Final Close Out Report

Craig Farm Site

Armstrong County

Perry Township, Pennsylvania

I. INTRODUCTION

This Final Close Out Report documents that the responsible

party, Beazer East Inc., (Beazer) has completed construction

activities for the final operable unit (OU-1) at the Craig Farm

Site in accordance with Procedures for Completion and Deletion of

National Priorities List Cites and Update (CSWER Directive

9320.2-3C). EPA, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental

Protection (PA0EP) and Beazer conducted a pre-f inal inspection on

August 31, 1995. At the time of the pre-final inspection, all

the waste had been excavated from the two pits, but not all the

waste had been treated or placed into the orsite landfill. EPA,

PADEP and Beazer subsequently conducted a final inspection on

December 14, 1995 and determined that the remedial action (RA)

contractor, IT Corporation, had constructed the remedy in

accordance with the remedial design (RD) plans and specifications

as incorporated in the Remedial Action Work Plan (RAWP). All

activities necessary to achieve site completion have been

successfully executed at this Sire.

IX. SUMMARY OF SITE CONDITIONS

Background

The Craig Farm Site covers approximately 117 acres, and is

located near the village of Fredericksburg, just insj.de the

western border of Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. The borough of

Fetrolia lies two miles to the vest, and the town of Parker, on

the Allegheny River, is about fcur miles to the north. The area

around the Site is dominated by farmland, and has a population

density of approximately 120 persons per square mile.

The Site was originally two abandoned strip mine pits which

had worked the Upper Freeport coal sean. As with most strip

rines in the area, the pits were cut into a hillside where the

coal outcropped. The two pits were used for the deposition of

distillation residue from 1958 to 1963. The residue was still

bottoms fron the production of resorcinol at the Koppers Chemical

Plant in Petrolia, Pennsylvania.

At the time when the source material was placed onsite, the

land was owned by Mr. Paul Craig. His brother, Mr. Herman Craig,

hauled the distillation residue from the plant and placed it into

the two pits. Approximately 2,SCO tons of waste contained in 55-

callon drums was thought to be deposited at the Site, and covered

with several feet of cover soil. In 1971, Koppers purchased 100

cf the 117-acre property, which included the pits. In 1985,
toppers purchased the remaining portion of the property.

.-.emedial Investigation/Feasibility Study

In December, 1982, the Craic Farm Site was placed en the

National Priorities List (NPL). In February, 1987, Koppers

signed a Consent Order with the Pennsylvania Department of

environmental Resources (PADER) to perform a Remedial

Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the Site. A total of

14 onsite monitoring wells were sampled during the RI. Test pits

vere dug directly into the two waste piles to determine the

extent of contamination in the two strip mine pits, A biological

survey was also conducted to determine the effects of the Site on

-earby biota with special emphasis on the aquatic biota of the

-earby unnared stream.

On January 26, 1989, BNS Acquisitions merged into Koppers,

*nd on January 26, 1989, the name of Koppers changed to Beazer

Materials and Services, Inc. (Beazer) , The Draft RI Report,

vhich included a human and an ecological risk assessment, was

submitted tc the EPA in April, 1939. The Draft FS Report, which

rro\ _ded a detailed analysis of r.o action, containment, and

treatment alternatives, was submitted to the EPA in July, 1989.

After incorporating comments fron PADER and EPA, Beazer submitted

the revised RI and FS reports in August, 1985.

?.OD Findings

After reviewing the results of the RI/FS, EPA issued a

Record of Decision (ROD) on September 29, 1969. The selected

remedy included the following components:

1. Excavation of all waste material and adjacent

—ntaninatec soil from the two pit areas. The two pit areas will

then be refilled with clean soil, and seeded to produce a

vegetative cover.

2. The waste material from the two pits will be stabilized

»r.d then solidified in an onsite treatment process.

3. An onsite RCRA-equivalent landfill will be constructed

izr disposition of the treated waste and the contaminated soils

from the two pit areas. This double-lined cell vill be

approximately two acres in size.

4. This disposal unit will ce capped, and then seeded to

produce a vegetative cover. A fence will then be placed around

tie perimeter of the disposal unit.

5. A treatability study will be conducted on the

stabilization/solidification procedure, and its effectiveness

vill be evaluated prior to the full-scale remedial action.
6. A wetlands delineation will also be done during the

pre-design phase in order to determine that the onsite landfill

is not impacting any of the onsite wetland areas. Potential

impacts to the wetlands will be considered and minimized during

the design phase of this project.

Design Criteria

A good-faith offer to perform the remedy in the ROD was

submitted to EPA by Beazer on October 27, 1989. After a period

of negotiation, Beazer signed a Consent Decree to perform the

RD/RA on May 18, 1990. On September 24, 1990, EPA received the

first draft of the RD Work Plan. The final draft of the RD work

plin" was approved on January 14, 1991. The pre-design work

started after this approval, and in August of 1991, the

treatzLbility study and the wetlands delineation report were

approved by EPA. The treatability studies and the wetlands

delineation were carried out during the pre-design phase. A

Source Delineation Study and a Siting Study was also done at this

time. On September 8, 1991, EPA, PADEP and Beazer were onsite

for the RD kickoff meeting. On September 27, 1993, the final RD

report was approved by EPA. The final version of the RAW? was

approved in April, 1994.

Remedial Construction Activities

On May 2, 1994, a public meeting was held just prior to the

initial mobilization for the RA. The RA progressed until

December 28, 1994, at which time onsite personnel demobilized for

the winter. The RA resumed in late March, 1995 and was completed

in December, 1995.

 7

Remedial action activities were conducted as planned and no

additicnal areas of contamination were identified. EPA conducted

a pre-f inal inspection on August 31, 1995, in conjunction with

PAD IP. The final inspection was conducted on December 14, 1995.

The RA included the following activities:

1. A RCRA-eguivalent landfill was built for disposal of the

waste and adjacent contaminated soils.

2. A cne-acre wetlands was built onsite to replace a smaller

area of wetlands lost in building the onsite landfill.

3. All wastes and adjacent contaminated soils were excavated

fror the two or.site pits.

4. The wastes were treated using a stabilization/solidification

procedure. The waste was processed in batches, and approximately

150 tons of waste were treated on an average day. After

treatment, the waste was taken via truck, and placed into the

onsite landfill. A total of 8200 tons of waste were treated
execution of the RA consistent with the ROD and the RD.

IV. MONITORING RESULTS

The Remedial Action Work Plan detailed a rigorous sampling

and analysis program for the length of the RA. Specifically,

sampling was required and implemented to: 1) protect the offsite

public, 2) protect onsite workers, 3) confirm compliance with the

various RA objectives. The sampling program included:

Daily perimeter air monitoring for volatile organics at the

property boundaries.

Daily personnel air sampling of exclusion-zone workers for

volatile organics. This was especially important for workers in

the two pits during waste excavation.

Test samples of waste batches to confirm proper

stabilization of treated waste material.

Destructive testing of all geosynthetics during landfill

construction.

Fcur landfill monitoring wells were constructed around the

perimeter of the landfill. These wells will be sampled, along

with the other existing monitoring wells on quarterly basis

curing future operation and maintenance (O & M) activities. The

Final Remedial Action Report, which will be submitted to EPA by

Beazer in February, 1996, will contain documentation of the

complete results and accuracy of the confirmatory sampling

program.

V. SUMMARY OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Site O & M activities include quarterly monitoring of a

number of the onsite ground water monitoring wells. Periodic

site inspections will also t-e conducted to insure that erosion

control measures are effective, and that the fence around the

cnsite landfill is properly maintained. Any disturbed soil areas

which co not have adequate vegetation will be reseeded. The

landfill has a leak detection zone which will also be checked

during -he periodic site inspections. The landfill also has a

leachate collection zone, and leachate collection from the

landfill will continue during 0 & H. Ir. signing the Consent

Decree, Beazer assumed all responsibility for 0 & M at this Site.

VI. PROTECTIVENESS

This Site meets all the site completion' requirements as

specified in OSWER Directive 9320.2-3C, Procedures for Completion

and Deletion of National Priorities List Sites and Updates. All

cleanup actions specified in the ROD have been fully implemented.
All contamination has been reroved from the two pit areas, and is

now located in the onsite landfill. The landfill does have a

leak detection zone in case a leak ever occurs in the future.

The Site no longer poses any threat to human health or the

environment. The only remaining activity to be performed is o &

M, which Beazer has agreed to do in the Consent Decree. A

bibliography of all reports relevant to the completion of this

Site under the Superfund program is attached. These documents

are available by calling the Region III office at (215)-597-0676.

VII. FIVE-YEAR REVIEW

Upon completion of this remedy, hazardous substances .will

renain onsite in the disposal cell, above levels allowing for

unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Thus, a statutory fiveyear review will be conducted in April, 1999 pursuant to OSKER

Directive 9355.7-02, "Structure and Components of Five-Year

Reviews" (May 23, 1991).

The long-term ground water monitoring will be performed by a

contractor hired by Beazer, and subject to approval by EPA. The

long-term operation and maintenance of the disposal cell wj.ll be

under the direction of this contractor.

Approve£<By

Thcaas C. Voltaggio,Xv&rfector Date

Hazardous Waste-Management Division

EPA Region III
VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Final RI/FS Report for the Craig Farm Site - August, 1989.

2. Proposed Remedial Action Plan for the Craig Farm Site -

August, 1989.

3. Craig Farm Site Record of Decision, September, 1989.

4. Final Remedial Design Repor- for the Craig Farm Site,

October, 1993.

5. Technical Specifications, Drawings, and Addenda, The Craig

Fane Site, October 1993.

6. Geosynthetic Construction Q-ality Assurance (CQA) Plan for

the Craig Farm Site, July, 1993.

7. Geotechnical Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) Plan for

the Craig Farm Site, July, 1993.

8. Stabilization Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) Plan for

the Craig Farm Site, July, 1993.

9. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan for the Craig Farm

Site, July 1993.

10. Spill/Volatile Organics Release Contingency Plan for the

Craig Fana Site, July, 1993.

11. Wetland Mitigation /if t ar the Craig Farm Site, June, 1993

12. Source Delineation Report fcr the Craig Farm Site, January,

1992.

13. Treatability Study for the Stabilization/Solidification

Process at the Craig Fam Site, April, 1991.