## STATE O F ARKANSAS

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 8001 NATIONA L DRIVE , P.O . BO X 8913 LITTL E ROCK , ARKANSA S 72219-891 3DECLARATIO N FORTH E MONRO E AUTO PI T SUPERFUN D SIT E (FINCH ROAD LANDFILL ) PARAGOULD, ARKANSAS RECORD O F DECISION AMENDMEN T NO . 1 SIT E NAME AND LOCATIO N Monro e Auto Superfimd Site , Paragould , Greene County , Arkansa s STATEMEN

T O F BASI S AND PURPOS E Thi s decision documen

t present s an amendmen

t to th e previousl

y selected remedia

l action for

th e Monro e Auto Superfimd Sit e (Site) . The ne w remed y wa s chose

n i n accordanc e with th e Comprehensiv e Environmenta l Response , Compensatio n an d Liabilit y Ac t o f 1980 (CERCLA) , a s amende d by me Superfimd Amendment s an d Reauthorizatio n Ac t of 1986 (SARA) (4 2 U.S . Code , Section 9601 , e

t seq.) , and , to th e exten

t practicable , th e Nationa

l Contingenc y Plan (NCP ) (4 0 CF R Par t 300) . Thi s decision i s base d o n th e Administrativ e Recor d for mi s Site . The U . S . Environmenta

l Agenc y (EPA ) Regio n 6 concur s with th e selecte d remedy . ASSESSMEN

T OF TH E SIT E Actua l o r threatene d release s of

hazardou s substance s fromthi s Site , i f no t addresse d by implementin g th e respons e actio n selected i n thi s amendment , may presen t an imminen

t an d substantia l endangermen

t to th e publi c healt

h o r welfare of

th e environment . DESCRIPTION O F TH

E REMEDY Thi s Amendment

change s th e metho d o f

contaminate d soil/sludg e remediatio n describe d i n the Recor d o f Decisio n (ROD ) execute d by th e Director o f th e Arkansa s Department

o f Environmenta

l Qualit y an d me EPA Regiona

l Administrato r

o n Septembe

r 26,1996 . ••• » The metho d of

remediatio n o

f soil/sludg e i s change d fromcontainment to excavatio n an d treatment require d by th e Resourc e Conservatio n an d Recover y Ac t (RCRA) , remova

l fromth e Site , an d disposa l i n apermitted , secur

e wast e disposa l facility . The ne w remed y doe s no t

chang e th e previousl y selected groun d wate

r remedy . Thi s amende d remed y doe s no t

alte r th e Applicabl e o

r Relevan t an d Appropriat

e Requirement s listed i n th e 199 6 ROD .

### STATUTOR

Y DETERMINATION S The selectedremed

y for soil/sludg e i s protectiv e o

f human healt

h and th e environment , complie s with Federa l an d Stat e requirement s that

ar e legall y applicable orrelevant

an d appropriat

e to th e remedia

l action andis cost-effective . The selectedremed y use s excavation , treatment , andremoval o f contaminate d soiVsludg e to an appropriat

e off-site landfil l facility . Thi s remed y continue s to requir

e groun d water monitorin g of

th e attenuatio n through natural processe s o f dilutio n an d adsorptio n to insur e effectivenes s o f th e remedia

l action . Becaus e the contaminant s will beremove d to belo w risk-based levels , five-yea r review s of th e soi l remed y would no t

b e require d for

thi s remedia

l action . DATA CERTIFICATION CHECKLIS T The followin g informatio n i s include d i n the Amendment :

• ne w remedia

l actio n goal s for

soil/sludge ; • lan d us e that

will b e availabl e a

t th e Sit e a s aresult

o f th e selected remedy ; • duratio n o

f th e implementatio n o

f th e remedy ; and , • decisive factor s that lea d to selectin

g th e remedy . Th e followin g informatio n i s include d i n th e previou s Recor

d o f Decisio n an d othe rdocument s i n m e Administrativ

e Recor d file :



### • chemical s of

concer n and their respectiv e concentrations ; • baselin

e ris k represente d by th e chemica l o f concern ; • basi s for

th e cleanup levels ; and , • current

and future groun d water

uses .

Directo r Arkansas Department

of Environmenta

l Qualit y

|gA . Cook

e sgiona l Administrator U . S . Environmenta

l Protectio n Agenc y 

# .^ . ^.^ Date

### CONCURRENC E LIS T FO RTH E MONROE AUTO PIT SUPERFUN D SIT E (FINC H ROAD LANDFILL ) PARAGOULD, ARKANSAS RECORD OF DECISION AMENDMEN T N0.1

' Ear l Hendrick Remedia l Projec t Manage r

Gu s Chavam a AR/OK/TX Projec t

Managemen

t Section

f&ay McGee Staff" Attorne y

Mark Peycke,<fchief Supe r fund Branc h Office of Regiona l Counse l

. --^^ ^ Qr K^-^^ / Myron 0 . Knud^on , P.E .

Directo r Superfund Division /illiam . Honker , AR/OK/TX Superfund Branc h

### CONCURRENCE LIS T FORTH E MONROE AUTO PI T SUPERFUN D SIT E (FINC H ROAD LANDFILL ) PARAGOULD, ARKANSAS RECORD OF DECISION AMENDMEN T N0.1

BruceD^ones Assistan t Regiona l Counsel , Office of

Regiona l Counse l 6RC- M

Regiona l Counsel , Office o

f Regiona l Counsel 6R C

f^ /. , /^£ ^

/^ ^ 

### i ' Davi d W . Gray Office ' Director , Office of

Externa l Affairs 6X A

## MONROE AUTO PIT SUPERFUND SIT E (FINC H ROAD LANDFILL ) PARAGOULD, ARKANSAS RECORD OF DECISIO N AMENDMENT NO. 1 Summary................................................................................................................................. . 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................. . 2 Sit e Description an d Background........................................................................................... . 2 Map of th e Sit e Location........................................................................................................ . 4 Sit e Topographi c Map............................................................................................................ . 5 Basi s for Thi s Document....::...........;...................................................................................... . 6 The 1996 Remedy................................................................................................................. . 6 Description o f

th e New Remedy..............................—.............................—......—.................. . 7 Classificatio n o

f Contaminate d Soil..—.............—

——.......——......——......................—. . 7 Remediatio n Actio n Goal s for Soil..................———..............——..————.——.—.—..... . 8 Evaluatio n o

f th e Origina

l an d th e New Remedies.———....................—.........—...............„ 8 Statutor y Determinations........................................................................................................1 1 Publi c Participatio n Compliance.............—.—..—...—..——................................................ . 1 1 Documentatio n of

No Significan

t Changes—————....——...—.—.....——..—...............1 2 APPENDI X A - Location s of

Repositories-..-.....——...............................................

—....1 3

### MONRO E AUT O PIT SUPERFUN D SITE PARAGOULD , ARKANSAS AMENDMEN T T O TH

E RECORD O F DECISION October 200 0 Summary Th e Arkansa

s Departmen

t o f Environmental Qualit y (ADEQ

) ha s prepared a n Amendmen t (Amendment

) t o th e 1996 Recor

d o f Decisio n (ROD

) fo rth e remedial actio n t o be take n a t th e Monro e Aut o Pi

t Superfun d Sit

e (Site) i n Paragould , Arkansas . Thi s Amendmen t change s th e remedia l actio n fo rsoi l fro m on-^it e containmen

t o f th e contaminate

d soil/sludg e an d prohibitio n o f th e futur

e us e o f th e Sit

e as specified i n th e 1996 RO D t o excavatio n an d off-sit e disposa l i n a secure , license

d landfil l facility . Thi s remed y i s Alternativ

e 7 described i n th e 1996 ROD . Thi s Amendmen

t doe s no

t alte rth e remed

y tha t wa s selecte d b

y th e 1996 RO D fo rth e monitorin g o f th e groun d wate rattenuatio n throug h natura l processe s o f dilution an d adsorption . Followin g th e successfu l implementatio n o f thi s revise d remedy , acces s control s should no t b e require

d bu t deed restriction s wil l b e necessar y t o preven t th e us

e o f th e contaminate

d groun d wate ra

t th e Site an d t o allo w fo rgroun d wate rmonitorin g unti l completio n o f th e groun d wate rremedy . Thus , th e Site coul d hav

e unrestricted use i n th e futur e afte rth e groun d wate rremed y i s complete . Thi s amendmen

t specifie s th e following : • modificatio n o f th e remedial actio n goal s fo rsoi l as presented i n Tabl e 8 o f th e 1996 RO D t o reduc e som e constituent level s t o promot e th e natura l attenuatio n o f th e groun d wate ran d increas e som e level s t o accommodat e existin g nativ

e soi l values ; • excavate d uncontaminate d soi l an d imported clea n fil l ma y b e used a s backfill ; • disposa l o f slightl y contaminate

d soi l i n a secur

e landfil l license

d t o accep

t suc h material ; • sludge an d highl y contaminate

d soi l wil l be stabilize

d an d store d i n a line

d containmen

t cel l o n th e Sit e whil e th e owne rapplie s fo rdelistin g o f th e material ; • afte rth e delistin g issu e i s resolved , th e stabilize d materia l wil l b e transporte d fo rdisposa l i n a Subtitl e D Landfil l i f delistin g i s approved , o ri n a Subtitl e C Landfil l i f delistin g i s no t approved ; • verificatio n o f th e remova l o f th e contaminate d materia l as define

d b y th e Remedial Soi l Action s fo rSoi l presented i n mis Amende d Propose d Actio n Pla

n b y th e analytica l testin g o f th e side

s an d botto m o f th e excavate d area ; and , • monitorin g o f th e groun d wate rt o ensur e th e effectivenes s o f th e remedial action . -* Thi s Amendmen

t does notalte rth e Applicableo rRelevant an d Appropriat e Requirement

s (ARARs ) listed i n th e 1996 ROD . Th e ne w remed y is consistent wit h th e statement s an d expresse d wishes o f th e nearb

y residents , th e U.S . Environmental Protectio n Agenc y (EPA) , an d th e potentiall y responsibl e party . Th e ne w remedia l actio n shoul d b e completed withi n si x months .

## Introduction

Thi s Amendment

present s th e chang e to th e remed y for th e Monro e Auto Pit

Superiun d Sit

e located i n Paragould , Arkansas . The ADEQ i s th e lea

d agency for

implementin g th e remedia

l actio n a t thi s Site . The 199 6 RO D wa s signed by th e Director of th e ADEQ an d als o by th e Deput y Regiona l Administrato r

o f EPA Region 6 o n Septembe r 26 , 1996 . The 199 6 RO D called for on-sit e containmen

t of th e contaminate d soil/sludg e an d th e prohibitio n o f me future us e o

f th e Site . Thi s Amendment

change s th e remed

y to excavatio n o

f th e sludg e an d contaminate d soil , treatment a s require d by th e Resourc e Conservatio n an d Recover y Ac t (RCRA ) for

remova l fromth e Sit

e an d disposa l i n an off-site licensed landfil l facility . Thi s ne w remed y shoul d allo w for

th e eventua

l unrestricte d us e of

th e Site . After

successful implementatio n of th e ne w remed

y acces s control s shoul d no t

b e necessary . Deed restriction s shoul d not b e necessar

y followin g th e successful completion o

f bot h thi s actio n an d th e monitore d natural attenuatio n o f th e groun d water . Thi s ne w soi l remed y doe s no t alte r th e previously selected groun d wate r remedy . The ADEQ i s issuing thi s Amendment a s par t o f it s publi c participatio n responsibilitie s a s require d by th e Comprehensiv e Environmenta l Response , Compensation , an d Liabilit y Ac t (CERCLA) , Sectio n 11 7 an d th e Nationa

l Oi l an d Hazardou s Substance s Contingenc y Pla n (NCP) , 4 0 CFR , Section 300.435(c)(2)(ii) . The purpose s of th e Amendment

ar e a s follow :

• to identif

y th e preferre d alternativ e an d explain th e rational e for change ; • to describ e othe

r remedia l option s considered ; and , • to serv e a s acompanio n to th e Remedia l Investigation/Feasibilit

y Stud y (RI/FS ) Repor

t an d Administrativ e Recor

d File . Thi s Amendment

use s informatio n that

ca n b e found i n greate

r detai l i n document s containe d i n th e RI/F S an d th e Administrativ e Recor d for th e Site . The developmen

t an d evaluatio n o

f th e remedia

l alternativ e ar

e based o n dat apresente d i n th e origina l RI/F S an d i n th e 1996 ROD . Sinc e thi s Amendment

alter s onl y th e metho d of remediatio n an d doe s no t decreas e th e qualit

y o f th e remediation , no additiona

l institutiona

l control s ar

e required . The ne w remed y provide s th e opportunit y for th e Sit e to b e reused . Thi s Amendment will becom

e part o f th e Administrativ e Recor d file a s require d by th e NCP 300.825(a)(2) . The Administrativ e Recor d i s availabl e a

t th e informatio n repositorie s listed i n Appendi x A . 

### Site Description

and Background Th e Monro

e Aut o Pi

t Superfun d Site , also know n as th e Finc h Roa d Landfill , i s locate d i n northeaster

n Arkansa

s i n a n unincorporate

d portio n ofGreen e County , approximately thre e mile s southwes

t o f Paragould . Th e Sit

e lie s immediatel

y wes t o f Arkansa

s Highwa

y 358 , approximately thre e mile

s wes t o f it

s intersectio n wit h U.S . Highwa y 49 . Th e Sit

e lie s i n th e Northwes

t Quarte ro f

th e Northeas t

Quarter of Section 17 , Townshi

p 1 6 North , Range 5 East , i n th e Paragoul d Wes t JV-i-mmate quadrangle . The southwester n come r o f th e Sit e i s a t latitud e 36 ° 01 " 0 ' an d longitude 90 ' 34 " 30' . The maps o n page s 4 and 5 sho w th e locatio n an d th e topography of th e Sit e respectively . The Sit e i s owne d by Tennec o Automotive , Inc. , successo r to Monro e Auto Equipment Company , On e Internationa

l Drive , Monroe , Michigan . The propert y i s identifie d a s parce l no . 4071- 1 i n th e Greene County Ta

x Assessor' s office. The lega l descriptio n provide d i n th e propert y dee d i s "al

l that part of th e Sout h Half of th e Northwes t

Quarte r of me Northeas t

Quarte r o f Sectio n 17 , Townshi p 1 6 North , Rang e 5 Eas t

lyin g Wes t

of th e Highwa

y No . 358 " (Warranty Dee d 1973) . In 1973 , Monro e purchase d th e seven-acr e trac t o f lan d i n Greene County , Arkansas . The Sit e include d an inactiv e sand an d grave l borro w pit . Approximately 15,40 0 cubi c yard s of

alu man d lim e electroplatin g sludge/slurr y fromthe wast

e wate r treatment lagoon s a

t Monroe' s Paragoul d manufacturing plant

wer e deposited i n th e borro w pit between 197 3 an d 1978 . Based o n 2 1 borin g sample s take n i n th e sludg e disposa l are ao f th e Site , me sludg e extend s to a maximumdept

h o f 3 0 feet . The greates t

contaminan

t concentration s an d th e majority o f th e sludg e occu r i n an approximat

e interva l o f five to 2 5 feet

belo w th e surface . Approximately four

acre s o f th e Monro e property , includin g th e sludg e disposa l are athat cover s les s than one acr

e o f me Site , ar

e surrounde d by asix-foo t tal l chain-lin

k fence toppe d with barbe d wire . The sludg e i s covered with approximately thre e to five feet o f soil . The Sit

e ha s remaine d inactiv e sinc e 1978 . Acces s i s controlle d by th e fence an d alocked gate . The remainin g thre e acre s withi n th e fence are , for

th e mos t part , cleare d o

f tree s an d covere d with nativ e vegetation . Unde r ADE Q review , Monro e conducte d aserie s o f investigation s a

t th e Sit e between 1979 an d 1990 . Thes e include d th e installatio n of groun d wate

r monitorin g wells , samplin g an d analysi s of groun d water , soil , surfac e water , an d sediment , an d th e conductin g o f geologica l surveys . Analysi s o f th e sample s collected frommonitorin g well s a t th e landfil l indicate d th e presenc e of 1,1

- Dichloroethane [100/^g/

L (1989) ] an d 1,2-Dichloroethylen e [750/^g/ L (1988)] . Furthermore , a residentia l well (Gann well ) located nea r th e Sit e als o showed 1,1-Dichloroethan e [10/^g/ L (1987) ] an d 1,2-Dichloroethylen

e [145/^g/ L (1987)] . The EP A propose d that

th e Sit e b e adde d to th e Nationa

l Prioritie s Lis t

(NPL) i n 1989 . In Augus t 1990 , th e Sit

e wa s adde d to th e NPL . A Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) search conducte d i n 199 0 under CERCLA Section 104(e

) 4 2 U.S.C . §9604(e) , indicate d that Monro e Auto Equipment wa s th e only PRP for

thi s Site . O n Marc h 14, 1991 , th e EPA issued«notic e o f an impendin g Remedia l Investigatio n an d Feasibilit y Stud y to th e PRP . Monro e Auto Equipment responde d to th e notic e with agoo d faith offer to performth e RI/F S for

thi s Site . O n June 28,1991 , EP A an d Monro e Auto Equipment

entere d into an Administrativ e Orde r o n Consen

t for Monro e to perform th e RI/FS .Th e EP

A an d th e ADE Q signe

d th e Recor

d o f Decisio n i n Septembe r1996, requirin g a cap , a 30 - foo t dee p frenc h dra m wit h grave l fil l installe d u p t o th e groun d surface , an d acces s an d deed restrictions . Th e containmen t an d th e restriction s woul d hav e eliminate

d th e ris k

o f long-ter

m contac t wit h contaminated medi a lef t i n place . Th e deed restriction s woul d prohibi t futur e developmen

t o f th e Site . A surve

y pla t indicatin g th e locatio n o f th e wast e disposa l are a wit h respec t t o permanentl

y surveye d benchmark

s wa s t o b e prepared an d file d wit h th e loca l zonin g authority . Th e remedial objectiv

e ma t i s addressed i n thi s Amendmen t i s th e reductio n o reliminatio n o f th e actua l and/o rpotentia l ris k associate d wit h th e sludge pi t an d th e contaminant

s i n th e groun d water . 

### Basis for This Document Season for Issuing the Amendment

to the Record of Decision Th e primar

y reaso n fo rissuing thi s Amendmen t i s t o identif

y an d describe th e rational e fo rth e modificatio n t o th e remed y a t thi s Site . Include

d i n thi s Amendmen

t i s a compariso n o f th e proposed remed

y t o th e remed

y selecte d i n th e 1996 ROD . Wit h stron g communit y opinio n i n favo ro f remova l o f sludge an d contaminate d soi l fro m th e Sit

e t o a n off-sit e landfill , ADE Q an d th e Potentia l Responsibl e Part y (PRP) , Tennec

o Automotive , Inc. , gav e preferenc

e t o th e off-sit e remedy . Th e PR P ha

s volunteered t o financ

e m e revise d remed

y eve n thoug h th e revise d remed y ma y b e mor e cosd y ma

n th e original remedy . Performance

Standards Th e Performanc

e Standard s specifie d i n th e 1996 RO D remai n unchanged . Thes e standard s includ e Remedia l Actio n objectives , standard s o f control , an d othe rsubstantiv e requirement

s (e.g., Applicabl e o rRelevant an d Appropriate-Requirement s - ARARS) , criteria , an d limitations se t fort h i n th e 1996 ROD . However , som e o f th e Remediatio n Actio n Goal s fo rSoi l woul d be altere d b y thi s Amendment . Becaus e th e remed

y i n th e 1996 RO D di d no t requir e excavatio n o f contaminate d soil , th e variou s meta l concentration s ma t ar e i n th e loca l soi l wer

e no t considere

d no rwer

e th e reduction s i n th e contaminant s t o promot

e groun d wate rthroug h monitore d natura l attenuatio n considered . These item s ar e no w include

d i n Tabl e 1 - Remediatio n Actio n Goal s fo rSoi l o n pag e 8 o f thi s Amendmen

t 

### 1996 ROD Remedy The followin g ar

e major component s o

f me soil/sludg e remed

y selecte d i n thel996 ROD : 1 . installin g a frenc h drai n aroun d th e are a o f sludge deposit s t o intercep

t perched groun d wate r befor e i t enter s th e contaminate

d area . Th e capture d groun d wate rwoul d be transporte d vi a burie d piping t o a discharg e poin t locate d i n th e intermitten t strea m southwes

t o f th e Site ; 2 . cappin g th e sludge disposa l are a i n accordanc e wit h RCR

A Subtitl e C requirements ; 3 . prohibitin g futur e developmen

t o f th e Site ; and , 4 . conductin g environmental monitorin g t o ensur e effectivenes s o f m e remedial action .

## Description of

the New Remedy The remed

y selecte d i n th e 199 6 ROD di d no t requir e treatment

of contaminate d soil/sludge , but di d require containment

to addres s th e threa

t o r potentia l threa t to human healt

h an d th e environment . The ne w remed y require s treatment

of th e contaminate d soil/sludg e that pose s athrea

t or potentia l threa t to human healt

h an d th e environment . The treate d materia l will b e transporte d off th e Sit e to alicensed landfill facility . Soi l remove d fromth e excavatio n are amat i s no t contaminate d abov e th e remedia l action goal s an d othe

r clea n soi l may b e use d a s backfill . Soi l remove d fromth e excavatio n are athat i s contaminate d abov e th e remedia l actio n goal s for

soil , but no t requirin g treatment

under RCRA , wil l b e transporte d to an d disposed o f i n asecur

e landfil l license d to accept

such material . In addition , othe

r features o f th e Amendment

ar e a s follows : 1 . implementatio n o

f thi s remed

y shoul d tak

e les s than si

x months ; 2 . thi s alternativ e remedia l action may cos t

mor e than th e origina

l remed y but th e potentially responsible party ha s volunteere d to finance th e tota l cos t of th e ne w remedy ; and , 3 . sinc e contaminant s wil l b e remove d to belo w risk-based levels , five-yea r review s o f me soi l remed y will no t be required . 

### Classification

of Contaminated

Soil •.••%• :"-. • Table 8 o f th e 199 6 ROD list s th e Remedia l Actio n Targe

t Goal s for SoU/Sludg e an d Groun d Water . Thi s Amendment

to th e ROD revise s an d updates th e clean-u p goal s for

th e soil/sludge . The updated Table 1 belo w add s permissibl e value s for cyanides , copper , mercury , nickel , an d silver . It increase s th e permissibl e valu e for berylliu mto recogniz e th e concentration s of berylliu malread

y existing i n th e nativ e soil nea r but outsid e th e are ao

f th e disposa

l pit contamination , increase s th e permissibl e valu e of

arseni c with th e applicatio n of th e Duution/Attenuatio n Facto r (DAF) , DAF =1 0 (value s explaine d below) , an d reduce s permissible value s o f antimony , chromium , lead , trichloroethylene , an d viny l chlorine i n orde r to promot

e quicke r natural attenuatio n o

f th e contaminate d groun d water . The permissible valu e for cadmiumremain s unchanged . Th e ADEQ use s th e DAF that ha s bee n developed for

th e purpos e of

promotin g th e natural attenuatio n of

th e groun d water . The DAF i s define d a s th e rati o of contaminant

concentratio n i n soil leachat

e to th e concentratio n i n groun d wate r a t th e receptor

point . The DAF i s use d to back calculat e th e target

soi l leachat e concentratio n froman acceptabl e ground'water concentration . As an example , i

f th e acceptabl e groun d water concentratio n i s 0.05 mg/L (milligrams/Liter ) an d th e DAF i s 1 0 (as i s th e cas e for thi s project) , th e target

leachat e concentratio n would b e 0. 5 mg/L. Presente d belo w ar

e th e former

clea n up goal s presente d i n th e 1996 ROD , th e DAF = 1 0 values , th e nativ e soi

l values , an d th e resultant

ne w remedia

l actio n goal s for

soil/sludge . The 199 6 ROD value s for groun d wate

r ar e no t altere d by thi s Amendment to ROD .CDIATIO N ACTIO N GOALS FORSOI L

Constituen

t 

### 199 6 ROD Tabl e 8 Goal s 

### Antimony 6 ppm Arseni c 0.02- 2 ppm Beryllium0.07- 7 ppm Cadmium4 ppm Chromium3-300 ppm Cyanide s — Coppe r — Lea d 50 0 ppm Mercur y — Nickel - Silve r Trichloroethylene 0.1-1 0 ppm Viny l chlorid

e 20-2000 ppm DAF=10 Values 

### 3 ppm 1 0 ppm 3 0 ppm 4 ppm 2 0 ppm 2 0 ppm 1. 5 ppm 0.0 2 pp m 7 0 pp m 2 0 pp m 0.0 3 pp m 0.00 7 pp m Nativ e Soi l Value s 

### 1 4 ppm 0.4 7 ppm 1. 1 ppm 6 6 ppm 2 3 ppm 1 4 ppm 0.7 6 ppm 8. 1 ppm New Remedia l 

### Actio n Goal s for Soil/Sludg e 

### 3 ppm 1 4 ppm 3 0 ppm 4 ppm 6 6 ppm 2 0 ppm 2 3 ppm 1 4 ppm 0.76pp m 7 0 ppm 2 0 ppm 0.03 ppm 0.00 7 ppm 

### Evaluation

of the Original

and New Remedies The ADEQ use s nin e criteria , o r standards , to evaluat

e alternative s for

ahazardou s wast

e Site . The followin g i s acompariso n of th e ne w remed

y an d th e remed

y selected i n th e 199 6 ROD with respect to th e nin e criteria . Base d o n th e informatio n currentl y available , th e ADE Q believe s th e ne w remed y provide s th e best balanc e o f tradeoffs amon g th e othe

r alternative s with respect

to thes e evaluatio n criteria , Overall Protection of

Human Health and

the Environment Thi s criterio n addresse s th e way i n whic h apotentia l remed y woul d reduce , eliminate , o r contro l th e risk s pose d by th e Sit

e to human healt

h an d th e environment . The metho d use d to achieve an adequat e leve l o f protectio n may b e throug h engineering controls , treatment techniques , o

r othe r control s such a s restriction s o n th e future us e of th e Site . The tota

l eliminatio n of

th e ris k i s often impossible to achieve ; however , any remed y mus t minimiz e ris k

to assur e that human healt

h an d th e environmen

t will b e protected . Both th e origina

l an d me ne w remedie s provide adequat e protectio n o

f human healt

h an d th e environmen

t by eliminatin g an d preventin g ris k of exposure : th e former

through containment

of th e contaminant s a

t me Site , the latte

r throug h treatment

an d remova

l o f th e contaminant s fromme Sit e to an off-site licensed landfil l facility . However , th e ne w remed y provide s greate

r overall protectio n o f th e community becaus e it

utilize s treatment

of th e contaminate d sludg e an d remova l o f th e treate d materia l fromth e community for

disposa l to apermitted , secur

e wast e disposa l facility .Applicable or Relevant

and Appropriate

Requirements Complianc e with th e Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat

e Requirement s (ARARs ) assure s that aselected remed

y will mee t all the relate d Federal , State , an d loca l requirement s pe

r Section 12 1 (d

) o f th e Comprehensiv e Environmenta l Response , Compensatio n an d Liabilit y Ac t o f 198 0 (CERCLA) . The requirement s may specif y maximumconcentration s of contaminant s that

ca n remai n a t th e Site ; design o

r performance requirement s for treatment technologies ; and , restriction s mat may limi t potentia l remedia l activitie s a

t aSit e becaus e o

f it s location . All ARARs containe d i n th e 199 6 ROD remai n unchanged . Bot h remedie s satisfy th e ARARs requirements . Long-term

Effectiveness

and Permanence Thi s criterio n refer s to expecte d residua l ris k an d th e abilit

y o f apotentia l remed y to reliably protec t human healt

h an d th e environmen

t ove r time , after

th e cleanu

p level s hav e been met . Bot h remedie s achiev e long-ter meffectivenes s an d permanence . The initia l remed y use d containmen

t to kee p th e contaminant s frommigrating . The ne w remed y woul d accomplis h me sam e result s by removin g th e contaminate d soil/sludg e to an off-site landfil l facility , thus providin g bette r long-ter meffectivenes s an d permanenc e than th e origina l remedy . Reduction

in Toxicity, Mobility, or

Volume Through

Treatment Thi s criterio n refers to th e anticipate d performance o f th e treatment

technologie s for

th e remedy . Factor s considered include th e nature o f th e treatment

process ; th e amount

o f hazardou s materia

l destroye d by th e treatment process ; ho w effectivel y th e proces s reduce s th e toxicity , mobility , o r volum e of wast e through treatment ; and , th e type an d quantity o f contaminatio n that

will remai n after treatment . The origina

l remed y require d no treatment

of th e contaminate d soi

l an d sludge . The ne w remed y require s th e contaminate d soi l an d sludg e be treate d to RCRA requirement s for disposa l i n asecure , licensed landfil l facility . Hence , th e origina l remed y woul d specifically reduc e mobilit y o f contaminant s a

t th e Sit e but leav e the mo n th e Site . The ne w remed y woul d reduc e th e toxicity , an d mobilit y o f wast e throug h treatment

a t th e Site , an d woul d remov e th e waste s fromth e Sit e an d deposi t th e treate d waste s into an off-site licensed landfil l facility . Short-term

Effectiveness Thi s criterio n addresse s th e time factor durin g implementatio n of

th e remedy . A potentia

l remed y i s evaluate d for

th e time needed to implemen t an d complet

e th e remed

y an d any advers e impac t

o n human healt

h an d th e environmen

t durin g th e constructio n an d implementatio n o f th e remed y unti l cleanu p level s ar e achieved . Bot h remedie s satisf

y thi s criterion . Bot

h remedie s requir

e only ashor

t tim e to implemen

t an d th e implementatio n o

f eithe r remed y woul d no t

hav e any advers e impac t

o n th e community .

» 9Implementability

Implementabilit

y addresses th e eas e wit h which a potentia l remed y ca n b e pu

t i n place . Factor

s suc h as availabilit

y o f materia l an d service s ar e considered . Th e origina

l remed y an d th e ne

w remed y ar e readil y implementable . Numerous vendor s ca n conduc t eithe rremedy . Ther

e ar e facilities tha

t ca n receiv

e m e treate d material . Cost Costs includ

e capita l cost s require

d fo rdesig n an d construction , operatio n an d maintenanc e cost s as present wort h costs . Present wort h cos t i s th e tota l cos t o f a n alternativ e ove rtim e i n term s o f today' s dolla rvalue . Cost s ar e considere

d an d compared t o th e benefi t tha t wil l result fro m implementing th e remedy . 

### The potentially responsible party ha s volunteere d to financ e th e ne w remed y eve n thoug h th e ne w remed y may b e mor

e costl y than th e origina

l remedy . EPA Acceptance EP A acceptanc

e indicate

s whether , based o n it

s revie w o f document

s i n th e Administrativ

e Recor d an d th e Amende

d Proposed Plan , th e EP A concur s with , opposes , o rha

s n o commen

t o n th e preferre d alternative . ADE Q provided th e EP

A Regio n 6 a n opportunit y t o revie w thi s Amende

d Propose d Plan . EP

A ha d n o comment

s o n th e Amende

d Propose d Pla

n an d concur

s wit h th e ne

w remedy . 

### Community Acceptance The ADE Q recognize s that th e communit

y i n whic h aSuperfund Sit e i s locate d i s th e principa l beneficiar y of all remedia

l action s taken . The ADE Q als o recognize s that it i s responsible for informing intereste d citizen s of th e nature o

f Superfund environmenta

l problem s an d solutions , an d to lea mfromth e communit

y what it desire s regardin g thes e sites . No writte n comment s wer

e receive d durin g th e thirty-da y publi c commen

t perio d (Apri l 19,200 0 throug h May 22,2000 ) for

th e Amende d Propose d Plan . The resident s attendin g th e Publi c Meeting i n Paragoul d o n May 11,2000 , expressed their satisfactio n with th e ne w remedy . Additionally , th e ne w remed

y i s consisten

t with comment s an d letter s receive d during th e publi c commen t perio d for th e Jul y 199 5 Propose d Pla

n an d with th e opinion s expresse d by severa l resident s attendin g apubli c meetin g i n Paragoul d o n Octobe r 4,1999 . Based o n th e informatio n currentl y available , th e ADE Q believe s th e ne w remed y meet s me threshol d criteri aan d provide s th e bette r balanc e of tradeoffs between th e two remedie s with respect to th e balancin g an d modifying criteria . The ADE Q expect s th e ne w remed y to satisf y th e followin g statutor y requirement s ofCERCLA §121(b) : 1 ) b e protectiv e of human healt

h an d th e environment ; 2 ) comply with ARARs; 3 ) b e cost-effective ; 4 ) utiliz e permanent solutions ; and , 5 ) satisf

y th e preferenc e for

treatment a s aprincipa

l element . 1 0

### Statutory

Determinations The primary responsibilit

y a t Superfund site s i s to selec t remedia l action s that

ar e protectiv e o f human healt

h an d th e environment . Section 12 1 of CERCL A als o require s that

th e selected remedia l actio n comply with applicabl e or relevant an d appropriat

e environmenta

l standard s established under

Federa l an d Stat e environmenta

l laws , unles s awaive

r i s granted . The selected remed y mus t b e cost-effectiv e an d utiliz e permanent solution s an d alternativ e technologie s o r resourc e recover

y technologie s to th e maximumexten t practicable . The Statut

e als o contain s a preferenc e for

remedie s whic h emplo y treatment that permanentl y an d significantl y reduc e th e volume , toxicity , o

r mobilit y of hazardou s waste s a s aprincipa l element . The new remed

y i s protectiv e of

human healt

h an d th e environmen

t an d meet s all of

th e soi l an d sludg e remedia

l action objectives-throug h treatment an d remova

l of th e contaminant s fromthe Sit e to an off-site licence

d landfil l facility . It

will eliminat

e th e potentia

l of direc t contac t o r ingestion of contaminate d soil an d will als o reduce/eliminat e th e sourc e o

f contaminant s enterin g me groun d water . The ne w remed

y continue s to requir

e groun d wate

r monitorin g o f

th e attenuatio n through natural processe s o

f dilutio n an d adsorptio n to insur e effectivenes s of

th e remedia

l action . The ne w remed

y satisfie s all o f

th e ARARs containe d i n th e 199 6 ROD . The ADE Q believe s th e ne w remed y i s cost effectiv e for

mitigatin g th e direc t

contact , ingestion , an d continue d groun d wate

r contaminatio n fromth e Sit e contaminants . The potentially responsible party ha s volunteere d to finance th e ne w remed y eve n thoug h it may b e mor

e costl y than th e origina

l remedy . The ne w remed

y woul d reduc e th e toxicity , an d mobilit y of wast e throug h treatment

a t th e Site , an d woul d remov e th e wast

e fromth e Sit

e an d deposi

t th e treate d wast

e into an off-site licenced la-ndfil l facility . It provide s th e opportunit

y for th e Sit e to b e reused . Shor t termrisk s associated with me selecte d remed y ca n b e controlle d by prope

r design an d implementation . No advers e cros s medi aimpact s ar e expecte d fromimplementatio n of th e selected remedy . The ADEQ believe s th e ne w remed y i s th e remed

y mos t acceptabl e one to th e community . 

### Public Participation

Compliance O n April 19,2000 , th e ADE Q issued anotic e of th e Amende d Propose d Pla n an d establishe d th e Publi c Commen

t Perio d to b e fromApri l 1 9 to May 22 , 2000 . The ADEQ conducte d aPubli c Meeting on May 11 , 2000 . No writte n comment s wer e received durin g th e thirty-da y publi c comment period . At

thi s publi c meeting, all comment s wer e verba l an d supporte d th e propose d plan .

1 1

### Documentation of No Significant

Change Based o n th e opinion expressed by th e resident s attendin g the public meetin g i n Paragoul d o n May 11,2000 , th e ADE Q determine d mat no change s to th e remed

y selection , a s it

wa s originally identifie d i n th e Amendment to th e Propose d Plan , wer

e necessary .

1 2

## APPENDIX A MONROE AUTO SUPERFUND SITE

LOCATION S O F REPOSITORIE S

Northeas tArkansas Regional Librar y 12 0 North 12

t h Stree t Paragould , Arkansa s 7245 0 (870)236-871 1 Hour s of Operation : Monda

y throug h Thursday 9:0

0 a.m . - 7:0

0 p.m . Frida y an d Saturda

y 9:0 0 a.m . - 4:00 p.m . 

## Arkansas Departmen to f Environmental Qualit

y Record s Section , Managemen t Service s Division 800 1 Nationa

l Driv e Littl e Rock , Arkansa s (501 ) 682-074

4 Hour s of Operation : Monda

y through Frida

y 8:0 0 a.m . - 4:3 0 p.m . 

## U.S . EPA , Regio n 6 7t h Floo r Receptio n Are a Contac t Mr Steve Wyman, (214) 665-279 2 144 5 Ros s Avenue Dallas , Texas 75202-273 3 Hour s o f Operation : Monday through Frida y 8:0 0 a.m . - 4:3 0 p.m .

» 1 3