SFUND-2003-0009-0084 

HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD COVER SHEET 

Name of Site: Peters Cartridge Factory 

EPAIDNo.: OHD987051083 

Contact Person 

Site Investigation and 

Documentation Record: Jeanne Griffin (312) 886-3007 

NPL Coordinator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V· 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago, IL 22202 

Pathways, Components, or Threats Not Scored 

Ground Water Pathway 

Although there is some evidence of a release to ground water at the site and a significant possible target 

population, the present information is insufficient to satisfy the HRS requirements for scoring. Thus, the 

ground water pathway has not been scored as part of this HRS package. 

Soil Exposure Pathway 

Based on the lack ofdata and a limited number ofdocumented targets, the soil exposure pathway has not been 

scored as part of this HRS package. 

. Air Migration Pathway 

There is insufficient documentation to satisfy HRS requirements for scoring, and this pathway minimally 

impacts the listing decision. As such, the air migration pathway has not been scored as part of this fIRS 

package. 
1

HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD

Name of Site: Peters Cartridge Factory

Date Prepared: November 8, 2002, Revised September 2012

EPA Region: Region 5

Street Address of Site*: 1415 Grandin Road (south side of the Little Miami River)

City, County, State, Zip Code: Kings Mills, Warren County, Ohio 45039

General Location in the State: In the southwestern portion of the state, north of Cincinnati and south of Dayton

Topographic Map: South Lebanon, Ohio Quandrangle

Latitude: 39o 21' 2.5" North

Longitude: 84o 14' 32" West 

Ref: Refs. 3; 4, Figure 3. (Measured from Building I)

*The street 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. Accordingly, 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 Not Scored

Ground Water Pathway Not Scored

Soil Exposure Pathway Not Scored

Surface Water Pathway 100.00

HRS SITE SCORE 50.00
-----------------------------------------------------

WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE 


~ ...s:... 

l. Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (Sgw) 

(from Table 3-1, line 13) 

.' 

2a. Surface Water OverlandIFlood Migration Component 

(from Table 4-1, line 30) 

100.00 10.000 

2b. Ground Water to Surface Water Migration Component 

(from Table 4-25, line 28) 

2c. Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (Ssw 

Enter the larger of lines 2a and 2b as the pathway score. 

100.00 10,000 

3. Soil Exposure Pathway Score (S, 

(from Table 5-1, line 22) 

4. Air Migration Pathway Score (Sa) 

(from Table 6-1, line 12) 

5. Total of S 2 + S 2 + S 2 + S 2 gw sw 5 a lQ.,QQQ 

6. HRS Site Score 

:Divide the value on line 5 by 4 and take the square root 

50.00 

2 

~---.-----
TABLE 4-1 


SURFACE WATER OVERLANDIFLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORESHEET 


Factor Categories and Factors Maximum Value Value Assigned 

DRINKING WATER THREAT 

Likelihood ofRelease 

1. 	 Observed Release 550 550

2. 	 Potential to Release by Overland Flow 

2a. Containment 10 


2b. Runoff 
 25 -

2c. Distance to Surface Water 25 -

2d. Potential to Release by Overland Flow (lines 2a x 


[2b + 2c]) 
 500 -

3. 	 Potential to Release by Flood 

3a. Containment (Flood) 10 - 3b. Flood Frequency 50 - 3c. Potential to Release by Flood 


(lines 3ax3b) 
 500 -

4. 	 Potential to Release (lines 2d + 3c, subject to a 


maximum of 500) 
 500 -

5. 	 Likelihood ofRelease 550 

(higher oflines I and 4) 550 


Waste Characteristics 


6. 	 Toxicity!Persistence a 10,000

7. 	 Hazardous Waste Quantity a 100 

8. 	 Waste Characteristics 100 32

Target~ 

9. 	 Nearest Intake 50 - 10. Population 

10a.Level I Concentrations b - lOb.Level II Concentrations b 

3 
10c. Potential Contamination b - 10d. Population 


(lines lOa + lOb + 10c) 
 b - 11. Resources 5 5

b 5 

Factor Categories and Factors 

12. Targets (lines 9 + lOd + 11) 

Value Assigned 

DRINKING WATER THREAT (Concluded) 

_Drinking Water Threat Score 

Maximum Value 

13. Drinking Water Threat Score 

([lines 5 x 8 x 12]182,500, subject to a maximum of 100) 


100 
 1.07 

HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT 


Likelihood ofRelease 


14. Likelihood of Release 

(same value as line 5) 550 550 

Waste Characteristics 

2 x 108 15. Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation a

16. Hazardous Waste Quantity a 100

1,000 320 

Targets 

17. Waste Characteristics 

18. Food Chain Individual 50 45

19. PopUlation 

19a.Level I Concentrations b -

0.03 


19c. Potential Human Food Chain Contamination 


19b.Level II Concentrations b 

b - 19d. Population 0.03 

(lines 19a + 19b + 19c) 

b 

20. Targets (lines 18 + 19d) 45.03 

Human Food Chain Threat Score 

b 

4 

------=------ -----------_.-,,- -_. -----..-~----------­ --.--------"~ 
21. Human Food Chain Threat Score 

([lines 14 x 17 x 20]/82,500, subject to a maximum of 

100) 100 96.06 

Factor Categories and Factors Maximum Value Value Assigned 

E~RONMENTALTHREAT 

Likelihood ofRelease 

22. Likelihood ofRelease 

(same value as line 5) 550 550 

Waste Characteristics 

23. Ecosystem ToxicitylPersistencel 

Bioaccumulation a 2 x 108 

24. Hazardous Waste Quantity a 100 

25. Waste Characteristics 1,000 320 

Targets 

26. Sensitive Environments 

26a. Level I Concentrations b - 26b.Level II Concentrations b 50 

26c. Potential Contamination b -

26d. Sensitive Environments 

(lines 26a + 26b +26c) b 50 

27. Targets (value from 26d) b 50.00 

Environmental Threat Score 

28. Environmental Threat Score 

([lines 22 x 25 x 27]/82,500, subject to a maximum of 

60) 

60 60 

SURFACE WATER OVERLANDIFLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE FOR A 

WATERSHED 

29. Watershed Score 

(lines 13 + 21 + 28, 

subject to a maximum of 100) 100 100 

SURFACE WATER OVERLANDIFLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE 

5 
-,.j 

30. Component Score (SoJo, 

(highest score from line 29 for all watersheds evaluated, 

subject to a maximum of 100) 100 100 

aMaxlmum= value apphes to waste charactenstics category. 


bMaximum value not applicable. 


"Do not round to nearest integer. 


6 

--------.--------~---------------------------.--------------------~--~--~--------~------~. 

REFERENCES 

Ref. 


No. Description ofthe Reference 


1. 	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), [Office ofthe Federal Register National Archives 

and Records Administration (OFRNARA)], December 14, 1990,40 CFRPart 300, Hazard Ranking 

System (HRS). 

2. 	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Superfund Chemical Data Matrix. June 1996. 

(Excerpt of 64 pages). 

3. 	 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 7.5-minute Series Topographic Quadrangle (South Lebanon, 

Ohio Quadrangle); and Latitude/Longitude Verification Worksheet (1 map and I page). 

4. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division ofEmergency & Remedial Response. Expanded 

Site Inspection Report. September 29, 1999. 103 pages. 

5. 	 Floppe Thelen Group, Inc. Report on Septic System Remediation, LensCrafters Kings Mills 

Technical Center, Kings Mills, Ohio. November 4, 1993. 236 pages. 

6. 	 PRC Environmental Management, Inc. Screening Site Inspection Site Evaluation Report, Peters 

Cartridge Factory (also Known as Kings Mills Technical Center), 1915 Grandin Road, Kings Mills, 

Ohio 45034. September 30, 1994. 50 pages. 

7. 	 PRCEnvironmental Management, Inc. Screening Site InspectionReport, Peters Cartridge Factory, 

1415 Grandin Road, Kings Mills, Warren County, Ohio. December 20, 1996. 67 pages. 

8. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Traffic Reports and Chain ofCustody for 05/05/99 and 

05/06/99 Peters Cartridge E.S'!. Site, OHD 987051083, Case Number 26980. 36 pages. 

9. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Traffic Reports and Chain ofCustody for 05/12/99 Peters 

Cartridge E.S.1. Site, OHD 987051083, Cases # 26980 and 27007. 8 pages. 

10. 	 U.S. EPA Region 5. Analytical Data Review, Case Number 26980. 1999. 68 pages. 

11. 	 U.S. EPA Region 5. Analytical Data Review, Case Number 26980. 1999.21 pages. 

12. 	 U.S. EPA, (EPA, 1996), Using Qualified Data to Document an Observed Release and Observed 

Contamination (OSWER Directive 9285.7-24FS). November 1996. 18 pages. 

13. 	 QsourceEngineering, Inc. Environmental Site Assessment, Kings Mills Technical Center, Kings 

Mills, Ohio. December 1987. 68 pages. 

14. 	 U.S. EPA Region 5 Central Regional Laboratory. Analytical Data Review, Case Number 26980, 

SDG MEBRL4. 1999. 14 pages. 

15. 	 U.S. EPA Region 5 Central Regional Laboratory. Analytical Data Review, Case Number 27007, 

SDG MEBRW6. 1999. 30 pages. 

7 

---. -- -- .-._...-......................."' .... -----1 	 - -. ---- .-----~--
16. 	 Martin, Steve, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Telephone Conversation with Ryan 

Peterson, Wildlife Officer, Division ofWildlife, Ohio Department ofNatural Resources. Subject: 

Fishing in Little Miami River. May 18,2001. 1 page. 

17. 	 Martin, Steve, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency . Maps with 1999 ESI Sample Locations and 

Area Estimates of Lead, Mercury and Copper Soil Contamination at Peters Cartridge Factory. 5 

pages. 

18. 	 Gannon, Loren, S. Jr., Historian. U.S. Department ofthe Interior, National Park Service: National 

Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination Form (prepared for Peters Cartridge Factory). 

March 1, 1985. 9 pages. 

19. 	 Ohio EPA, Division ofEmergency and Remedial Response. Sensitive Environments Map. 1999. 

2 pages. 

20. 	 Ohio Department ofNatural Resources. Little Miami State and National Scenic River. Web site 

accessed 10/5/01: http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/odnr/dnap/sr/lmiami.htm . .3 pages. 

2i. 	 National Wild and Scenic Rivers Systems. River Milage Classifications for Components of the 

National Wild and Scenic Rivers Systems. Web site accessed 10/5/01: 

http://www.nps.gov/rivers/wildlriverstable.html. 2 pages. 

22. 	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EnviroMapper: web site accessed 10/30/01. 8 pages. 

23. 	 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Summary ofMajor Changes Made to the Multi-Media, 

Multi-Concentration Organic Analytical Statement of Work (OLM03.2 to OLM04.2) (OWSER 

Publication 9240.0-33FS). January 2000. 4 pages. 

24. 	 Martin, Steve, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Correspondence to Josephine Williams, 

DynCorp; Telephone Conversations with Joe Tussey, City ofLebanon, and John Luallen, Village 

ofLebanon; and 1 map. April 2002. 4 pages. 

25. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Non-Sampling Screening Site Inspection Kings Mills 

Army Reserve Center. May 16,2002. 282 pages. 

26. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Investigations and Sampling Logbook, Peters Cartridge 

ESI, Case # 26980 SED Samples. May 4, 1999. 16 pages. 

27. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Investigations and Sampling Logbook, Peters Cartridge 

ESI, Case # 26980, Soil. May 4, 5, 11 1999. 24 pages. 

28. 	 Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Investigations and Sampling Logbook, Peters Cartridge 

. ESI, Case # 26980, Ground Water, Soil, Sediment Samples. May 4,5, 1999. 14 pages. 

29. 	 U.S. EPA Region 5 Central Regional Laboratory. Analytical Data Review, Case Number 26980, 

SDG ECHJ6. 1999. 68 pages. 

30. 	 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Introduction to the Contract Laboratory Program, EPA 

540-R-99-005, OSWER 9240.0-34P. February, 2000. 43 pages. 

8 

-- --~----- - .._------- ----~. ---­
8a

REFERENCES, continued

31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5. Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial 

Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS), Peters Cartridge Company, a/k/a Kings Mills Technical Center. 

July 7, 2004. 74 pages.

32. Geosyntec Consultants. Remedial Investigation Report, Former Peters Cartridge Facility. February 25, 

2009. 1965 pages.

33. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Biological and Water Quality Study of the Little Miami River –

Peters Cartridge Area. November 1, 2007. 36 pages.

34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5. Record of Decision, Peters Cartridge Facility. 

September 2009. 140 pages.

35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5. Administrative Order for Remedial Design and 

Remedial Action, Peters Cartridge Facility Site. April 4, 2012. 33 pages.
9

Site Summary

The Peters Cartridge Factory formerly operated on a 10-acre parcel of land at 1415 Grandin Road, on the south side of the 

Little Miami River in Warren County, Ohio. The facility is bordered by the Kings Mills United States Army Reserve Center 

(USARC) [formerly part of the Kings Mills Ordnance Plant] to the southwest, the Little Miami Scenic Trail and the Little 

Miami River to the north and west, and rural areas to the east and south (Figure 1 of HRS documentation record; Ref. 4, p. 1, 

Figure 2; Ref. 3; Ref. 25, p. 4). 

The Peters Cartridge Factory operated as a manufacturer of semi-smokeless cartridge ammunition, including shotgun shells 

and rifle and pistol cartridges (Ref. 4, p. 2; Ref. 18, p. 4). The company expanded north across Grandin Road during World 

War I due to increased demand for ammunition from the European Powers and the United States (Ref. 7, p. 10). After the 

war, the frame buildings erected to keep up with the war demands were demolished, and the company was consolidated back 

to its original buildings at the present site location. Remington Arms purchased Peters Cartridge Factory in 1934 and 

continued to manufacture rifle and shotgun ammunition until near the end of World War I1 (Ref. 4, p. 2; Ref. 18, pp. 4, 5). In 

1944, the facility was closed as part of a consolidation by Remington (Ref. 18, p. 5). The Columbia Records division of RCA 

occupied the facility from 1944 to 1948, mixing plastic materials and manufacturing phonograph record disks. Seagrams

Distillers used the facility as a bonded warehouse during the 1950s. A small cabinet company used a portion of the facility 

around the 1970s (Ref. 18, p. 5). In 1979 the facility was purchased by Landmark Renaissance Corporation and is currently 

known as the Kings Mills Technical Center. LensCrafters leased the property from January 1987 to December 1991. 

LensCrafters utilized chemicals such as Freon 113, surfactants, phosphoric acid, n-hexane, paints, tints, and dyes in the 

manufacture of eyeglass lenses and frames. Several other companies owned or leased the present facility, but they did not use 

chemicals in their operations (Ref. 6, p. 11; Ref. 7, p. 10, 11; Ref. 13, p. 6). 

In 1987, as part of an environmental assessment for the Kings Mills Technical Center, lead contamination was discovered at 

the site (Ref. 13, pp. 4,5,9, 12, 13). On-site soils were sampled at depths of 1,4, 8, and 12 feet, and lead was found at 

concentrations reaching 33,500 ppm at a depth of 4 feet (Ref. 13, pp. 4,12). Fill materials including boiler ash and slag were 

found buried in layers from 7 to 12 feet thick on the property (Ref. 6, p. 12;Ref. 13, p. 17). Monitoring wells were installed 

on-site in December 1987and were sampled and analyzed for lead and total organic content. Lead was detected in well W-3 

at 0.52 mg/l, well above the action level of 0.015 mg/L (Ref. 6, p. 11; Ref. 13, p. 15). In 1993, operational portions of the 

facility were paved to prevent direct contact with lead contaminated soil (Ref. 4, p. 2; Ref. 6, p. 12). 

An Expanded Site Inspection was conducted on May 4, 5, and 1l, 1999 by the Ohio EPA. Soil, sediment, ground water, and 

fish tissue samples were collected (Ref. 4, p. 1). Contaminated ground water was discovered in on-site monitoring wells (Ref. 

4, pp. 7, 8, 11). An observed release to the Little Miami River was documented. The Little Miami River, which is threatened 

by contamination from the site, is a fishery, State and National Scenic River, and home to several State-designated

endangered species (Refs. 19; 20; 21). 

From 2005 through 2007, field work for a Remedial Investigation (RI) was conducted at the Site by E.I. du Pont de Nemours 

and Company (DuPont) pursuant to an Administrative Order on Consent entered into by DuPont and EPA on July 7, 2004 

(Refs. 31, pp. 1-5; 32, pp. ES-1, ES-2). Environmental samples were collected from potential areas of concern (AOCs), grid 

locations, off-property background locations and the Little Miami River (Ref. 32, p. ES-2). Ohio EPA also independently 

conducted a study of the river in the vicinity of Peters Cartridge (Refs. 32, p. ES-3; 33). The study included the collection of 

fish, macroinvertebrate and sediment samples at each of five sampling locations in the river. The sediment sampling results 

indicated a level of lead in the shoreline sediment in the depositional area adjacent to the facility that, while below the Ohio 

Sediment Reference Value, was more than three times the background sediment level (Ref. 33, pp. 13-15). A Record of 

Decision (ROD) was issued by the EPA on September 28, 2009, with concurrence from the State of Ohio. The ROD 

delineated the cleanup option selected for the Site, which was excavation and on-site consolidation of contaminated soils and 

sediments adjacent to the facility outfalls, with institutional controls such as zoning and use restrictions, soil management 

plans, restrictive agreements, public notices and posted signs (Ref. 34, pp. vi-viii). Subsequent to the ROD, the EPA and the 

responsible parties for the Site held extensive negotiations to develop a consent decree for remedial design/remedial action,

but no agreement was reached. On March 30, 2012, the EPA Region 5 signed a unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial 

Design and Remedial Action for the Site (Ref. 35, pp. 1, 33).
i 

I 

I 

i 

,~----~,-------------,--------------------------------------------------------~-------------------

2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION 

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION 

Source Number: 1 

Source Type: Contaminated Soil 

Description and Location of Source (Figures 2 and 3 ofHRS documentation record; Ref. 4, Figure 3; Ref. 

25): 

Lead, copper, and mercury contaminated soils were discovered in areas near each ofthe buildings at the site; 

just across Grandin Road; and in vacant areas just south ofthe Peters Cartridge Factory. The approximate 

areas ofcontaminated soils were determined using GIS plotting and the area within samples from the XRF 

results from the 1999 ESI sampling event (Ref. 4, Appendix G, pages 1 to 3; Ref. 17, pp. 1-5). 

This contaminated soil source is associated with the ammunition manufacturing activities at the Peters 

Cartridge Factory. The Peters Cartridge Factory manufactured semi-smokeless cartridge ammunition, 

including shotgun shells and rifle and pistol cartridges (Ref. 4, p. 2; Ref. 6, p. 10; Ref. 18, p. 4). Lead shot 

ammunition was manufactured by pouring lead into the shot tower, near Buildings 2 and 3 at the site, and 

letting it fall through a screen in order to form pellets. Building 6 was used to prepare volatile fulminate of 

mercury primers. Copper and mercury fulminate, were also used in the lead shot ammunition preparation 

(Ref. 6, p. 11; Ref. 18, p. 2). Contaminated soil was discovered in areas near each of the buildings at the 

site; just across Grandin Road; and in vacant areas just south of the Peters Cartridge Factory (Ref. 4, 

Appendix G, pages 1 to 3). 

In 1987, as part of an environmental assessment, lead contaminated soil was discovered at the Peters 

Cartridge Factory site (Ref. 13, pp. 9). Nine trenches were dug, and samples were collected at a depth of 

1, 4, 8, and 12 feet. During trenching, 7 to 12 feet offill material was also found at seven ofthe nine trench 

locations. The fill was believed to be slag and boiler ash deposited during ammunition manufacturing (Ref. 

6, p. 12). Lead concentrations reaching 33,500 ppm were detected in soils adjacent to the shot tower (Ref. 

6, Figure 2). Due to the extent oflead in the soil, some areas of exposed soil were paved in 1993 to prevent 

direct soil contact (Ref. 4, p. 2; Ref. 6, Figure 2). 

In 1999, an expanded site inspection (ESI) was conducted by the Ohio EPA. Source soil sampling was 

conducted in two phases. The first phase consisted of53 samples collected using stainless steel spoons and 

a Geoprobe sampler. These samples were placed in plastic bags and analyzed for metals using a portable 

X-ray fluorescent (XRF) machine (Ref. 4, p. 4, Appendix G; Ref. 17). The XRF results were used to select 

locations for the second phase of sampling in which 9 soil samples (PC-SaX-os; PC-SO-09; pc-sa-os; 

Building 3; #6 Bunker; PC-SOX-I7; Hearth Area; PC-SOX-42; PC-SO-26) were collected for analysis 

using U.S. EPA's contract laboratory program (CLP) methodology (Ref. 4, pp. 4, 6, Figure 3, Appendix 

E pp. 1 to 3; Ref. 27, pp. 2 - 21). A soil sample (PC-SO-Ol) was collected from the grassy area east of 

Building 6 and was analyzed for volatile organic compound (VOC) analysis by Ohio EPA Division of 

Environmental Services (DES) laboratory. The soil background sample (pC-SO-26) was also analyzed for 

VOCs by Ohio EPA DES laboratory (Ref. 4, pp. 4, 6). 

Lead, copper, and mercury contaminated soils can be associated with site activity. The approximate areas 

ofcontaminated soils were determined using GIS plotting and the area within samples from the XRF results 

from the 1999 ESI sampling event. These areas are shown in Reference 17. Semivolatile, volatile, and 

10 
pesticide organic compounds were also detected in the 1999 ESI soil samples (Ref. 4, Appendix A, pp 1 

to 9). Acenapthene, Anthracene, Carbazole, Di-n-butylphthalate, Dibenz(a, h)anthracene, Dibenzofuran, 

Fluorene, Methylene chloride, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene, alpha-BHC, alpha-Chlordane, gama-Chlordane, 

delta-BHC, Heptachlor Epoxide, 4,4-DDE, and Endosulfan Sulfate are among the organic compounds 

detected inthe contaminated soil samples, but have not been documented to be associated with the processes 

at the Peters Cartridge Factory facility; these hazardous substances may be present as a result of the asphalt 

paving applied over parts ofthe source to avoid direct contact with the high levels ofmetals in this source. 

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH SOURCE 

BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE: PC-SO-26 

The soil background sample was collected on May 5, 1999 approximately 500 feet northeast of the site 

outside the influence ofthe manufacturing activity conducted at the site, but within the vicinity of the local 

environment of the site (Ref. 4, Figure 3 and AppendixE, p. 3, Appendix G, page 3; Ref. 27, pp. 7, 8, 9). 

This sample was collected at 0 to 6 inches of depth and consisted ofbrownish black silt and clays, slightly 

moistened, with an organic odor (Ref. 27, pp. 7,8,9). 

Antimony 2.31 19.6 4, Appendix A, p. 9; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

Arsenic 11.8 3.3 4, Appendix A, p. 9; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

Cadmium 0.33U 1.6 4, Appendix A, p. 9; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

Copper 40.8 8.2 4,Appendix A, p. 10; 14 pp. 2 to 8 and 10 

30,9. A-4 

Lead 1491** 0.98 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

Mercury 0.741** 0.03 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

Silver 0.65U 3.27 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 14, pp. 2 to 8 and 10; 

30,9. A-4 

J Value is estimated (Ref. 4. Appendix A, p. 11; Ref. 14, p. 8). 

U Analyte ,was analyzed for but not detected above the sample quantitation limit. (Ref. 14 p. 8). 

** While some ofthe values were qualified during QC review, the qualifiers only effect the accuracy 

of the quantification; the presence of these substances is not in doubt. The hazardous substances 

are listed to document the presence ofthe substance at the source. 

SQL estimated for inorganic analytes using the following equation: SQL = CRDL Ilg/L x 200 ml 

(final volume) x 1000 Ilg/mg x Dilution I 1000 mIlL x 1 gm (sample weight) x 1000 gm/kg x 

(%solids/l00) 

A fmal volume of 100 ml was used for mercury. 

11 

------------------------------------------

CONTAMINATED SOIL SAMPLES: Building 3; #6 Bunker; PC-SOX-17; Hearth Area; PC~SOX

42; PC-S-01 

The contaminated soil source samples were collected on May 5, 1999 and May 11, 1999 during an 

Expanded Site Inspection. The sample depth ranged from 

°to 8 inches below ground surface. All samples 

were collected in a similar manner as the background sample collected onMay 5,1999 (Ref. 27, p. 1 to 21). 

The contaminated soil source samples consisted ofone or more ofthe following descriptions. Black loamy, 

dark grey; brown, sandy gravel, slightly moist; brown/dark loam; silver grey clay, and grey gritty black 

material. 

", ;JI" .. 	 !."'l·,;· ..1 ;Haiardoiis,:'.. tSQL":,Ji

1· "Sf' ubstli'ncerr·,; t·,·" ...,1.:" :,.~::~:;~.~~jW~~;III::~~:l;;~~l::::: I:;l.'/k+::;:· (~~.~f~t~~~~!:~~;i;j·}f\;;il·;?;kj:f:;;"Y;l·;;..:.~'::~~;;t~:lf:'!:W;bi}:J~~ (i , , •. , '1 ~' .~,.::g.1

4, Appendix A, p. 9; 15, pp. 2, 12; 27, p. 13; 

30, pp. 8, A-4 

7,920 (pC-SOX-l7) 

Antimony 52.9 (Bunker 6) 18 

14.7 15,pp.2, 13; 27, p. 16; 30,pp. 8,A-4 

10,200 (Hearth Area) 15, pp 11; 27, pp. 16,17; 30, pp. 8, A-4 

109 (!>C-SOX-42) 

15.0 

15.5 15, p. 2, 14; 27, p. 19; 30, pp. 8, A-4

4, Appendix A, p. 9; 15, pp. 2, 13; 30, pp. 8,. 

A-4 

Arsenic 2,550 (PC-SOX-17) 3.0 

4, Appendix A, p. 9; 15, p. 13; 27, p. 16; 30, 

pp. 8, A-4 

Cadmium 4.7 (pC-SOX-17) 1.5 

4.3 (Hearth Area) 1.3 15, p. 11; 27, pp. 16, 17; 30, pp. 8, A-4 

1.6 (PC-SOX-42) 1.3 15, p. 14; 27, p. 19; 30, pp. 8, A-4 

Copper 186 (pC~SOX-42) 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 15, p. 2, 14; 27, p. 19; 

30,jlQ. 8, A-4 

6.5 

Lead 56IJ** (Bldg. 3) 0.65 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 14, p. 10; 30, pp. 8, A-4 

1,790 (Bunker 6) 15,pp.2, 12; 27, p. 13;30,pp.8,A-4 

294,000 (PC-SOX-17) 

0.89 

15,pp.2, 13; 27,p. 16;30,pp.8,A-4 

301,000 (Hearth Area) 

0.73 

15, p. 2,11; 27, pp. 16, 17; 30, pp. 8, A-4 

13,200ffC-SOX-42) 

0.75 

0.77 15, pp. 2, 14; 27,j). 19; 30, pp. 8, A-4

Mercury 16.6 (Bunker 6) 0.029 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 15, p. 2, 12; 27, p. 13 

5.9 (PC-SOX-17) 0.024 15, pp., 2, 13; 27, p. 16; 30, pp. 9, A-4 

5.2 (Hearth Area) 0.025 15, pp. 2, 11; 27, p. 16; 30, pp. 9, A-4 

17.8 (PC-SOX-42) 0.026 15, pp. 2, 14; 27,p. 19;30,pp.9 A-4

Silver 11.5 (pC-SOX-17) 3.0 4, Appendix A, p. 10; 15, pp. 2, 13; 27, p. 16 

12.5 (Hearth Area) 2.5 15, pp. 2,11; 27, pp. 16, 17; 30, pp. 9, A-4 

J Value is estimate (Ref. 4. Appendix A, p. 11; Ref. 15, p. 4). 

** While some ofthe values were qualified during QC review, the qualifiers only effect the accuracy 

ofthe quantification;, the presence ofthese substances is not in doubt. The hazardous substances 

are listed to document the presence ofthe substance at the source. 

+ 	 SQL estimated for inorganic analytes using the following equation: SQL = CRDL f.1g/L x 200 m! 

(fmal volume) x 1000 f.1g1mg x Dilution/1000 mIlL x I gm (sample weight) x 1000 gm/kg x 

(%solidsll 00) 

A fmal volume of 100 ml was used for mercury. 

12 

_._._---------­
2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY 

, 

.~:*~;t~~~~f~'rf#~?~~f~{;;::~i}i~.:~:::':~:,;.~·;:::~;,:::l',:;i:i'::':·j~!~l\r:;::(;Jr!:~:!,;.::;·il;;i\"~i. '::!:~'! i':F~~~;;~!l:\: :::', ~~~i~~~~~~~!;E 

Gas release to air: not scored 

particulate release to air: not scored 

Release to ground water: not scored 

Neither ofthe following are present: (1) maintained engineered 

cover, or (2) functioning and maintained run-on control system and 

10 Ref. 1 Table 4­

2, p. 51609; 

Ref. 4, p. 1,2, 

22, 23, and 

Figure 3; Ref. 

3; Ref 6, p. 10, 

Figure 2 

_runoff management system. 

2.2.4 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY 

2.4.2.1.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity 

Description 

Insufficient information is available to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity. 

Sum (pounds): Not available (NA) 

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value (C): NA 

2.4.2.1.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity 

Description 

Insufficient information is available to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity. 

Sum (pounds): NA 

Sum of Waste stream Quantity/5,boo (Table 2-5): NA 

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value (W): NA 

13 
2.4.2.1.3 Volume 

Description 

Insufficient information is available to evaluate Volume. 

Volume Assigned Value (V): 0 

2.4.2.1.4 Area 

Description 

The exact dimension of the contaminated soil has not been determined. An estimate of the copper, lead, 

and mercury contaminated areas were made using the 1999 XRF sampling data (Ref. 4, pp. 4, 6, Appendix 

G; Ref. 17). While the exact area ofcontaminated soil is unknown, it is known to be greater than zero based 

on 10 soil samples showing the presence of lead and other hazardous substances above background levels 

(Ref. 4, pp. 4, 6). Therefore, an area hazardous waste quantity of greater than zero is assigned. 

Sum (iP) : (greater than zero) >0, but exact amount is unknown 

Area Assigned Value (A): >0 

2.4.2.1.5 Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value 

The source hazardous waste quantity value for Source 1 is >0 for Tier D - Area (Ref 1, Table 2-5). 

Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: >0 

14 
~~~~-'~·~t--~----------------------------·-----------------------------------

2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION 

Source Number: 2 

Source Type: Contaminated Soil 

Description and Location of Source (Figure 4 ofHRS documentation record; Ref. 5, Figures 2 ,3, 7, and 

8, Appendix B, p. 6; Ref. 4, Figure 3): 

This contaminated soil area is between Buildings 3 and 6 at the Peters Cartridge Factory. It consists of 

a septic system leach field contaminated with organic compounds from the manufacture ofeyeglass frames 

and the coating of optical lenses (Ref. 5, pp. 1, 2;.Ref. 6, p. 12). 

LensCrafters, Inc. occupied a portion of the Kings Mills Technical Center at 1413 Grandin Road, Kings 

Mills, Ohio from 1986 to December 31, 1991 (Ref. 5, p. 1). LensCrafters' operations include the 

manufacture of eyeglass frames and coating of optical lenses within Buildings 3 and 6 at the Kings Mills 

Technical Center (Ref. 5, p. 1). LensCrafters' processes utilized Freon 113 (1,1,2-Trichloro-l,2,2­

Trifluoroethane), surfactants, phosphoric acid, n-hexane, paints, tints, and dyes. Freon 113 was used Tn the 

Molded Frames' operation to dry eyeglass frames and in the Specialty Koatings' operations to dry optical 

lenses. Both ofthese operations were conducted in Building 3. A lens dryer was operated about 6 hours 

per day and used approximately 1 gallon ofFreon 113 per day to dry lenses. The Freon 113 used in the lens 

dryer was recycled through the system and replaced as it evaporated over time. Water, displaced from the 

lenses, was decanted from the recycled Freon 113 in a water separator which was built into the system. The 

top water phase ofthe separator was at one time discharged into a floor drain which was piped to an on-site 

septic tank. In the Spring of 1990, after Freon 113 was detected in the septic tank, this connection was 

closed. The top phase of the separator was collected thereafter for off-site disposal (Ref. 5, p. 1). 

LensCrafters moved from the Kings Mills Technical Center on December 31, 1991 (Ref. 5, p. 1). 

The original design and permit to install the septic system was issued by Ohio EPA, but the septic system 

was not installed according to the permit. The permit accounted for a two-compartment, 2000 gallon septic 

tank, a flow diversion box and three leach lines, each 125 feet long (Ref. 5, p. 8, Figure 5). During an onsite inspection, the septic tank and the flow diversion box where found to be installed south of the area 

shown on the original design plan (Ref. 5, p. 8). Also, at some point, a second influent line was connected 

to the septic system for wastewater from Building 3.(Ref. 5, p. 8). This influent line was installed near the 

northeast corner of Building 3 and enters the septic tank from the side and into the second (effluent) 

chamber of the septic tank, not the influent chamber (Ref. 5, Figure 6). The discharge ofthe influent pipe 

from Building 3 into the septic rank was found to be approximately 17 inches below the normal operating 

, level of the tank and only approximately 4 inches above the effluent baffle (Ref. 5, p. 8). 

The septic tank and the diversion box discharged to two 200-foot leach lines located east of the septic tank 

(Ref. 5, p. 15, Figure 6). Due to the under capacity ofthe septic tank, the septic system periodically had 

surface discharges ofsewage around the leach field area (Ref. 5, p. 15). Source samples characterizing this 

source includes samples collected at depth in 1990,1991,1992, and 1993 (Ref. 5, pp 5, 6, Appendix G, p. 

2, Appendix I, p. 2). Attempts were made by LensCrafters to remediate the influent line, diversion box, 

septic tank, and the leach fields (Ref. 5, p.1). Based on soil samples, the leach fields and the surrounding 

soils still contained Freon 113 after the initial response efforts (Ref. 4, p. 7; 5, pp 8 to 20, Figures 2,3,7, 

8, and 26). Ground water samples collected in the 1999 ESI documented Freon 113 in on-site monitoring 

wells (Ref. 4, pp. iv, 6, 7, 12). 

15 


------~~"~~---- -.--- .-- .. -"._'-- -- ­
-~~~~,----------------~----------------~-------------------~-

Freon 113, the associated hazardous substance for this source, is man-made and is not naturally occurring. 

A background sample, PCSO-26, for Source 1 did not document Freon 113 as ubiquitous in the area (Ref. 

14, p. 10; 29, pp. 41, 50, 64). 

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH SOURCE 

<.",' ,;•.1'" ,:(.,;,..,. '1;.""" ,"" ',,'.,,:: . :Hlitard6us", i ::'< .:' '!lJe~t~:",.,,:\;,::: CRQL :

.~y"~s~m~tp ': ~:;~!~\: '.~:;i ~. '·::;~J\!;,:E~;,t~nic~Ji!.;,': ?/l::f " . 

(f~e!J."., . 

" :~ ,j-I, 

.i ';l~ I:'; <:::ij;:,j;!;lf:' .:1~ t~~ter~~f~ ,;r,;:li~:.,: '>I'~i.;~~;' >:~ 10 j.tg/kg 5 AppendixF, pp. 8, 12 


1,2,2­

1,1,2-Trichloro­ SB-9 19 J,Lg/kg 13.5 - 15.5

5 Appendix F, pp. 8, 13 

Trifluoroethane 

SB-l1 15 J,Lg/kg 4.5 - 6.5 

5 AppendixF, pp. 8, 14 

(Freon 113) 

SB-ll 13 Jlg/kg 9 -11

5 Appendix F, pp. 8, 15 

Cas. No. 76-13-1 

SB-ll 182 J,Lg/kg 13.5 15.5 

5 Appendix F, pp. 8, 18 

(See Ref. 5, 

SB-lO 12 J,Lg/kg 13.5 - 15.5 

5 Appendix F, pp. 8, 19 

Appendix B, p. 6) 

SB-lO 14 Jlg/kg 13.5 15.5 

SB-8 12 J,Lg/kg 4.5 - 6.5 5 Appendix F, pp. 26 

(November 1992) 

1,1,2-Trichloro­ 5, Appendix I, pp. 2,5 


1,2,2­

SB15 10 Jlg/kg 17 - 19 10 Jlg/kg 

5, Appendix I, pp. 2,8 

Trifluoroethane 

SB-15 11 flg/kg 24.5 - 26.5 

5, Appendix I, pp. 2, 9 


(Freon 113) 


SB16 23 flg/kg 7-9

5, Appendix I, pp. 3, 10 

Cas. No. 76-13-1 

SB-16 39 flg/kg 17 - 19

5, Appendix I, pp. 3, 11 

(See Ref. 5, Figure 

SB16 77 flg/kg 24.5 - 26.5 

5, Appendix I, pp. 13, 16 

8) 

SB-19 12.9Jlg/kg 17 - 19 

5, Appendix I, pp. 13, 18 

(February 1993) 

SB-18 76.3flg/kg 7-9

5, Appendix I, pp. 13, 19 

SB17 

SB-18 24.1j.tg/kg 12 - 12.5 

5, Appendix I, pp. 14,20 

SB17 

48 flg/kg 9.5 - 11.5

5, Appendix I, pp. 14,21 

SB17 

142 Jlg/kg 14.5 - 16.5

5, Appendix I, pp. 14,22 

SB17Dup 

340 J,Lg/kg 17 - 19 

5, Appendix I, pp. 14,23 

23,p.4 

328j.tg/kg 17 - 19 

Dup Duplicate 

SB Soil boring 

2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY 

I 

I 

Gas release to air: ,not scored 

Particulate release to air: 

Release to ground water: 

not scored 

not scored 

Neither ofthe following are present: (1) maintained engineered 

cover, or (2) functioning and maintained run-on control system and 

runoff management system. 

10 Ref. 1 Table 4­

2, p. 51609; 

Ref. 5, pp. 4, 

15 and Figure 5 

16 
______________________________________~--~J-------------------~-----------------------------

2.2.4 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY 

2.4.2.1.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity 


i Description 


Insufficient infonnation is available to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity. 


Sum (pounds): Not available (NA) 

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value (C): NA 

2.4.2.1.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity 

Description 

Insufficient infonnation is available to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity. 

Sum (pounds): NA 

Sum of Waste stream Quantity/S,OOO (Table 2-5): NA 

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value (W): NA 

2.4.2.1.3 Volume 

Description 


Insufficient infonnation is available to evaluate Volume. 


Volume Assigned Value (V): 0 

2.4.2.1.4 Area 

Description 

The exact dimension ofthe Freon 113 contaminated soils have not been detennined. While the exact area 

of contamination is unknown, it is known to be greater than zero based on soil boring samples showing the 

I presence of Freon 113 (Ref. 5, Figures 2 ,3, 7, and 8). Therefore, an area hazardous waste quantity of 

greater than zero, but extent unknown, is assigned. 

Sum (ff) : (greater than zero) >0, exact amount is unknown 

Area Assigned Value (A): >0 

2.4.2.1.5 Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value 

The source hazardous waste quantity value for Source 2 is >0 for Tier D - Area (Ref. 1, Table 2-5). 

Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: >0 

17 

SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS 

1 >0 N NS 10 NS NS NS 

2 >0 N NS 10 NS NS NS 

.', 

" 

NS Not scored 

Other Possible Sources at the site: 

Peters Cartridge Factory manufactured lead shot ammunition by pouring lead out ofa shottower, and letting 

it fall through a screen in order to form pellets (Ref. 7, p. 10; Ref. 13, p. 14). The shot tower is near 

Buildings 2 and 3 at the site (Ref. 5, Figure 3; Ref. 18, p. 2). The shot tower was not sampled during the 

1999 ESI (Ref. 4, pp. 8 to 10, Figure 3). However, based on the use of the shot tower during the 

ammunition manufacturing process, it may be a possible source at the site. 

18 

i 

4.0 SURFACE WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY 

4.1 OVERLANDIFLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT 

The topography ofthe facility varies from approximately 620 to 730 feet above sea level (Ref. 3; Ref. 4, 

pI). Drainage at the facility is towards the Little Miami River, which is adjacent to the north and west side 

of the facility. Three swales convey runoff water from the facility down the steeply sloping valley into 

storm sewers that run beneath the main buildings (Ref. 4. pp. 1,2; Ref. 6, p. 10, Figure 2; Ref. 13, p. 17). 

These storm sewers drain directly into the Little Miami River (Ref. 4, p. 22; 6, p. 10). Culvert 1 is the most 

upstream culvert discharging drainage from the site to the Little Miami River (Ref. 4, Figure 3; Ref. 17, pp. 

4, 5). Ditch 3 is considered the most downstream discharge from the site to the little Miami River. (Ref. 

4, Figure 3; Ref. 17, pp. 4, 5). The discharge location of Culvert 1 will be considered the most upstream 

. probable point of entry (PPE) for the surface water migration pathway, and the surface water migration 

. pathway continues for 15 miles downstream ofDitch 3 in the Little Miami River (Ref. 4, Figure 3; Ref. 

17, pp. 4, 5; Ref. 19). 

4.1.1.1 Defmition ofHazardous Substance Migration Path For Overland/flood Component 

4.1.2.1 Likelihood of Release 

4.1.2.1.1 Observed Release 

Seven sediment samples were collected by Ohio EPA as part of an Expanded Site Inspection on May 4, 5, 

and 11, 1999 (Ref. 4, pp. 1,4,6, and Appendix E, pp. 4 to 6; Ref. 26, pp 1 tol6; Ref. 28, pp. 13, 14). Six 

ofthe seven sediment samples were collected from the Little Miami River, and one (Ditch 2) was collected 

from a ditch leading from the site to the Little Miami River (Ref. 4, Appendix E, p. 4; Ref. 28, p. 13). The 

sediment samples were collected in the Little Miami River and are named according to the general location 

ofthe sample in the River (See Reference 4, Appendix E, pages 4 to 6). 

The background sediment sample, Upstream Bridge, was collected inthe Little Miami River, approximately 

120 yards upstream ofthe Grandin Road Bridge (Ref. 4, p. 6 and AppendixE, p. 6; Ref. 26, pp. 2, 3). The 

background sample, Upstream Bridge, was collected approximately 300 feet upstream ofthe PPE at Culvert 

1, but approximately 1.6 miles downstream ofa waste water discharge to the Little Miami River. The City 

of Lebanon has an NPDES permit to discharge waste water to the Little Miami River (Ref. 22 pp. 1 to 7). 

Mercury is suspected as a hazardous substance in this discharge (Ref. 22, pp. 1 to 7). Mercury has also 

been ~dentified as hazardous substance in the Little Miami River that may not necessarily be attributable 

to the Peters Cartridge Factory site (Ref. 4, p. 10). For these reasons, mercury is not evaluated as part of 

the observed release for Peters Cartridge Factory surface water migration pathway. 

The samples were analyzed by EPA Region 5 using contract laboratory program (CLP) methodology (Ref. 

4, pp. 4, 7; 11, pp. 1, 2). Hazardous substances were documented in the five sediment samples 

(Downstream Culvert 1, Downstream Culvert 2, Ditch 3, Downstream Steel Pipe, and Little Miami River) 

collected in the Little Miami River downstream ofthe background sample (Ref. 4, Figure 3, Appendix B, 

pp. 1 to 11, & Appendix E, pp. 4 to 6; Ref. 26, pp. 5 to 16). A sediment sample collected from a ditch 

leading from the site to the Little Miami River (Ditch 2 sample) also documented the presence ofhazardous 

substances (Ref. 4, Appendix B, p. 11; Ref. 11, pp. 2, 4,5, 18; Ref. 28, p. 13). For purposes ofHRS 

scoring for this site, two samples met observed release criteria. 

The Little Miami River is a fishery (Ref. 4, Appendix F, p. 4; Ref. 16). A wildlife officer of Warren 

County, Ohio has frequently observed people fishing in the Little Miami River, adjacent to the Peters 

19 
~~~--------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------------

Cartridge Factory (Ref. 16). The Little Miami River is also a National and State designated scenic river and 

the habitat of several State endangered species (Ref. 4, pp iv; 22; Refs. 19,20,21), An observed release 

ofcopper, a hazardous substance with a bioaccumulation factor value 50,000, has been documented in the 

Little Miami River (Ref. 1, Section 4.1.3.3.1; Ref. 4, Appendix B, p. 10; Ref. 12, p.lS). Level I 

contamination in the Little Miami River was not documented. The zone ofLevel II contamination extends 

from the most upstream PPE at sample location Downstream Culvert 1 to the most downstream sample. 

documenting an observed release in the Little Miami River at the location ofsediment sample Ditch 3 (Ref. 

17, 19). 

Chemical Analysis 

The samples documenting an observed release were collected on May 4th, 1999 during an Expanded Site 

Inspection. The background sample was collected in 2 feet ofwater, and the observed release samples were 

collected in depths of 6 inches to 2 feet of water. The sample medium consisted of a range of medium 

brown/grey or greyish fine silt or silty clay, some with fine sand or pea size gravel (Reference 26, pp. 2 to 

13). 

Back2round Sediment Sample 

Upstream Bridge (Ustr. 57.3 2 ft. water 	 Medium 05/04/99 4, Figure 3 & 

Bridge) 	 brown/grey Appendix B; 12, p. IS; 

silty clay and Ref. 26, pp. 2 to 4 

fine grain 

sands 

Ct· on amma t d S e e d' Imen t S amples 

:i; (;;~': ": ': ;::t:: '. ,"''­ $~nitpH~ 'm ,',:' . ,,:;:::,,':: :;!' \' \:'.~:, '~'. " : 

' '0/,0 .. .',: 

;:;;8J1I(18:;:, 

~ ;~ r:.:~:. I~ 

" D 'il::',: ,', ' ,ept ,,':' 

,',;: i; ,':' ;";'. 

: :,D:e8cfljifidn'; , .. 1' F.::l"::::~::::; ;';' 

:,;.::,~ /t, :,1".;;, 

:,', ,'9:f1~e. 1;:;,:, ~ ;. ':', ;: , , . 

"',j' ::i,. :',,:' ",,' , 

:; ,', ::' >References ,": ,', :::. " ", 

Downstream Culvert 2 

(Dstr. Culvert 2) 

64.2 6 inches 

to 1 feet 

water; top 

3 inches 

(sediment) 

Medium 

brownish 

grey-fine 

sands, silty 

clays, pea size 

gravel 

05/04/99 4, Figure 3 & 

Appendix B; 12, p. IS; 

26, pp. S to 10 

Ditch 3 LJ Top 3 

inches 

(sediment) 

Medium 

brownish-fme 

sands, some 

silt 

05/04/99 4, Figure 3 & 

AppendixB; 12, p. IS; 

26, pp. 14 to 16 

20 

Copper 8.73 mglkg 12.2mglkg 7.22 mg/kg 45.7 mglkg 

Ditch 3 

4, Appendix 

B, p. 10; 11 

p.18; 30, 9. A4 

Lead 1.05 mglkg 11.8b mglkg 0.935 

mglkg 

192Jmg/kg 

(133.33 mglkg)a 

Dstr. Culvert 2 

4, Appendix 

B, p. 10; 11, 

pp. 4,18, 19; 

30.9. A-4 

mglkg milligrams per kilogram 

J Value is estimate (Ref. 4. Appendix B, p. 11; Ref. 11, p. 7). 

Oa Original concentration is bias high. Concentration in parenthesis represents adjusted value 

according to Reference 12, (EPA, 1996), Using Qualified Data to Document an Observed 

Release and Observed Contamination (OSWER 9285.7-24FS). 

b Background concentration biased high. No adjustment necessary (Ref. 12, p. 8) 

SQLinorganic Sample quantitation limit (SQL) is estimated using the following equation (assuming a 

final volume of 200 milliliters and a sample weight of 1 gram; a final volume of 100 

millimeters is assumed for mercury): SQL =' CRDL (ug/L) x 200 ml x 1,000 ug/mg x 

dilution /1,000 mIlL xl g x 1,000 glkg x (% solids/IOO) 

Attribution: 

The Peters Cartridge Factory formerly operated on a 10 acre parceJ ofland located at 1415 Grandin Road, 

on the south side of the Little Miami River in Warren County, Ohio. The property is currently known as 

the Kings Mills Technical Center (Ref. 4, pp. 1,2; Ref. 5, p. 4; Ref. 6, p. 1). An area ofcontaminated soil, 

a contaminated septic system, and contaminated ground water have been identified at the site (Ref. 4, pp. 

7,9; Ref. 5, p. 4, Figure 8). 

Peters Cartridge Factory operated from around 1880 to 1944 and manufactured ammunition for military and 

sporting uses (Ref. 4, p. 2). After World War I, the factory was sold to Remington Arms, which continued 

. to manufacture ammunition. Remington Arms continued to operate the facility until 1944, at which time 

The Columbia Records Division of RCA occupied the facility, mixing plastic materials and manufacturing 

phonograph records (Ref. 4, p. 2). Several small businesses occupied portions of the property over the 

years, among which was LensCrafters. LensCrafters leased the property from 1987 to 1991 (Ref. 4, p. 2; 

Ref. 5, p. 1). As part of an environmental site assessment for the Kings Mills Technical Center, ground 

water and soil were sampled, identifying contamination at the site (Ref. 13, pp. 4, 9 to 17). 

Peters Cartridge Factory manufactured lead shot amm'unition by pouring lead out ofa shot tower, and letting 

it fall through a screen in order to form pellets (Ref. 6, p. 11; Ref. 7, p. 10). Copper and mercury fulminate 

were also used in the lead shot ammunition preparation (Ref. 6, p. 11). Building 6 was used to prepare 

volatile fulminate of mercury primers (Ref. 18, p. 2). The residual lead, remaining after the pellets were 

removed, is responsible for the lead contamination found at the site; much of the site appears to have bee 

used for disposal of boiler ash, slag, etc. over the operating life of Peters Cartridge Factory (Ref. 6, pp. 11, 

12; Ref. 13, pp. 17, 18). 

21 


-----~----~--- .......... ~_T··~~"_~.............. . _ _ __....... ~ __ ~---. ._ ...~_.~__... ____ ~_' 
A 1987 environmental assessment identified lead contaminated soils and lead contaminated ground water. 

Nine trenches were dug and these trenches were sampled at 1, 4, 8, and 12 feet depths. Soil lead 

concentrations were as high as 33,500 ppm and ground water concentrations are above the drinking water 

action level of 0.015 mgIL (Ref. 13, pp. 4, 9 to 15). 

The Little Miami River is adjacent to the site. Site topography and drainage culverts to the Little Miami 

River provides a direct overland flow for hazardous substances from the site sources to the Little Miami 

River (Ref. 3; Ref. 4, pp. 1,2; Ref. 6, p. 10, Figure 2; Ref. 7, pp. 50 to 54). An expanded site assessment 

conducted by the Ohio DES in 1999 continued to confirmed the presence of hazardous substances in 2 

sources at the site, and documented contaminated sediments in the Little Miami River (Ref. 4, pp. 3 to 10; 

, Refs. 26, 27, 28). 

Copper, lead, and mercury have been identified in sediment samples from the Little Miami River adjacent 

to the facility. Organic hazardous substances were also identified in sediment samples from the Little 

Miami River as well as in site source samples. Included among these organic substances are 2-Buteonine, 

Phenanthrene, Fluoranthene, Pyrene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Chrysene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, 

Benzo(a)pyrene, and Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (Ref. 4, AppendixB, pp 1,6,7; 10, pp. 36,49,50). Copper 

and lead are evaluated as observed release hazardous substances in the HRS score for Peters Cartridge 

Factory. Mercury is suspected as a hazardous substance in this discharge (Ref. 22, pp. 1 to 7). Mercury 

has been identified as a hazardous substance in the Little Miami River that may not necessarily be 

: attributable to the Peters Cartridge Factory site (Ref. 4, p. 10). For these reasons, mercury is not evaluated 

, as part ofthe observed release for Peters Cartridge Factory surface water migration pathway. 

The Kings Mills United States Arm Reserve Center (USARC) is located approximately 1000 feet southwest 

, ofthe Peters Cartridge Factory site. The USARC property covers approximately 16 acres and was formerly 

part ofthe 110 acre Kings Mills Ordnance Plant. Currently, this facility houses several buildings and an 

AMSA (Army maintenance sport activity) vehicle maintenance facility (Ref. 25, p. 4). The activities atthe 

, vehicle maintenance facility involve the use ofsolvents, fuels, and antifreeze. In the past, waste may have 

, been disposed of on the ground (Ref. 25, p. 5). At the USARC, surface water and storm water drainage is 

to the south, onto the adjacent property, and then to the west, down the bluffto the Little Miami River (Ref. 

25, p. 6). Discharge from the USARC is south and downstream ofthe observed release evaluated for the 

, Peters Cartridge Factory site. 

Hazardous Substances Released: 

Copper 

Lead 

Observed Release Factor Value: 550 

4.1.2.1.2 Potential to Release 

Potential to Release by overland flow was not evaluated because an observed release has been established 

(Ref. 1 Section 4.1.2.1.1, p. 51609). 

22 
4.1.2.2 Drinking Water Threat Waste Characteristics 

Antimony 1 10,000 1 Ref. 2, B-2 

Arsenic 1 10,000 Ref. 2, B-2 

Copper 1 1 Ref. 2, p. B-6 

Lead 1 10,000 1 Ref. 2, p. B-13 

Mercury 1 10,000 0.4 4,000 Ref. 2, p. B-13 

Silver 1 100 1 Ref. 2, p. B-17 

The hazardous substances with the highest ToxicitylPersistence Factor Value are antimony, arsenic, and 

lead. 

ToxicitylPersistence Factor Value: 1 x 104 

4.1.2.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity 

The hazardous constituent quantity for the sources at the site has not been adequately determined. Because 

the Little Miami River is a fishery and sensitive environment subject to Level II concentrations, ahazardous 

waste quantity factor value of 100 is assigned (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2). 

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 

(Ref. 1, Table 2-6) 

23 

4.1.2.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value 

ToxicitylPersistence Factor: 1 x 104 


; Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 


: ToxicitylPersistence x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor (subject to a maximum of 1 x 108) =1 X 106 


Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 32 


(Table 2-7) 


: 4.1.2.3 Drinking Water Targets 


. No drinking water intakes were identified within the IS-mile target distance limit. 


: 4.1.2.3.3 Resources 


, The Little Miami River is designated for recreational use (Ref. 4, pp. iv, 22; 20). 


Resources Factor Value: S 


24 

4.1.3.2 Human Food Chain Threat Waste Characteristics 

4.1.3.2.1 Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation 

1, 1,2-Trichloro- 2 1 0.4 50 20 Ref. 2, p. B1 ,2,2-Trifluoroethane 19 

Antimony 10,000 1 0.5 5 X 103 Ref. 2, p. B2 

Arsenic 1 10,000 1 5 5 X 104 Ref. 2, p. B2 

Copper 1 50,000 Ref. 2, p. B6 

Lead 10,000 1 50 5 X 105 Ref. 2, p. B13 

Mercury 1 10,000 0.4 50.000 2 X 108 Ref. 2, p. B13 

Silver 1 100 1 50 5 X 103 Ref. 2, p. B17 

The hazardous substance with the highest Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value is mercury. 

Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 2 x 108 

25 
4.1.3.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity 

The hazardous constituent quantity for the sources at the site has not been adequately determined. Because 

targets are subjected to Level II concentrations, a hazardous waste quantity factor value of 100 is assigned 

(Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2). 

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 

4.1.3.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value 

ToxicitylPersistence Factor: 4,000 

Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 50,000 

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 

:roxicitylPersistence x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor (subject to a maximum of 1 x 108

) = 4 X 105 

roxicitylPersistencelHazardous Waste Quantity Factor x Bioaccumulation Factor Value (subject to a 

2 X 1010 maximum of 1 x 1012) = 

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320 

(Table 2-7) 

4.1.3.3 Human Food Chain Threat-Targets 

Actual Human Food Chain Contamination 


:rhe Little Miami River is afishery (Ref. 4, Appendix F, p. 4; Ref. 16). A wildlife officer ofWarren County, 


Ohio has frequently observed people fishing in the Little Miami River, adjacent to the Peters Cartridge 


Factory (Ref. 16). 


Level I Fisheries 


No Level I Concentrations are scored. 


Most Distant Level II Sample 


Sample ID: Ditch 3 (Sample is Adjacent to Ditch 3 in the Little Miami River.) 


Distance from probable point of entry: approximately 800 feet (Ref. 17, p. 5) 


References: Ref. 4; Figure 3; Ref. 16; Ref. 17, pp. 4, 5. 


Level II Fisheries 


Actual contamination ofthe Little Miami River was documented with Level II concentrations of observed 


release hazardous substances having a bioaccumulation potential factor of 500 or greater (copper) in 


$ediment samples Ditch 3 and Downstream Culvert 2. This fishery is subject to Level II concentrations 


(Ref. 1, Sec. 4.1.3.3.1). 


26 

l(lelltltyof.fishe~< 

:~;: f C 

~ ~c.~~~~.~ 

. . . - - ­ .,.­

·E~tentofthe LriellIFisflcry 

~(RelatlYeto~PE), 

, ~ 

R.eferences 

i}. ~~CC, .~. .~. ~ ,:" .~:.~.~: 

<C 

.~ C 

.' 

C~ ~ ~ . 

Little Miami River 

~ . 

approximately 800 feet Ref. 4, Figure 3; Ref. 16; Ref. 

17, pp. 4, 9; Ref. 19 

~U.3.3.1 Food Chain Individual 

~ctual contamination ofthe Little Miami River was documented with Level II concentrations of observed 

~elease hazardous substances having a bioaccumulation potential factor of 500 or greater (copper) in 

Isediment samples Ditch 3 and Downstream Culvert 2. This fishery is subject to Level II concentrations; 

~herefore, a value of45 is assigned to the Human Food Chain Individual Factor Value (Ref. 1, Sec. 4.1.3.3.1). 

Food Chain Individual Factor Value: 45 

14.1.3.3.2 Population 

4.1.3.3.2.2 Level I Concentrations 

There are no fisheries subject to Level I concentrations in the study area. 

Level I Concentrations Factor Value: 0 

14.1.3.3.2.2 Level II Concentrations 

Actual contamination ofthe Little Miami River was documented with Level II concentrations ofhazardous 

isubstances in sediment samples collected in the Little Miami River at a location adjacent to Downstream 

!Culvert 2 and Ditch 3. An observed release ofcopper, a hazardous substance with a bioaccumulation factor 

!value 50,000, has been documented in the Little Miami River (Ref. 1, Section 4.1.3.3.1; Ref. 4, Appendix 

iB, p. 10; Ref. 12, p.18). The zone ofLevel II contamination extends from the most upstream PPE at sample 

IlocationDownstream Culvert 1 to the most downstream sample documenting an observed release inthe Little 

IMiami River at the location ofsediment sample at Ditch 3 (Ref. 17, pp. 4,5; Ref. 19). 

! A wildlife officer ofWarren County, Ohio has frequently observed people fishing in the Little Miami River, 

adjacent to the Peters Cartridge Factory (Ref. 16). ActUal contamination of the Little Miami River was 

documented with Level II concentrations of hazardous substances having a bioaccumulation potential factor l

0f 500 or greater (copper) in sediment samples Ditch 3 and Downstream Culvert 2. The annual production 

1

for Little Miami River has not been documented, but this segment is a known fishery (Ref. 4, Appendix F, 

p. 4; Ref. 16). Therefore, a minimum value ofgreater than 0 to 100 pounds is assigned as the human food 

Ichain production (Ref. 1, Section 4.1.3.3 .2.2). For an annual production ofgreater than 0 to 100 pounds per 

:year, a Human Food Chain Population Value of 0.03 is assigned for the fishery (Ref. 1, Table 4-18). 

27 

--~--~-- - - - ­
Sum ofLevel II Human Food Chain Population Values: 0.03 

Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 0.03 

4.1.3.3.2.3 Potential Human Food Chain Contamination 

Potential human food chain contamination is not evaluated. 

4.1.4.2 Environmental Threat Waste Characteristics 

14.1.4.2.1 Toxicity IPersisten celBioaccum ~lation 

1,1,2-Trichloro-1 ,2,2­

Trifluoroethane 

2 1 0.4 50 2 x 101 Ref. 2, p. B19 

Antimony 100 1 5 5 X 102 Ref. 2, p. 

B-2 

Arsenic 1 10 1 500 5 X 103 Ref. 2, p.B2 

Copper 1 100 1 50,000 5 X 106 Ref. 2, p. B6 

Lead 1 1,000 1 5,000 5x 106 Ref. 2, p. B13 

Mercury 1 10,000 0.4 50,000 2 x 108 Re~. 2, p. B13 

Zinc 1 10 1 500 5 X 103 Ref. 2, p. B20 

rThe hazardous substance with the highest ToxicitylPersistenceiBioaccumulation Factor Value is mercury 

ToxicitylPersistenceiBioaccumulation Factor Value: 2 x 108 

28 
4.1.4.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity 

The hazardous waste quantity for the sources at the site has not been adequately detennined. Because targets 

are subject to Level II concentrations, a hazardous waste quantity factor value of 100 is assigned (Ref. 1, 

Section 2.4.2.2). 

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 

(Ref. 1, Table 2-6) 

4.1.4.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Valne 

Ecotoxicity/Persistence Factor (lead) : 4,000 


Bioaccumulation.Factor Value (lead): 50,000 


Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 


Ecotoxicity/Persistence x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor (subject to a maximum of 1 x 108

) = 4 x lOs 

Ecotoxicity/PersistencelHazardous Waste Quantity Factor x Bioaccumulation Factor Value (subject to a 

maximum of 1 x 1012) = 2 X 10lD 

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320 

(Table 2-7) 

4.1.4.3 Environmental Threat Targets 

Level I Concentrations 


No Level I targets are scored. 


/ 

Level II Concentrations 

Most Distant Level II Sample 

Sample ill: Ditch 3 (Sample is Adjacent to Ditch 3 in the Little Miami River.) 

Distance from the probable point of entry: approximately 800 feet. 

References: Ref. 4, Figure 3; Ref. 17, pp. 4, 5; Refs. 19,20,21. 

4.1.4.3.1 Sensitive Environments 

4.1.4.3.1.1. Level I Concentrations 

Sensitive Environments 


No Level I targets are scored.' 


29 

---------, ._- ... . -­
~.1.4.3.1.2. Level II Concentrations 

I , 

Sensitive Environments 

;The Little Mianrl River is a National and State designated scenic river (Ref. 4, p. iv, 22; Ref. 20; Ref. 21). 

iAn observed release of copper and lead have been documented in the Little Miami River (Ref. 1, Section 

~.1.3.3.1; Ref. 4, AppendixB, p. 10; Ref. 12, p.1S). The zone ofLevel II contamination extends from the 

~ost upstream PPE at sample location Downstream Culvert 1 in the Little Miami River to the most 

~ownstream sample documenting an observed release in the Little Miami River at the location of sediment 

~ample at Ditch 3 (Ref. 17, 19). 

Little Miami River o Ref. 4, p. iv, 50 

(National designated 22; Ref. 20; 

scenic river) Ref. 21 

i 

~um ofLevel II Sensitive Environments Value: 50 

lwetlands 

I 

~here is insufficient information to determine the wetland frontage subject to actual or potential 

pontamination. Not scoring this factor does not impact the site score. 

~um of Level II Sensitive Environments Value + Wetlands Value: 50 

Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 50 I 

I 

~.1.4.3.1.3 Potential Contamination 

Sensitive Environments 

I 

frhere are several endangered species identified along the surface water migration pathway, but evaluation 

~f these sensitive environments for potential contamination does not impact the HRS score for the Peters 

~artridge Factory site (Ref. 19). 

I 

30 
lOCO 

E3 E3 E3 

o 

1- it: i: :: 

1000 

: ;;;;:.:;::a:: 2000

3000 

:::::: : :I 

4000 0000 

ii:::: li; :: "Salt:: :::: 

6OC'tO 

--' 

7000 

Scale in Feet 

Figure 1: Peters Cartridge Factory 

Site Location Map 

l From USGS South Lebanon, Ohio Quadrangle 
r· 

.............-O'·'·,!' -­...~---------.--.-------. 

) ~ r-" r-" 

+ s

fC.SOX-17 ,-­ flSunk«

CULVERT 

LEGEND 

..­

MW-F1 MONITORING WELL OR GEOPROBE LOCAllON 

$ SMOKESTACK 

@) SEWAGE PUMP STATION Figure 2: Peters Cartridge Factory 

WOODS Source 1 Location Map 

@ SEDIMENT SAMPliNG LOCA11ON 


Dttd13 


@ SOIL SAMPUNG LOCAll0N 

PC«).Ot 

--" ...........
 Environmental Protection SOURCE, MODIFIED FROM PRC 1996 NOT TO SCALE • ______••• ·~ __ 0~_ 
-~~==================================~; 
-------

1" :.: 40' 

Sump­

..--) \ Pali 

I , 

~ I I 

I I 

I 

I I 

I , I Molded Frames

, I Building I I 

I I #3 

SIH4-IIYI1/92 

'" -- '-'- ./ 

./

/ 

~ -.-

--... ,..-.~.- ~.-

.--- -"­ ~'---" 

;l - ~~~,,,t,,,.,,, "~_ "'---"" Bnlsh 

Q 

~~,-~",,,,,,, l.ine',jf-.-/\ \S",'- 11/16/92 .'___ DovB~~"" '~""_" L.... . __ .... ; 

II:: / '-, \\ Light 0 --. --- I ___~ach._t'ie!L_ , -:."_III_ ."." 

/ 

II :l'-~ /" \ ' ~Ole [ -~---- SU 13 ... _._ ,_. __ . :] ~ \/ __ ~ _ J 1-" /TSeplic Li Illd'T.,D..":':'-!l!l=.:;!~.J!!.Il" ii1,f'IIEON.J'!"--j ...k 

"""'''- - ~.---- ...-.~SB7 _ .~__o ._~.~_ II 

' - W , ~ . 

---

-'. 

SOli 

230 007 m _ ",\

~t ~ ' -."-\, "\ \~Pole \ ...':1,1 SUI.~ _~. •. ", CJ'! .' ~r-~ S611 Building #6 ~:::;'" "........ui"' '-,.;,s6Jk \ / lighl !O!! .., - .. ~m '<../ \ " ' Pol. 

'U"Ui!L .-==-- ~ ......, 0 S~9 \ c:xbllllU 

~II

UliIily~ P"le _''-----.~ _____ ......_'---.... .......~._. . 'Si,,".'"

'-'-.." GraSS~.~II) fiGrilvel__ J. ... ,. ~ ____ --'iI3Q _. '(° 1 

. ",. '" .. ..n.".. .... maL>L. iI'i !. 

- - .. '" .- U".. ...EPT 9.0-11.&._ ..'''LI-!RE '(-00-05 ..ms/kS ~k-'.-----Ai2 Approximate

0' 

0034 n,,- .. .../ s 0 

II 

0-23.0 _ II 

~_Ill.!! 6 m« Ikl. . Soil 21. 0.699 mil. Scale ______ ._ I 0.177 mllliI "~llid 

LEGEND Figure 4: Peters Cartridge Factory 

61 Pre;:violls Uurillll, LOCtlliOIl::i Source 2 Location Map 

~ May, 1993 Monilol'ing Wells 

- .--r 

----·OEPTII(U) t-_!_R_ -;k&./ - ­ " - . 

I - ---­ o729