## FINAL CLOSE OUT REPORT PALMER BARGE LINE SUPERFUND SITE PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS EPA ID# TXD068104561

REGION 6

# ~Rafaelcas CONCURRENCE PAGE FINAL CLOSE OUT REPORT PALMER BARGE LINE SUPERFUND SITE EPA ID# TXD068104561



### anager

Compton, Office of Regional Counsel , Superfund Branch

ection

Charles FaJltry, Associate Director S erfund Division

nce ofRegional Counsel, Superfund Branch

pbela Ph' lips, eputy Director, Superfund Division 

# U3/It Date**z.~** 

## cJwnc 'i l 

### Date



# ttfJ6 Date t. 

# #& Date

# ~ Date


# {p lull l Date 

### I I
.

### FINAL CLOSE OUT REPORT PALMER BARGE LINE SUPERFUND SITE PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS
I. 

### INTRODUCTION This Final Close Out Report documents that the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) have completed all of the cleanup activities for the Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site (hereinafter "the Site " or " PBL Site " ) in accordance with the EPA ' s guidance document titled, " Close Out Procedures for National Priorities List Sites" (OSWER Directive 9320.2-09A-P). 

### II. SUMMARY OF SITE CONDITIONS Background The PBL Site (CERCLIS ID

- TXD068104561) , a former barge-cleaning operation, encompasses approximately 17 acres and is located approximately 4
. 5 miles east-northeast ofthe City of Port Arthur on Old Yacht Club Road on Pleasure Islet. Pleasure Islet is a peninsula located approximately 0.5 miles southwest of the mouth ofthe Neches River. The Site is bordered by vacant property to the north, by Old Yacht Club Road to the west, by the State Marine of Port Arthur Superfund Site to the south, and Sabine Lake to the east. Pleasure Islet is a manmade landmass consisting of dredge spoils generated during the construction and maintenance of the Sabine-Neches canal, also called the Intercoastal Waterway. The canal was constructed between 1898 and approximately 1920 in the vicinity of Sabine Lake and the Neches River, between the current Site location and the mainland. Between 1955 and 1957 , a portion of the canal along the western side of Pleasure Islet was abandoned, and a new canal was cut along the eastern and southern sides of Pleasure Islet. Pleasure Islet was created when a land bridge was constructed across the abandoned portions of the canal, between the northern tip of Pleasure Island and the mainland. Vehicle access to the Site is limited to a single dirt road starting at the western Site border along Old Yacht Club Road. The Site, along with the adjacent properties to the north and south, were used as a Municipal Landfill for the City of Port Arthur from 1956 to 1987. Although disposal at the landfill has long since ceased and the landfill contents have been covered with dredged sediments , the contents are still present on the Site in the subsurface soils. In April 1982 , John Palmer, President of Palmer Barge Line Inc. purchased approximately 17 acres from the City of Port Arthur for the purpose of servicing and maintaining barges and marine vessels. The company ceased operations on the property in July 1997
. 3During operation, the typical activities performed at the Site included cleaning, degassing , maintenance, and inspection of barges and other marine equipment. Cleaning operations included the removal of sludge and other residual material by pressure steaming the vessel holds , engines,**an~** boilers. Engine s were degreased and accumulations of sludges were removed. Degassing aftivities involved the removal of explosive vapors from vessel holds using nitrogen or boiler exHaust. Maintenance and inspection activities included the replacement and/or rep air of valves, engines, and line leaks followed by pressure tests. A flare was located on-site to burn excess gases and liquids produced during facility operations. Site Histo In D cember 1996, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) , now the TC Q, conducted a multi-media investigation. The purpose ofthis study was to determine t e compliance status ofthe facility. In

# ~arch 1998, the TNRCC along with the EPA conducted an investigation to identify potential so rces and to sample the soils and sediments at the Site. Five areas of stained soil were identi f ed on-site near the sumps, boiler house , flare , ASTs , and wastewater tanks. Sample results indicated the presence of metals, semi-volatile organic constituents (SVOCs), and pesticides i9 on-site soil. Metals and SVOCs were detected in offshore sediments adjacent to the Site. In J,-,ly 1999, the TNRCC sampled the ASTs , roll-off boxes and slop tanks to characterize the stored materials. In Ol tober 1999, the EPA conducted an Expanded Site Inspection (Weston 2000) to determine

## t~e presence and nature of on- and off-site constituents and to determine migration and routes of exposure of site-rela ted constituents
. The investigations ofthe Site included the wastewater aboveground storage tank (AST) , boiler house ASTs , open top slop tanks area, horizontal ASTs, twelve ASTs area, flare area, area east of flare in the center ofthe Site, ground water, and s diments of Sabine Lake. Results ofthe inspection indicated the presence of volatile organic con tituents (VOCs ), SVOCs , pesticides , polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and metals
. EP**~** published a proposed rule on May 11 , 2000 (65FR30489), to add the Site to the National**Pr orities**  List (NPL)
. The Site was added to the NPL in a final rule published on July 27, 2000**(6 FR46096).**  The surface water migration pathway was scored as part of the Hazard Ranking Syj;tem Documentation Record
.

4

### History of CERCLA Enforcement Activities On September 30, 2002, the EPA issued an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC, EPA 2002) to the PRPs to conduct the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS; URS 2004 and 2005a, respectively) for the Palmer Barge Site
. Voluntary respondents to the Order were : E. 

### I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Chevron/Texaco Inc.; Kirby Inland Marine, LP ; Kirby Inland Marine, Inc
. of Louisiana; and Ashland Inc
. On May 7, 2007, the EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO, EPA 2007) for Remedial Design and Remedial Action (RD/RA) to a group ofPRPs. The UAO became effective on June 6, 2007. By letter dated June 15,2007, a group of four (4) companies agreed to comply with the UAO to conduct the RD/RA for the Site. 

### Removal Actions Performed In August 2001, the EPA completed a Removal Action (Weston 2001) to remove source materials stored on-site. Activities included waste removal, water treatment, oil/water separation, and sludge stabilization. Approximately 250,000 gallons of water were treated onsite; 330 cubic yards of sludge stabilized; and 100 ,000 gallons of oil/styrene were separated and removed from the Site. All ofthe ASTs were removed except for a 420,000-gallon AST on the northern portion ofthe Site that contained liquid and sludge materials. Several ofthe concrete AST foundations remain along with gravel throughout the Site. 

### Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study On September 30, 2002, the EPA issued an AOC to the PRPs to conduct an RI/FS. The objectives of the RI/FS were to characterize the nature and extent of constituents of concern in soil , ground water, and surface water and sediments of Sabine Lake
. Constituents detected in soil samples included metals, SVOCs, VOCs, PCBs, and pesticides. Several samples containing concentrations of metals and SVOCs above background were from samples collected in soil that contained municipal waste, indicating that some constituents present may not be due to activities from the barge cleaning operation. There is no current or anticipated future use ofthe shallow ground water at the Site and it is not considered a potential drinking water source. The shallow ground water resulted from the dredging activities that formed the isle where the former PBL Site is located. Ground water samples collected from permanent ground water monitoring wells installed downgradient of the Site did not contain significant concentrations of Site-related constituents above risk-based levels. 

### 5In 2 1 04, URS Corporation, on behalf ofthe Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs), submitted tge Remedial Investigation (RI) Report (URS 2004), which characterized the nature and extent or constituents present in environmental media at the Site and in adjacent Sabine Lake surface wat9r and sediments. The constituents detected in the sediments of Sabine Lake included polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and metals. Many ofthe constituents found in the soil at the Site were not detected in sediment samples. Surface water samples contained only metals at low concentrations. The

## uman health risk assessment concluded that contaminants were present in Site soils and sedimeqts that presented an unacceptable risk to on-site workers and off-site recreational anglers. The screening level ecological risk assessment concluded that site contaminants did not present an unacceptable risk to ecological receptors. A

### to**al** of four alternatives were developed for the Site during the FS. The EPA chose excavation dnd off-site dispo sal as the Selected Remedy for the contaminated soils at the Site . Record of**~ecision** Findings Basdd on the results of the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA, URS 2005b) and f creening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA, URS 2005c), the EPA's Selected Reredy for the PBL Site, identified in the September 2005 ROD, was "Excavation and Off-S ite**Di posal."**  The Selected Remedy consisted ofthe following components:
• Excavation of approximately 1,204 cubic yards ofthe upper two feet of soil that exceed human health and ecological risk-based levels at each ofthe response areas.
• Confirmation sampling for constituents ofpotential concern at each of the response areas.
• Backfilling of excavated areas with clean soil.
• Off-site disposal ofthe excavated soils at a permitted disposal facility.
• Implementation of institutional controls (ICs) to restrict future land use only for industrial purposes. The ICs shall be a restrictive covenant recorded by the property owner in the real property records of Jefferson County, Texas.
• Abandonment of five existing ground water monitoring wells
. • Wastewater AST sludge removal and decontamination and off-site dispo sal. 6The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) achieved by the Selected Remedy for the Site were based on the following :
• The reasonably anticipated land use scenario is based on the future redevelopment 'ofthe Site for industrial or commercial use, consistent with current Site use and surrounding land use . • Potential ecological risks were considered for Site soils to prevent exposure to ecological receptors and prevent surface runoff of contaminants to Sabine Lake sediments. The RAOs for the Site were:
• Prevent direct contact, ingestion , and inhalation of surface soils that exceed human health risk-based levels , based on an industrial worker scenario, for the chemicals of concern (COCs)
. • Prevent off-site migration of COCs to Sabine Lake sediments that exceed human health and ecological risk-based levels for the COCs.
• Prevent exposure to Site soils that may pose a risk to ecological receptors . Remedial Design and Remedial Action On May 7 , 2007, the EPA issued a UAO for RDIRA to the PRPs, which became effective on June 6 , 2007. The Final RD /

RA Work Plan was approved by the EPA on August 2,2007
. A total of 181 tons of contaminated soils were excavated and disposed at a permitted disposal facility. Each response area was then backfilled with clean soil. Additionally, approximately 78 , 340 pounds of oil were skimmed from the 10 ,000-barrel AST and recycled for fuel blending , and approximately 854,886 pounds ofthe remaining sludge material within the AST were incinerated. As required by the 2005 ROD , five permanent ground water monitoring wells were plugged and abandoned. The RA on-site construction was completed on September 4 , 2007. The June 2008 Remedial Action Report was approved on July 1,2008. An institutional control, in the form of restrictive covenant by the property owner, to the benefit of the State of Texas and the United States Government, was recorded in the real property records of Jefferson County , Texas on March 25 , 2011. This IC ensures that future Site use remains commercial/industrial.
7

### III. MONI DRING RESULTS PA chose a 1
.0 x 10-5 excess cancer risk target cleanup goal based on exposure to COCs that xceeded those levels at surface soils
. The COCs and the selected soil cleanup go als achieved by the RD/RA fo r the Human Health Risk Areas were:
• Aldrin

- 1
. 1 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg).
• Benzo(a)pyrene - 2
. 3 mg/kg
. • Benzo(a)anthracene

- 23
.0 mg/kg.
• Dieldrin - 1.2 mg/kg.
• Heptachl or Epoxide

- 2.1 mg/kg.
• Naphthalene

- 210
.0 mg/kg
. • PentachIorophenol- 100.0 mg/kg.
• Lead

- 800.0 mg/kg. The COCs and the selected soil cleanup goals achieved by the RD/RA for ecological receptors w re:
• 4,4'-DDD

- 0.0864 mg/kg
. • 4,4'-DDE

- 0.0864 mg/kg.
• 4,4'-DD T

- 0.0865 mg/kg
. • Butyl benzyl phthalate

- 5
.37 mg/kg.
• Lead, total

- 497.0 mg/kg
. • Methoxychlor

- 0.09 mg/kg. Th ROD required the collection of confirmation samples, including analyses for the

### constituent**~** ofpotential concern, at each ofthe response areas. Analytical results were used to determine**orizontallimits** of impacted media in each of the response areas. If constituents were 8found to contain concentrations in excess of the remediation goals (RG) , step-out samples were analyzed for those constituents. Additional step-out samples were collected and analyzed when the step-out samples exceeded the RG. This process continued until sample results for perimeter samples were below the RG, indicating horizontal delineation had been achieved according to the requirements of the ROD
. These results are documented in the July 1,2008 RA report. 

### IV. DEMONSTRATION OF CLEANUP ACTIVITY QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL The Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QAlQC) program for the PBL Site was conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved work plan for the RA construction activities. The following project plans were prepared and implemented for the RA : $ Community Relations Plan
. $ Site Management Plan. $ Health and Safety Plan. $ Field Sampling Plan. $ Quality Assurance Project Plan. $ Data Management Plan. $ Pollution Control and Mitigation Plan
. $ Transportation and Disposal and Waste Management Plan
. $ Construction Quality Assurance Plan. These plans ensured that the cleanup activities met all QA/QC requirements for the RA for the Site. The EPA performed oversight throughout the implementation of the RA
. The TCEQ reviewed and commented on all project plans for the Site, participated in the Final Construction Inspection, and reviewed and commented on the Draft Final Close Out Report. 

### V. FIVE-YEAR REVIEWS Since remaining conditions at the Site will not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure , a Five-Year Review (FYR) must be conducted no less often than every five years from initiation of the Remedial Action to ensure that the remedy is , or will continue to be , protective ofhuman health and the environment. The effectiveness of the recorded IC will be part ofthe 9FYR for the Site to ensure that future Site development is consistent with the industrial cleanup standards for which the remedy is based. The EPA will conduct the first FYR by September 2012. 

### VI. SITE q OMPLETION CRITERIA The implemented remedy at the Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site met the cleanup levels specified in f.he 2007 Record ofDecision and documented in the July 2008 RA Report. The implemente!i restrictive co venant ensures future land use will remain commercial/industrial. Therefore, 

# 9 0

further Superfund response is needed to protect human health and the environment.

# ~~/M{J**t(~!t** Samuel Coleman, P.E., Director Date Superfund Ij)ivision

10

### VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2002. Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. September. EPA. 2005a. Proposed Plan. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. July. EPA. 2005b. Record of Decision. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. September. EPA. 2007. Unilateral Administrative Order. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. May
. URS Corporation (URS). 2004. Remedial Investigation Report. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. July. URS. 2005a. Feasibility Study Report. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. July. URS. 2005b. Human Health Risk Assessment, Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. June. URS. 2005c. Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site. June. Weston Solutions, Inc. (We$ton). 2000. Expanded Site Inspection. Palmer Barge Line Superfund Sites. January
. Weston. 2001. Removal Action Report. State Marine of Port Arthur and Palmer Barge Line Superfund Sites. August.

11