5)

. The cooling pond and the area of

contaminated soil are scored as Sources 1 and 2, respectively.

During the 1990 sampling investigation, air samples were collected at the facility and an observed release

to air was documented based on these samples (Ref. 14, Figure 1; See section 6.1.1 of this HRS

documentation record)

. Three additional sources were identified by Chemfax as releasing vapors to air at

the time of the air sampling (Ref. 5, p. 7 ); these three sources, the spill, drip pan and mo l ten resin

processing area, are scored as Sources 3, 4 and 5, respectively. The hazardous substances found in the

observed release samples were benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, st yrene, total xylenes and naphthalene. In

addition, several of the contaminant concentrations were above HRS

- designated health

- based benchmarks

for air, and workers were scored as exposed to Level I contaminant levels (See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS

document ation record) . At some point between June 1993 and January 1994, Chemfax backfilled the

cooling pond with soil (Ref. 6, pp. 3, 4)

. Operations at the facility ceased in 1995 (Ref. 7, p. 1).

F ield work for a Remedial Investigation (RI) and Supplemental Grou nd Water Characterization was

conducted by the EPA in January 1995 and March 1999, respectively

. The RI report was finalized in

January 1996 and the Feasibility Study (FS) was finalized in April 2000. A baseline risk assessment for

human health was also in cluded as part of the FS, and was finalized in April 2000. An Addendum to the

FS was finalized on June 7, 2000

, which addressed some additional issues not included as part of the April

2000 document (Ref. 3, p. 8)

.

As part of the Feasibility Study, the EP A conducted a facility visit in December 1998. T his visit revealed

that the facility was easily accessible to trespassers, many drums were stored on the property , and the

buildings were occupied by transients. Chemfax was therefore assessed under Superfund ’s removal

authority, which is intended to address short

- term threats to public health and the environment (Ref. 3, p.

8) . Based on the available data, EPA conducted a time

- critical removal action at the Chemfax facility from

July 1999 to November 1999. Th e purpose of this removal was to address imminent threats posed by the

facility . At that time, approximately 195 tons of drummed contaminated soils; 52,258 gallons of

hazardous waste from above

- ground storage tanks; additional contaminated soils from aroun d the tank

farms; and a number of buried drums of waste paraffin, wax and oil were removed (Ref. 7 , pp. 1

- 3 )

.12 A Record of Decision (ROD) was published by the EPA in 2002. The ROD detailed remedial actions to

address long

- term threats posed by Chemfax to human health and the environment. The major components

of the remedy outlined in the ROD include:

**•** Excavation of contaminated soils and sediments from areas exceeding cleanup standards;

**•** Backfilling of excavated areas with clean soil;

**•** Off

- site disposal of e xcavated soils and sediments at an approved facility;

**•** Extraction of contaminated ground water, treatment by physical and/or chemical means, discharge

to surface water;

**•** Continuation of ground water remediation until performance standards are met;

**•** Institutio nal controls to restrict land use during remediation;

**•** Control of fugitive dust emissions and surface water runoff during remediation (Ref. 3, pp. 1, 3)

.

In 2009, a Site Characterization sampling investigation was conducted at Chemfax on behalf of the

Mis sissippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and EPA (Ref. 4) . The purpose of the

additional work was to evaluate the current characterization of contaminants in soils and ground water,

develop aquifer characterization data and compare the results t o those of previous investigations (Ref. 4,

p. 1) . The results of this investigation revealed remaining contamination with volatile organic compounds

(VOCs) and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in soil and shallow ground water at the Site (Ref.

4, pp . 6, 9, Tables 4, 5) . As a result of the supplemental data obtained, the EPA is currently amending the

2002 ROD.13 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Name of source: Cooling pond Number of source: 1

Source Type : Surface impo undment

Description and Location of Source (with reference to a map of the site): The water in the cooling pond is

used to cool paraffin wax after it is blended. The water does not come into contact with the wax. This

pond has a cla y bottom (Ref. 12, p. 11). The type of clay bottom is not documented. The cooling pond

(source) is limited to the water placed in the pond.

The cooling pond is located on the south portion of the site (Ref. 12, Appendix B, p. 3). (See Figure 2 of

th is HRS documentation record .) The cooling pond was not removed during the 1999 response action

(Refs. 3, App. D, p. 2; 7, pp, 1

- 3).

Containment

Gas containment: T he description of the “ abatement ” conducted by Chemfax on the cooling pond states

that the pond was backfilled to grade , but there is no mention of the contaminated contents having been

removed first (Ref. 6, p p . 3 , 4 ). On this basis , it is estimated that uncontaminated soil cover could be

between 1 and 3 feet. Conservatively, it is assumed that the soil could be heavily v egetated, given the

inactive and abandoned status of the site , but the cover soil type is unknown . Th ese conditions, applied to

HRS Table 6

- 3, result in a gas containment value of 7 for the air pathway (Ref. 1, p. 51 6 52).

Particulate containment : Based on the description of estimated post

- abatement conditions provided above,

the particulate containment value from HRS Table 6

- 9 is 7 (Ref. 1, p. 51653 ).

Hazardous Substances

Hazardous Substance Evidence Sample Type Reference

Naphthalene 200,000 ug/kg CF

- SD

- 15 12, App. F, p. 2

2

- Methylnaphthalene 27,000 ug/kg CF

- SD

- 15 12, App. F, p. 2

Calcium 1,700 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Copper 12 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Iron 7100J mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Lead 28 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Manganese 31 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Mercury 0.43J mg/kg CF

- SD

- 15 12, App. F, p. 1; 42

Nickel 3.7 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 16 12, App. F, p. 248

Zinc 160 mg/kg CF

- SD

- 15 12, App. F, p. 1

Benzene 17 ug/l CF

- SW

- 05 18, App. A, p. 1

Toluene 90 ug/l C F

- SW

- 05 18, App. A, p. 1

Ethyl benzene 75 ug/l CF

- SW

- 05 18, App. A, p. 1

Xylene 160 ug/l CF

- SW

- 05 18, App. A, p. 1

Styrene 290 ug/l CF

- SW

- 05 18, App. A, p. 1

SD

- Sediment SW

– Surface Water CF

- Chemfax J

– Estimated ValueSource Characterization 14 2.4.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUA NTITY

2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity

Description

No information on Constituent Quantity was available.

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: NA

2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity

Description

No data was available on w astestream quantity.

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: NA

2.4.2.1.3. Volume

Description

The estimated dimensions of the cooling pond are 5 ft x 30 ft x 200 ft (Ref. 15, p. 9).

CALCULATION

30,000 ft 3 or 1,111 yd 3

Sum (yd 3 /gal): 1,1 11 yd 3

Equation for Assigning Value (Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5): 1,111 yd 3 / 2.5 = 444

Volume Assigned Value: 444

2.4.2.1.4. Area

Description

Not evaluated

Area Assigned Value: 0

2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value

Highest assigned value assigned from Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5: 444Source Characterization 15 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Name of source: Contaminated soil Number of source: 2

Source Type : Contaminated soil

Description and Location of Source (with reference to a ma p of the site): An area of contaminated soil has

been delineated on the site. (Ref. 12, Appendix F; 18, Appendix A). (See Figures 3 and 4 of this HRS

documentation record.) Each of the samples used to delineate the area of contaminated soil include: CF

SS

- 02, CF

- SS

- 04, CF

- SS

- 07, CF

- SS

- 14, CF

- SS

- 15.

A small portion of the contaminated soil area was excavated during the 1999 response action (Ref. 3,

Appen. D, p. 2); this portion is accounted for in the hazardous waste quantity evaluation.

Containment

Gas a nd Particulate release to air

Situation not listed (Ref. 1, Tables 6

- 3, 6

- 9, pp. 51652, 51653).

VALUE: 10

Hazardous Substances

Hazardous Substance Evidence Sample Type Reference

Naphthalene 68,000 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 02 12, App. F, p. 297

800 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 04 12, App. F, p. 3

7500 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 07 12, App. F, p. 316

1300 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 14 12, App. F, p. 5

2800 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 15 12, App. F, p. 345

Xylene 39,000 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 02 12, App. F, p. 295

340 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 15 12, App. F, p. 343

Styrene 1500J ug/kg CF

- SS

- 02 12, App. F, p. 295

Ethyl benzene 1400 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 02 12, App. F, p. 295

22 ug/kg CF

- SS

- 15 12, App. F, p. 343

SS

– Surface Soil CF

– Chemfax, Inc. J

– Estimated ValueSource Characterization 16 2.4.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY

2.4.2.1.4. Area

Description

Contaminated so il is located on the Chemfax property. There is an approximately 34,596 ft 2 area of

contaminated soil (Ref. 12, Appendix F; 18, Appendix A). (See Figures 3 and 4 of this HRS

documentation record.)

Sum (ft 2 ): 34,596

(Ref s . 1, Table 2

- 5 ; 12, Appendix F; 1 8, Appendix A )

During the 1999 time

- critical removal action, an estimated 70

- by

- 50

- foot area of this contaminated soil

area was excavated and removed (Ref s . 3, Appendix D, p. 2 ; 7 ) . However, because the specific location

and precision of this latter est imate is unknown, the area of Source 2 is considered as unknown but greater

than zero.

Area Assigned Value: >0

2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value

Highest assigned value assigned from Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5: >0Source Characterization 17 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZAT ION

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Name of source : Spill of raw feedstock Number of source: 3

Source Type : Other

Description and Location of Source (with reference to a map of the site): A spill of raw feedstock occurred

while the 1990 sampling invest igation was ongoing; it occurred in the vicinity of air sampling stations CF

AT

- 03 and CF

- AT

- 04 (Ref. 5, pp. 7, 11, 13, 14). Chemfax referred to the spill as “the liter or so of raw

feedstock that sometimes spills when a hose is disconnected that has not b een properly purged, or when a

valve is not properly closed when the charging process is begun” (Ref. 5, p. 7). Because the liquid phase

could have been at least partially contained in the drip pan (Ref. 5, p. 7), its location is expected to have

been in t he immediate vicinity of air sample location CF

- AT

- 04 (R e f. 5, p. 13, Exhibit B). This is shown

on Figure 2 of this HRS documentation record.

While this source is currently no longer present, it was identified as releasing hazardous substances to air

at t he time of the air sampling study (see section 2.2.2 of this HRS documentation record, below),

therefore, it is included as a scored source.

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE

Chemfax described the quantity of the spill as “sufficient to be detected by the air sampling equipment,”

and stated “that process vapors were actually sampled” by the 1990 air sampling stations adjacent to the

cooling pond (Ref. 5, p. 7). Therefore, the hazardous substances in the observed release to air are

ass ociated with this source. Please see section 6.1.1 of this HRS documentation record for the background

and observed release samples that document the release. The hazardous substances are shown below.

List of Hazardous Substances Associated with Source

Be nzene

Toluene

Ethyl benzene

Styrene

Total xylenes

Naphthalene

2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY

Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

Gas release to air: Due to the nature of the spill, no containment

feature s, such as a gas collection system or cover, are associated

with it. According to Chemfax’s acknowledgement, vapors from

the spill were detected in the air samples used to document the 10 Refs. 1, Table

6

- 3, p. 51652;

5, p. 7.Source Characterization 18 Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

observed release . These conditions fit the Table 6

- 3 category of

“All s ituations except those specifically listed below

. ”

Particulate release to air: Based on the description provided above,

the category from Table 3

- 9 of “All situations except those

specifically listed below” ap plies. 10 Refs. 1, Table

6

- 9, p. 51653;

5, p. 7

Release to ground water: NS

Release via overland migration and/or flood: NS

Notes:

NS Not Scored

2.4.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY

2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity

Description

Th e information available is not sufficient to adequately support evaluation of the hazardous constituent

quantity.

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity

Description

The spill is described by Che mfax as approximately one liter; one liter converts to approximately 0.264

gallon (common metric to standard conversion). In accordance with HRS Table 2

- 5 (Ref. 1, p. 51591),

one gallon equals approximately ten pounds. Therefore, 0.264 gallon equals 2.64 p ounds.

Sum (pounds): 2.64

Sum of Wastestream Quantity/5,000 (Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5): 2.64 / 5000 = 0.000528

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: 0.000528Source Characterization 19 2.4.2.1.3. Volume

Description

Not evaluated (Ref. 1, p. 51591).

Volume Assigned V alue: NS

2.4.2.1.4. Area

Description

Not evaluated (Ref. 1, p. 51591).

Area Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value

Highest assigned value assigned from Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5: 0.000528Source Characterization 20 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Name of source: Drip pan Number of source: 4

Source Type : Other

Description and Location of Source (with reference to a map of the site): Chemfax stated that spills of raw

feedstock (please see source description for Sour ce 3) are “usually contained within the drip pan provided

for that purpose” (Ref. 5, p. 7).It is noted that the use of the word “usually” suggests that feedstock also, at

some frequency, spills outside of the drip pan. According to Exhibit B of Reference 5 , p. 13, the drip pan

was located near air sample station CF

- AT

- 04. Please also see Figure 2 of this HRS documentation record.

While this source is currently no longer present, it was identified as releasing hazardous substances to air

at the time of the air sampling study (see section 2.2.2 of this HRS documentation record, below),

therefore, it is included as a scored source.

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE

Chemfax’s reference to the quantity of the spill as “sufficient to be det ected by the air sampling

equipment,” also applies to this source as the spilled material was partially contained within this source

(Ref. 5, p. 7). Therefore, the hazardous substances in the observed release to air are associated with this

source. Please see section 6.1.1 of this HRS documentation record for the background and observed

release samples that document the release. The hazardous substances are shown below.

List of Hazardous Substances Associated with Source

Benzene

Toluene

Ethyl benzene

Styre ne

Total xylenes

Naphthalene

2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY

Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

Gas release to air: Because during its operational period the drip

pan received spills from Chemfax’s opera tions area, it is expected

that it was open, without cover, and it was located in the open, in

the vicinity of the air sampling stations. The category of HRS

Table 6

- 3 to which this corresponds is “All situations except those

specifically listed below.” 10 Refs. 1, Table

6

- 3, p. 51652;

5, pp. 7, 13.Source Characterization 21 Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

Particulate release to air: Based on the description provided above,

the category from Table 3

- 9 of “All situations except those

specifically listed below” applies. 10 Ref. 1, Table

6

- 9, p. 51653;

5, pp . 7, 13

Release to ground water: NS

Release via overland migration and/or flood: NS

Notes: NS Not Scored

2.4.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY

2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity

Description

The information available is not sufficient to adequately support evaluation of the hazardous constituent

quantity

.

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity

Description

No information is available to evaluate wastestream quantity.

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.3. Volume

Description

The volume of the pan is unknown ; based on Chemfax’s description that it contains spills, it is expected to

be greater than zero (Ref. 5, p. 7).

Volume Assigned Value: >0Source Characterization 22 2.4.2 .1.4. Area

Description : Not evaluated.

Area Assigned Value: 0

2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value

Highest assigned value assigned from Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5: >0Source Characterization 23 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Name of sour ce: Molten Resin Processing Area Number of source: 5

Source Type : Other

Description and Location of Source (with reference to a map of the site): During the time the air sampling

study was being conducted, Chemfax stated that the process area was in u se, and molten resins were being

pumped through filters in the area (Ref. 5, p p . 7 , 11, 14 ) Reference 5, page 13, Exhibit B shows the

location of this area as being in the immediate vicinity of CF

- AT

- 04 and the drip pan. See also Figure 2 of

this HRS docum entation record.

While this source is currently no longer present, it was identified as releasing hazardous substances to air

at the time of the air sampling study (see section 2.2.2 of this HRS documentation record, below),

therefore, it is included as a scored source.

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE

Chemfax stated that “[m]olten resins necessarily release considerably more vapor than resins and

distillates at ambient temperatures,” and that these vapors were reflected in the air sampling results of the

1990 air sampling stations adjacent to the cooling pond (Ref. 5, p p . 7 , 11, 14 ) . On this basis, the

hazardous substances in the observed release to air are associated with this source. Please see section 6.1.1

of this HRS documentat ion record for the background and observed release samples that document the

release. The hazardous substances are shown below.

List of Hazardous Substances Associated with Source

Benzene

Toluene

Ethyl benzene

Styrene

Total xylenes

Naphthalene

2.2.3 HA ZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY

Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

Gas release to air: Because this source was stated by Chemfax to

be releasing vapor , and was located in the open adjacent to the air

sampling stat ions, no containment features such as cover or gas

collection system were associated with it. The category of HRS

Table 6

- 3 to which this corresponds is “All situations except those 10 Refs. 1, Table

6

- 3, p. 51652;

5, pp. 7, 13.Source Characterization 24 Containment Description Containment

Factor Value Ref erences

specifically listed below.”

Particulate release to air: Based on the description provided above,

the category from Table 3

- 9 of “All situations except those

specifically listed below” applies 10 Ref. 1, Table

6

- 9, p. 51653;

5, pp. 7, 13

Release to ground water: NS

Re lease via overland migration and/or flood: NS

Notes:

NS Not Scored

2.4.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY

2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity

Description

The information available is not sufficient to adequately support evaluation of the hazardous constituent

quantity.

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity

Description

Although hazardous substances are known to be associated with this source, no information is available on

which to base a hazardous waste quantity estimate. Therefore, its hazardous waste quantity is assigned as

unknown but greater than zero.

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: >0

2.4.2.1.3. Volume

Description

No information available.

Volume Assigned Val ue: NSSource Characterization 25 2.4.2.1.4. Area

Description

No information available.

Area Assigned Value: NS

2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value

Highest assigned value assigned from Ref. 1, Table 2

- 5: >0

### ``

Source Characterization 26 SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS

Sourc e

No. Source

Hazardous

Waste

Quantity

Value Source

Hazardous

Constituent

Quantity

Complete?

(Y/N) Containment Factor Value by Pathway

Ground Water

(GW)

(Ref. 1, Table

3

- 2) Surface Water (SW) Air

Overland/flood

(Ref. 1, Table 4

- 2) GW to SW

(Ref. 1, Table 3

- 2) Gas

(Ref. 1, Table 6

- 3) Particulate

(Ref. 1, Table 6

- 9)

1 444 N NS NS NS 7 7

2 >0 N NS NS NS 10 10

3 0.000528 N NS NS NS 10 10

4 >0 N NS NS NS 10 10

5 >0 N NS NS NS 10 10AIR

- Likelihood of Release 27 6.0 AIR M IGRATION PATHWAY

6.1 LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE

6.1.1 OBSERVED RELEASE

Direct Observation

Direct observation is not evaluated.

Chemical Analysis

- Background Concentrations:

Sample ID Date Start/Stop Time Sampling Inlet

Height above

Ground (inches) Ref erence(s)

CF

- AT

- 01 5

- 31

- 90 8:38 am/12:35pm 26.75 39, p. 18

CF

- AT

- 02 5

- 31

- 90 8:41am/12:37pm 26 39, p. 18

Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration

(ppbv) Sample

Quantitation Limit

(ppbv) Reference(s)

CF

- AT

- 01 Benzene ND 0.48 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 4

Toluene 0.90 NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 4

Ethyl benzene 0.16J NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 4

Styrene 0.07J NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 4

Total xylenes ND 0.90 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 4

Naphthalene ND 0.30 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 5

CF

- AT

- 02 Benzene ND 0.4 4 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 6

Toluene ND 0.70 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 6

Ethyl benzene 0.37 NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 6

Styrene ND 0.40 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 6AIR

- Likelihood of Release 28 Total xylenes ND 1.4 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 6

Naphthalene 2.40 NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 7

Notes:

ND Not Detected

- Contaminated Samples:

Sample ID Date Start/Stop Time Sampling Inlet

Height above

Ground (inches) Reference(s)

CF

- AT

- 03 5

- 31

- 90 8:43 am/12:40pm 26.25 39, p. 18

CF

- AT

- 04 5

- 31

- 90 8:45am/12:39pm 26 39, p. 18

CF

- AT

- 05 5

- 31

- 90 8: 52am/12:38pm 27.5 39, p. 18

Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration

(ppbv) Sample

Quantitation Limit

(ppbv) Reference(s)

CF

- AT

- 03 Benzene 14 0.48 U /0.44 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 2

Toluene 17 0.70 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 2

Ethyl benzene 44 NA 14, p . 10; App. B,

p. 2

Styrene 120 0.40 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 2

Total xylenes 95 1.4 U /0.90 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 2

Naphthalene 12 0.30 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 3

CF

- AT

- 04 Benzene 18 0.48 U /0.44 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 1

Toluene 18 0.70 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 1

Ethyl benzene 22 NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 1

Styrene 62 0.40 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 1

Total xylenes 45 1.4 U 14, p. 10; App. B,AIR

- Likelihood of Release 29 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration

(ppbv) Sample

Quantitation Limit

(ppbv) Reference(s)

p. 1

Naphthalene 8.8 0.30 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 8

CF

- AT

- 05 Toluene 3.6 0.7 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 9

Ethyl benz ene 7.3 NA 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 9

Styrene 23 0.40 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 9

Total xylenes 17 1.4 U /0.9 U 14, p. 10; App. B,

p. 9

Level I & II Samples

Sample ID: CF

- AT

- 03

Reference for Benchmarks: 2, 21

Hazardous

Substance Mol. wt. Hazardous

Subst ance

Concentration Benchmark Benchmark Level

Benzene 78.12 0.0447 mg/m 3 0.00031 mg/m 3 * Level I

Toluene 92.15 0.0641 mg/m 3 5.2 mg/m 3 ** Level II

Ethyl benzene 106.17 0.1910 mg/m 3 0.00097 mg/m 3 * Level I

Styrene 104.16 0.5112 mg/m 3 1.0 mg/m 3 ** Level II

To tal xylenes 106.17 0.4125 mg/m 3 0.1 mg/m 3 ** Level I

Naphthalene 128.19 0.06291 mg/m 3 0.000072 mg/m 3 * Level I

* = Cancer r isk benchmark

** = Non

- cancer r isk benchmark

Level I & II Samples

Sample ID: CF

- AT

- 0 4

Reference for Benchmarks: 2, 21

Haz ardous

Substance Mol. wt. Hazardous

Substance

Concentration Benchmark Benchmark Level

Benzene 78.12 0.0575 mg/m 3 0.00031 mg/m 3 * Level I

Toluene 92.15 0.0678 mg/m 3 5.2 mg/m 3 ** Level IIAIR

- Likelihood of Release 30 Ethyl benzene 106.17 0.0955 mg/m 3 0.00097 mg/m 3 * Level I

Styrene 10 4.16 0.2641 mg/m 3 1.0 mg/m 3 ** Level II

Total xylenes 106.17 0.1954 mg/m 3 0.1 mg/m 3 ** Level I

Naphthalene 128.19 0.0461 mg/m 3 0.000072 mg/m 3 * Level I

* = Cancer r isk benchmark

** = Non

- cancer r isk benchmark

Level I & II Samples

Sample ID: CF

- AT

- 0 5

Reference for Benchmarks: 2, 21

Hazardous

Substance Mol. wt. Hazardous

Substance

Concentration Benchmark Benchmark Level

Toluene 92.15 0.0135 mg/m 3 5.2 mg/m 3 ** Level II

Ethyl benzene 106.17 0.0317 mg/m 3 0.00097 mg/m 3 * Level I

Styrene 104.16 0.097 9 mg/m 3 1.0 mg/m 3 ** Level II

Total xylenes 106.17 0.0738 mg/m 3 0.1 mg/m 3 ** Level II

* = Cancer r isk benchmark

** = Non

- cancer r isk benchmark

Attribution:

All weather conditions during air sampling was taken from direct observation and from a Weat her Pro

weather station. The weather conditions include: wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and barometric

pressure. This data is located in the field logbook ( Reference 39, pp. 18, 19). The large downwind/upwind

concentration ratios for benzene, nap hthalene, styrene, ethyl benzene and others, combined with the

occurrence during the sampling period of a fairly steady, south

- southeast to southwest wind, strongly

indicates that the cooling pond and surrounding contaminated soil areas were the sources of these

compounds released to the air. The final report for the Site Screening Inspection (SSI) indicates that

Chemfax used various solvents in its processing, these include: alkylated xylene and naphthalene (Ref. 18,

pp. 7, 18).

The air samples were analy zed through the Special Analytical Services of the Contract Laboratory

Program. The whole

- air sample procedures were based on Compendium Method TO

- 14 (Ref. 40).

In addition, Chemfax stated that process vapors were sampled during the 1990 air sampling, ind icating

this included the spill of raw feedstock and the molten resins being pumped through filters (Ref. 5, p. 7).

Hazardous Substances Released

Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl benzene, Styrene, Total Xylenes, Naphthalene.

Air Observed Release Factor Value: 55 0AIR

- Waste Characteristics 31 6.1.2 POTENTIAL TO RELEASE

Since criteria have been met to constitute an observed release to air, the Potential to Release component of

this pathway was not evaluated.

6.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS

6.2.1 TOXICITY/MOBILITY

Hazardous

Substance Source

No. Toxicity

Factor

Value Gas

Mobility

Factor

Value Particulate

Mobility

Factor

Value Toxicity/

Mobility

Factor Value

(Ref. 1,

Table 6

- 13) References

Benzene 1, 3

- 5 1000 1 NA 1000 2 , p. 4

Toluene 1, 3

- 5 10 1 NA 10 2 , p. 9

Ethyl benzene 1

- 5 10 1 NA 10 2 , p. 5

Styrene 1

- 5 10 1 NA 10 2, p. 8

Mercury 1 10,000 0.2 0.00008 2 000 2, p. 6

Naphthalene 1

- 5 1000 1 0.02 1000 2, p. 7

Notes:

NA Not Applicable

Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, styre ne and naphthalene were assigned gas mobility values of 1.0

because they were found in observed release to air (Ref. 1, Section 6.2.1.2). Mercury was detected in the

cooling pond, but not in observed release to air (Refs. 12, App. F, p. 1; 42).

Toxicity/M obility Factor Value: 2000

6.2.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY

Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity

1 Surface Impoundment 444

2 Contaminated Soil >0

3 Other 0.000528

4 Other >0AIR

- Waste Characteristics 32 Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity

5 Other >0

Sum of Values: 444.000528

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100

(Ref. 1, Table 2

- 6)

6.2.3 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FACTOR CATEGORY VALUE

Toxicity/mobility Factor Value: 2000

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100

Toxicity/mobility Factor Value x

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 2 x 10 5

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 18

(Ref. 1, Table 2

- 7)AIR

- Targets 33 6.3 TARGETS

Level I Distance Categories

Sample ID: CF

- AT

- 03; CF

- AT

- 04; CF

- AT

- 05

Location: CF

- AT

- 03 was taken on the north side of the cooling pond, CF

- AT

- 04 was taken on the north

side of the cooling pond, beneath aboveground tanks, and CF

- AT

- 05 was taken on the northwest corner of

the cooling pond.

Reference: Reference 14, p. 3.

Source: Cooling pond, contaminated soil, spill, drip pan and mo lten resin processing area.

Distance from the source in miles: Less than one

- quarter.

Reference: 5, pp. 7, 13; 14, pp. 5, 6, 7. See also Figures 2, 3 and 4 of this HRS documentation record.

Distance categories subject to Level I concentrations: 0

- 1/4 mi le radius.

Samples CF

- AT

- 03, CF

- AT

- 04 and CF

- AT

- 05 contain Level I and II concentrations of contaminants. See

tables in Section 6.1.1 of this HRS documentation record. The Level I air contamination encompasses a

quarter of a mile radius around the cooling pond which includes the delineated area of contaminated soil.

There are 57 employees at Chemfax that use the parking lot and the building on the property (at the time of

the air release), thus all 57 employees are subject to Level I concentrations (Ref. 2 2). A target survey was

conducted on June 6, 1990 by NUS Corporation. This survey concluded that there are no homes within a

quarter mile radius of Chemfax, Inc. (Ref. 15, p. 16). However, the Alpine Masonite Company has two

employees that are within a qua rter mile radius of the cooling pond on the Chemfax property (at the time of

the air release) (Ref. 41). Therefore, 59 individuals are subject to Level I concentrations within a quarter

mile rad i us of the cooling pond.

Samples CF

- AT

- 03, CF

- AT

- 04 and CF

- AT

- 05 were collected from the perimeter of the cooling pond (Ref.

14, p. 9). Sample canisters were placed at least six inches from the water in the cooling pond, on a plastic

sheet around the perimeter of the cooling pond (Ref. 14, Appendix A, p. A

- 3).

Leve l II Distance Categories

No additional Level II distance categories have been documented.

Actual Contamination Distance Categories

As documented above.

6.3.1 NEAREST INDIVIDUAL

Nearest Individual

- Level I Concentrations

Residence, building or area s ubject to Level I concentrations: There were 57 active workers on Chemfax and

2 active workers on Alpine Masonite at the time of the observed release to air that were subject to Level I

concentrations (Refs. 14, p. 3; 22; 41).

Nearest Individual Factor Value: 50AIR

- Targets 34 6.3.2 POPULATION

6.3.2.2 Level I Concentrations

Level I Population Targets

Distance Category Population References

Onsite 59 22

Sum of Population Exposed to Level I Concentrations: 59

Sum of Population Exposed to Lev el I Concentrations x 10: 590

Level I Concentrations Factor Value: 590

6.3.2.3 Level II Concentrations

Level II Population Targets

Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 0

6.3.2.4. Potential Contamination

Potential Population Targets

Population subject to potential contamination was not scored.

Potential Contamination Factor Value: NS

6.3.3 RESOURCES

There are no resources within one

- half mile of Chemfax, Inc. (Reference 26).

Resources Factor Value: 0

6.3.4 SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS

Se nsitive Environments : Not Evaluated