1 0 5 0 9 4 7

.J'-C^

The XJUh De:cartmeat of EiiVirssmeBtal Quaiity (UDEQ) und the U.S. EBTirosaseiital PFGtectisa Agency (EFA) Aaaouace P r ^ p e s ^ Modified Remedy

atCTOATlVFRECfMI! ^• - '- .

The p^xrpose of tliis document is to request pabtic modiw the remedy for a Superrand Site. Also, in Input on proposea fundamental 2.rM sigmfi^Lni dsimg«* to the remedy at die Porti^i Supertiind Site (Site) in S ilt Lake City. Utah.

accordance with CERCLA. EPA aad ths Si. tis notify the public of any sigmiicaai changes which have been made to the remedv.

!t w ^ ptepsrea oecaose. m sccordaace with ine Comprehensiye Ea?iromBeratal Rssponse, Com^^mmon, aacj liability Ad (CERCLA) of 19S0. as aosended by the Superfund Ameadmests and Re£uthorizm.ion Aa (SARiV) of 1986, EPA and the Stare consider public input when decidiog to niaaaineatally

leribes both the origsr.ai remexiy mn proposed modified remedv:

i^roviaes a coavenieni summary ot me cbsages EO the rem^y. This suiumary

fZ:

November L 1993, to Decembei' L 1993.

on this Proposed Plais may he Ki either orally or in wniing at the public

mating, or you can send wnrtes comments postmarked no later than December 1, i993,. to:

Roben O'Brien State of Ijtali Dept. or E.nvironrae.ntal Ousiirv Dlv. ef Envii'onmentai Resp. i: Re.meoiaiion 1950 West Nojth Temple Sail Lake City, UT 84116

Upon timeiv reauest. the conimeRt oeriod mav

LK ivvi, I p.m. m LDEQ, Building 2 (above address;.

INFORMATION REPOSITORIES:

EPA Supemnd R&x^rds Center 999 1803 Street. Fifth Floor Denver. CO 80202 Hours: M-F S:CK) a.m. ;o 4-.30 v.m.

be e;itended, Sueh a request sno'dlu he submiued in writing to UDEQ- The request rausl be postmarked no :.,i8r ;han Moveraber !6. 1993,

\Jt2h DepgxtJD5T5t of Hnvirormientii Quaiity Dh\ of EnviroriBientai Resp. &. Remediation I9S0 Wesc Nonh Temple. Second Floor Sail Lake Criv, UT S-4-n6 Hours: M-F S:fKi a.m. to 5:(K) p.m.

in bold &TC (i&msc T. UIC giOs.^rv 31 U:',' end ai Lhis aocumcnt.

. 1 .

4.

caa oe Tounti on r>asi.' 5 ut ihss document Ttn?. summary aiso provides a UiStmciion betv 'een the fundamenjM changes and me sigpificant chaiiges. to the remedy v;hich are being proposed,

Idestrdes key information about the Site which provides die basis for modif ing die rem^y. This iniormauoo can be found ia the sdmiiilstrative remrd (AH) for the Si^:

Evaluate the two remedies to esplaia why UDEQ and EPA prefer me modified

e mpyt on tne

es tlie puohc to being

provides informalion on how to do so.

UDEQ is the lead agency for developing cieaaiup options and cor ductlBg cieanup work at itie Site. EPA is the support agency 3'. die Site. Both agencies coordinated dev£iQpmem of diis

This Proposed the public

ma t ;-.;.:ction -l/iai jn<4 (-.:i -.n CERCLA imenaed rv SARA.

Tne 71.acre Site ss ie-atsd near lOGO Souih Redwood Road, between the Surplus Caxsal ;^d Indiana .A.vahue. tn Salt L'ike City, The i rsa the Site is primarily coma^ercial aiii •txm', it

agricuiturai lands. Betf ' xx 6.000 aD.d 12.fflX) iive w thiB one miie of the Sht. (Sea

Fist.ite I).

ihe Sits bouhdariss, cement kiln dmi (CSD) is present ia thickness from mree lo eight fesi. Total CKD vQhiHie is esiimatsd m be

Sits, mucis ot the CKD has been mixM -mth md covered hy fill consisting of soil and demolif debris.

13 a powdery Dv-product or nsaauiacmring process. It is aikaiiiie, aad contains elevsiad levels of several heavv mei alsi inctudisg arsaoic. iead, chromium, ca^m.!

FIGURE 1

,ii::E^ii.j.^xjdii=_

CKD 13 exempted froo's t>sim. s hazardous wiism under the .Resource Coirss

bu£ it is a P: nmev CFJ?J this site, tliis distinction h imponans because it ise^ias. an^^ng other thmgs, thM fee CKD may be disposed m s less-expeasive MCRA Sub^tk D indiismal iSBdUE as opposed to a more-espensive ECRA Subtitle € hasmdor-' wrnit ImidfilS.

Between 1963 aed i9S3. CKD wa.s ccUea^ from

I;FA :i;-..i i.DliC* .'i ieucs^ c'i-cais-iip remedies ii t OU% I aaJ 2 in RODs ihsueii in 1990 sijd 1992. respeeuvejy, "TTiese remeaievS vvere degig^eti «3 mitJgsiEa or reduce Ske rssks. "HJE; 0\i-l assd OU-2 rsraedies srs described in deuii law^ in ihi? docu<i eat. m 1992, arter sigiuag the OU-2 K.OD.. EFA and UDEQ combmed. OU-1 a5ia OU»2 for ri^iedis^ d^igu and remedsas saion (EB/KA). Tae Ou-1 a ^ OU-2 remeclias ara hertafler coil :Tlveiy referred to as the combined rem&dy.

wm be ssy, groimd-water comarmaatK; by a •muire ROD, TTiis deia

hundr^ tOBS or" ctifos^um-bearing bricks from lhe will be made tbilowing removal of thg iBlaminaied soils.

order to more elti Site, it was divlds OU-1 w ^ the soils underlyisg

Tne COB'

^ortiand Cement Site oo die List (NFL) in June i9S6. In

:ieiatiy manage cieaBup st the ii into operable unifc

lasted Rrouad water, which LO bs

, inc. consEs iBvstigEtisnu'fs^iMIItT study (EI/FS) for OU-I

'eeiBsat with the State. The Site was m several RI Repoits. For OU-L

£ RI was submittal \TX July 1986. Ths )U-1 Fi was submioed in July 1989 to

gaps m Phase I. TQQ OU-2 remedial •cused. feasibiiitv smdy reports were

I by UDEQ " 1991.

mvesu ccmpi

logether, i.'se approxims-ie e.tieiit Site. 71ieRI/F of the risks posed by -die Sits contsmlisasts. 0ns

people are at risk to being e.xposed to alkaline materials at the Site. For more information on the Site risks, the AR shouid be consulted. 'The OU-i risk assessment is published in tti.e Phase ii RI. Volume \, dated July 21. 1989, and ths Eeoord Qt !>edsi.sR (ROD) dated July 1990. The OU-2 risk 3ssessir^ni is pubiished HI the RI Report for OU-2 dated November 1991 and L .e ROD dated March 1992. Tnese documents are in th.e AR.

lis psaE proposes to mociify ths reiE^'i

ORIGINAL- COMEIHE0 REM.EBY:

i/ie onpnal conmmea

V Removal and offsim disposal ofCllD and

V

V tor Site

of corummriOted soils and

Ground-water monitoring before and afier

imptememmion oj as required, to restrict future land-uss m the Sue.

V

Esdmoied Omiial Costr: Esiimai£d Annual O&JrS Costs: E^imaiedPresem-WorJi Costs: $l9J29.i Estmiazed lime to Implemem: 5 years

Tae original combined remedy involves removal and off-site dispossi. of CKX> m a iaalfill coiisTT^cted specifically for the Site waste. Co-dispose chromi^aro-beariag brisks would be separated from the CKD and temporarily sitored on sile. Co-dhposed, noE-hazardous ms^rkis at ths Site, suck as constraction debris, would ;^so be reoiovKi am disposed in the laiidfil! aloag with die CKD. Use landffil v/ouid be ioC2r.Ed la the geaerai vicinitv of the Salt Lake Vaiisv Laodfili m

McCcncy (EPA) to mr PorJsnd Cement Site Fiie aatesl lot the .Porthnd CeffiCTi ProwGasd ModiUcd Combined Reme^

ik-iinM i indrill-Suit Lokij Countv

.Site sous contamiTsatEXJ above the ai tioift k veLs wouid I'-t excavated and trsatea on s'.te, Tne stored chromiiim-bearmg bricks at the Sue would also be treated on site. Treaiea matenais wouid be disposed off site at an appropriate lacility. Tne soil actioa levels would be. lor lead. 500 pans per miilion (ppm) aad, for arsertic. "0 ppm. Followijig removal activities, the eQtire Sile woujd be covered with at least 18" cf clean backfill.

Gs: be cODtar"'Bated soils. riiomtoring would be ground-wa^r ress^ia'

if necessary, deed rastrictiotis coanrois would necessmv, future

2val of the CKD The purpose of

to assess the oeed in ih.2 future.

i controls in the form at bd imposed. These

e designed ro oontroL as •ouad water ana land use at me

assesse

Since signisg the Site RODs. EPA aad UDEQ have received new ioformaEion wnkh has prompted CGEsidetaiioG oi a modined remedv. This ir fOTiBSiioa is as follows:

a. Unso.iidSfed.„.Fi:t) K^ais from Commerdal LiHidfilis: Several existing commercial laadtiils ria.ve contacted UDEQ with offers to accept the

n CemesE CKD. Some of

be ss or

b. g^JjMC-_-Cooe^n$ R^arding ..UandOi!

City and coacems over

in Salt

bars and ieaders of the Salt Lake y coiainumties have expressed e possibilitv' ot locaimg a new

c. 1992, EFA began an emergency

cleanup at the abandoned Sumitutville Mine jn soudiera Colorado. EPA has proposed the Sumniitviile sue for listing on the NPL, .Vs part of the cl^uuD activities ai the Summir/ille site.

I;PA iTsav -Acei,! to \imiy acsa neuuajamg iigcr K a; in^ rnme. EFA i.s cori^iaering me use i?t Ume m CK.D for this purpose. If &e Poniamd Csmem. CKX> IS dei!:eni5..iaed to be cheniicaliy aoceptshie iiid cia hs uanspoRai to me nuse safaly MKI ^^conofn'caily, EPA proposes lo use it 3t the niise. Use .o: the CKD for ihis purpose wouid not only neiitraiise acidity oi the rnme waste but also rs<iuce me pH of the CKD. making the CKD 3ess hazaraous. More informaiios on 'this proposal can be foimd III .-\R docuimeats ia Sumxmtviile DispO'Sal Oprion Cgit,

t..onsmi

^- EFA. .Ree?a m_atiQ.a.. f. H.CEA_ Smce sigmng the OU-2 ROD. EPA has •Donsimi&d ihst soils contamisa^ with CKD sjsj exsas^st from feguialion imder the RCRA Submis C law (ss IS CKD).-- Previously, EPA took ths ihst soils contamiaatea -with CKD were COJ a trnzardous waste aad siibieet to RCR. Subdue C feqsiiremsBES.

is

im: endearing sessions. EPA and UDEQ made two cost saving dei^irunatiOBs:

i) SiiK;e soils do not need to be treated prior to

:ass expeasively off site than ^ i site. Tb.e cost savings would be due Drimariiv to the rs .isioimt ot maEeriais

operate a treaa:x?.ent faciliiy on the Site thmi to sead the materiais to an e-xisimg treatmest facillry off site.

2) Non-hazardous debris which has beeh disposed along with the CKD at the Site csn be safdy re-'osgd at the Site as fnl material foilowmg removal of the CKB. Studies indicate mst there die,

KX) cubic yards of totn sou fill at the Site,

in the west poraon. engjxi&sring mdicates ihsixhis soil aiih debris may provide a safe and cost-eTfective fill maierisl for :he She.

' This deasmmason ^-as set ibrtnin a .'ncmoranaum mim£p.^ HesGqu»net^ojiiK* to EPA Re^i i VUi dai&si iuns iO,. 1993. The subjctt ofthis memoranaujn is CUnficauoa os RCRA Appuc^-on to i.ods'Cont&p.i^n^i:^ liy Cen^eiu Km D iiti-" "l k niciinoraiiO!i.tKi 53 in ihs AK= .4.^

Based on ^Mysts or the new fi\i:DrTnani.m outlinaj alxive, EPA aad UDEQ propose ms following Tnodifi&i combined remedv;

V

V

V Removal ana off-site aisposm of CKD. occur in varii ufi npf^ <>;

u of c v^utQt^S prior rreamiem:

sou:

treasmen: and disposal < [f

V

nmtencd:

Growid-wmer monaonn^ before mid i:fler removal of CKD ana commranmed soii: •din

of instimnGTim comrois.. as required, U) res'cna p.awe ihe sue.

I U)si.v: Costs:

Vt Casts: 3IS,64 Ime io Impiemem: 3

o Removai and oif-site disposal of CKD, Ccgignict Jaadfiit aear Ssii Lake Valley for off-sits disi^osai of CKD;

x-a2!J*iri3i

s off-si{ Co-mid^ the foUowmg options ioi off-sit^i

a. Dispose of m a vsnsxU&d ^ffiiSgixnai,

odser mdiisinai o-pei-auoD: off m&\

Use double imer for iananli mtsnor and cap with, vegeiatisd layer; and

'rest c.?iix3niii.u .-i>aanr.a DHCKS GO, me.

i o Type ot liners used wosijd diipend on

The aioauieii ccrr'--/'- -•'' - -r-r.- ••— • m a oif-site iiiar, •;. •, \ . occur in the trfilowing types ot facUrues; -.; n laidfill corsstruaed ott site specirlcaiiv to- • C'iU^ (as ua the orsgmal rerasavi; b) a cot. : laadfill; cr ci aii mdustrul operation ibr re-ase or me fnatenai. Lsuch as ihe proposed Su^ • Superfaaa SiteL One or a conibmauoii ,.. . ,- • optiOBS would be seieciea duimg remedial design. Coas t racaoa of a new landfill (option la) abovei would be cossiderM only if opuoM ib) ana ic) are foimd to be not viable oor cost e f f ^ t r r e . Final, seiection of the opiioms) wiii ba based upon an evaluHiion of which opi ioi^ best meet E P A ' s nine criteria. (EPA's nme evaiuatios criteria are described later m this documeEt.l T h e laiKifilKs) chosea woaid be i l a ^ asd/or capped according to applicable laws. Co-disposal noD-toazardoi^s msteriais at the Site would either be disposed off site or used at the Site as backt^L (This decision would also be m ^ e durm^ remedial design and wiii be based on whether t is possible to eosnomieaily separate CKD from aoB-faazardoiis debris.)

CKB-cciitaimnsEed soils woold be removed and disposed off $it^. Comsmm&isd soils would noi bs tteaied prior to disposal. Chromium-bear isg bri.cks would be separated from the C K D and be t r ^ t e d and disposed off site. Following removal acdvides, the entire Site would be backfilied wmi a mimmum of IS" of cieaa backfJI.

GrouEd, water at the Site would be momtored both before asd auer removal cf the CKD 'And contaminatgd soils. Toe purpose of this rnomtoriEg would be lo assess the need for gmwhd-wster rensediaiioii ia the mvam.

If Becessary, iostimtionai eontrois in the foim ot de«^ restnctioES would be imposed. T h ^ s coBtrols womd be designed to control, .is na^Ksary, ftiture land and ground water use at the Site, Toe need for iiistimiionai conirois would be assessed during remadiaJ desigB.

E¥Al..lJATIO.N OF THE ALTERMATIVKS .\MD THE FEEFESRMI ALTEE.NATI\'E:

The preferred alieroaave :f, )J Combined Remedy, as deaenbed abo' U D E Q 5s currsntiv ^r^ ..'vmz _ renied.y m its sjiJE^n_^ decision on makhre

'"w JV

f \ J , U

-".ifv/ i-!*„ . SLGffeo V'l i^z 4Leiu?t M. •si oils prupo^es plaii. i'he Ki.'FS dor :. um ongiiiai RODs shouid be consuiv laformaioa on th^.e aJtsoianvts. docusesis axe in me AR.

l l i ^ ^

Toe two alteo3Hiiv8s (the Qj igmal C o m b i r ^ Remedy and the M ^ i & i d Commined Eemedy) w a s evaiii^^ usixig EPA's nms. criiaria, wM^ ai^ inmmmizod as toiiows:

-. Orn-m Protection of Hiimms EmMM.

or not a reiBSdy provide ^aqua^ pn3isetio.ii and describes how tkks, p m ^ thmugh each pailiway arsi elimnjiM. rstuced, or coEijoiled.

" - C^mpiiaiise wi'ih Appilm&le &T M^W^JII

a^^ .appropriate EsiquiremeEls (AEAF^> addresses wheiligr or noi a remedy will meet a.U Federal aud Stile eaviromneiitsl Lav/s mdJot provide grooads for a waiver.

3. Rfiiiumsn of Toxidiy, Volume ihrosjgn T r ^ t m ^ . preference for a rem&i Li t reaa- ' health hazards, the rnovesefli or coai^nmaiiB, or the qiiaBtity of

• - LsBg-ierm Effeetiversess a s i F&m^sie«oa refers lo the ahilir/ of a remedy to maiiriaie reiiabie piistg^oa of human health ssi^ ths eavirooiserii over

~- Stmrt-ierm. Ef'fs!ti¥ei3ess; ref^n n Lie period of time nestled to c; ..:.. m^ remedy, asd auy adverse impaas oa hiiinaa he-aitli ;i,iia xhs gjivirT - -- ^ "--- •f'-"'* mm be oosad during tiie con: • -., . implemearation ct the rejusciy.

• ^ -

IE .ssily i

L-"' LC ^t, tn** / a i l a t

.>w,. .;tt iiceced lo ."". -solutios. It also iii.%' Jti c 0 f^eral, state and „ _-' -clean up the Site.

°..,i!J'

i 1 \ 1

Ci*! ^J. h . f . ^^ f ' 5 •^^ J M '^ j ' I j j , '

7. CiBl evaluates capital, operation, iuid maiBtesaEce -costs of each alternative and cQEpares costs aisosg siiBilafly protective remedies.

8. Sttte Ac^stag« iBdi^tK whether the State cOECufs wldi, oppose, or has no coascEt OB the Preferred Altetnative.

9. C©miHe®ity Atcept&ace iscmdes determiffiiBg which compohgns of the MtemaiiYes interesi^ persons m dr*e commimiEy suppon. have r^ervatious about, or oppose. This assessment will UQt be coiBpietea tmdi public comments on the Proposed Plan are receive.

UDEQ and EFA's comparative axmiysis of tiie two alsgnsHives (th@ Q^^imi Combined Remedy asd ttie MtMiSM Combined Remedy) h ds, follows:

Both ailematives woald be eqEaily g m ^ ^ k s ^ liaill§JLj2^llkJlli..|hS e,nvj,m.fim.gM is auaimag risk r«Juctioii at the Sits. Mor^ver, both alternatives would comply..wi.iii .al.I.. .AEAILs at the Site."* Ofi~ut^ disposal, wiiii botli aliemadves. woHJd be coBdacted in accordance with EPA's Final 0^"Slte Rule.

Both alsemauves provide sigoincaBt rsdiiction of tQxieir>'. mobility or volume of Site wast^. The modifisd rem^y wouid besier reduce toxicity of CKD If an industrial use is foiisd sush as at the Sumuiit ille Mime, Although the original remsly would beuer i ^ m s ^ m ^ of contaminated soiJ because the soil would be L eatsd prier to disposal, EPA aad UDEQ have deteroiiii^ that disposal of the untreated. cootamlBated soils in an acseptsble off-sits facility would sufficieaily addiess the need for i:MiiaimLJlL.JoxiciQ^ mQbilitw QLVolmm of the containiBated soils.

I i ^ "^ . . j 1/ ; s.a- Hi ^ J .t t..,' c ^ L ^ ' i i , , '4''E*i:i

'>r " c : J e t j . j ' . J '

vaJMaiS of chrosmiioi-bearmg !• • . • _ i treaimest.

BG&, aitsmaiiv^ provide fcsi' iMili^EE a£fil^^;M£S^S' uoider both alteiiim:ives, ail source coBtaffiiaatiGa wo'ild be removed, frcj;?"" '^'"'^ ^r"

Hie modified reiUKly is sore el ^cj s^H^ISr^ becauss it could be impiemer «0d Oi 1994. Tlie origisal remedy., UL iic ^-Js:i hsBQ, would likely t,akQ t^/o to ihrS'S years losger. However, the mcMiifled remedy ts le^5 proiecli ve ill the sho£t-term &m to risks associated with trissportiog consmicatsd mmerials beeaas.8 ciaomiiHu-beariBg bricks wii! be ixeatad e ^ i l s asd soils would no longer be ixeaied ai alL

Hie modifigd resiedy is more M^JMB^MSM because tiiere are mcsre options tor disposal of CKB. As described above, several existinig cooMnerciai laadfilis are; iBteresi^ m receiviiig the CKD. Moreover, ba^aase soils no loager roiiiii'e tr.eamieat. design and deveiopmeat of a ses-ts^eot system is no longer necKsary. The avail^Hity of as indusixial ose for ihe CKD, fiowever,, is uacertain.

The modified remedy attains the ris.k Temcuon goals established for tise Site i 2If_esMi;( "" . •.;.... i than lhe original resi^My. A CGffi.iserci i.5 i^iditv or indasiriM . pplicatioB would be lis mi for disposal of CKD only it it is more cost effative rhzn constTdcting a landfill. Tlie estimated present wonh cost of tlie inadifled renuaiy is at U^si S68S.^)0 i&ss ilLia the estimated cost of the origijiai remedy,

St _.Md.XfilMBMily=...Ac£e^pt2|iCis will be fully evaiuaisd ai tlie end of the public comment penod.

* Drsit j^iRARs Ibr me Modified Combsnsa Rcmmv sre ^unnrmrrLsn m a memo from Miks hi'.:Cc!-!cy to ine P-'i,Tti£.od Csmcni Site iiis dated Octsb^r 29. 1993. Ths saojcci oi ihc niemo L-i Dr^ft ASAil.^ {or uic pyrU^-io Cemsai ?v»odifi«d CDnib:j^sd Rcasedv." Tfds -iserao s k the AR-

f ' -

UDEQ and EPA Peiseve uiat the nreierrco iiiodified combmed remedy nieew the dif& noid es'aiuatis^ criteria or tiie National ConiiaceJicv VhM (MCP) and provides the besc balaitce of ths remai-tung NCP evaiustmg criteria ai.aong the two aiieraatives. Based on the infonnaEion avaiiable

JDEO and EPA believe me

remeav w;m!d: proscci human heahh. -iml u>^i •mvitonni'Z-m: .\)mpiy widi .-XkUKh's: be &.'Si-etfeaive; and uuli2.e penYis.jier.i solatioo and aiyjmanve treatment iechrjOi-.>g!es or resource recovery ischnologies to iJie maxirsmm (SXtSEi: pract^csbie. Tae modified remedy woaid, in >ati fy tiie preisrence Jor !.reamieih as a priiJ. elesserit.

\mt in soil, air. or waier at which EPA aM the Sute believe

varv from

• Record (AJt); The body of documents upon which EPA ana die State base a cieanup decision at a Superfund Site. By law, ihe

neat the Supammd site. The AR for ihis Site may be found al the Informaiion Repositories iist^ on

of this fact

ism 10 which have high pH (greater than 7L Opposite of

Cesnent KUn Bisst (CKD): A powdery by-product of the ceaem msni^facturmg process. h Is aikaiiae and coEtains eievaied leveis or several heavv

'IRCIA: An abbreviation for Lhe Comprehensive Resp-onse, Compeasacion. and Siipemmd. 42 U.S.C. § 960L e^

seg.. CERCLA is a law passed in I estnbllshM a program to idsatify hazardoBS waste sises. ensure that they are cleaned up, evaluate damages to risturai rssources. and cr^te ciainas procedure's for panses who cieaxied up the sit^.

Fimdam^ntM Chimges: Changes to a Sup-TTuad Site remedy are consider^ fapdamentai, whea they fundanseBtally siter the -ay lo which wastes are ET aaged at the site. Fuodamantai cb^ig^ to a remedy mnst be made through .50 amended ROD.

to be reieas.ed to the environment, is fonod by EFA to pose a substaoiial tnreai to public he?ith, welfere or the eavironmeat.

which is so danserous it must be msiiiaged under especially strict requyrsments, Wasi^ are considered to be hazaxdous if. among othef things, they are highly toxic. igBiiable, corrosive, or coatain eercais other hsxardods characteostics.

s, e.i physical, which prevent individuals trom comisg into cootact with coniaminated pordoos of a

site. Tnese coEtrois include fencing, igfs, d e ^ rastriaions. asd other i^nd-

•ise restricnons.

u reguianohs governing the 5T3p.lememauoh of CERCLA- Tde NC? can be louod ai m CFR Part 300.

The E.PA's Iii the most serious uacontro^led andAir absi has^dous w^te sites. NFL sites axe eligible tor

•oned possible long-mnn eo

Off-sii-e Rule: Aa amendment to iJ e MCP w\\%< regulates the oft'-siis trahsfer of CE11CL.A wasw. The Off-siie mle can be found at 4Q C l ^ Pan 300-440. Toe Off-site .Rule ws^ finalized on September 22., i.:?93, :ui4 became e^eaive m-> October 22, 1993.

Crdt iOUy. .\ term used to describe a certain ponma of a Supertdnd site.

istance: 'Ctidtt CERCLA, my raaseriai which when leieaseci, or when threatened

t>r't' w*.t**ji amd rf mmemxMce iOAM) costs: The ^ ot ensurmg tliai. a resaliai airerBaisve ve.

p«: A mOBsmt of fee acsdiiy or alka.h;r:r., -.ri n liquid or solid iBateriaL

Res&urte Comtmmi&n a mi Rec&veiy .4 a ( R € ^ ) : A FederM law touad at 42 U.S.C. g 6901 s L u ^ ^ that established a reguisteiy system to oracle ha;ard0iis snbstsncs ftom tiie time oi geaeraiionm disposal. The law requires sMe and SKme procsdm'^ to be u s ^ m tteatiBg, trajffiporting, storiag, and disposing of hazardous substasces. Tht regulEtioiis implementiBg RCRA can be foimd al 40 CFR Parts 2 ^ 2 8 1 .

RCRA Si^Me € Emmd^^m Wmte iMMfiU: A disposal facility where waste Is plac^ in or on lam. Subtitle C laiKifills are dispossi sitK for RCRA haardous waste. They are d igmKi to miniimze the cksscg of release of haEardons subsiSBces into the environmeM.

MCSA Si^tMs B Js^dsmrml lai$djm: A disposal f^ility where waMe is piasgd ie or on land-Subtifie D lasifills are disposal sit^ for non-h^atdous solid w^tes.

Remrd iff I^dsm^ (ROB): A public document that explains which cleanup aicersative^s) will be ussd to clean up sit^ listed OB tiie NTL,

' \ " a"' IP' i

fiime^M InyesugGtiiPsz/Fessibiiity S i-.. »* ResKiial Invest!gaiEOa is tm in ^ •> ^ s. d^igBecl to gather th,e data oecessan i the oEtm'e and exisnt of c asmiLS SiiperfiiBd site, U :... .... the altSBMives for cls^isup action?, and i x - . y ' tsdisicai and cost laalyses of tJie flJtoratrv'fs. Th@ Feasibility Smdy Is the as lysis of the p€teMial cleMiup aJtEiraatives for .-' site,

Sigmificam Qm^-ges: Changes to & Sx^p^iiuml site remedy are considered .iMiifi^it wiieE they are insremeotal change lo a c^smposem of a remedy that do not fiimaniehiaily alter the sversii clsan-np approach at the Site. EP'A and th'd State Boti^ the public of sl^fifiMI cfaisges by issuing as Expiaiatioa of Significant Differaaces ts^

VtdM€ EugiFts^rimg: An organb:ai approach to idsntiiymg costs that do sot coistributa msasatalsly to a project's qualiry, effeaiveness or disrabillty.

FOR MORE IHFOMf.lATION, YOU MAY CONTACT:

If yoii have qaestioss or would like more teciinica! iafermMioB, please contact:

Roban M. O^BricB, UDEQ Proiect Manager 1-801-536-410)

For additioLai imormation, you may coataa:

Da.-i-m

mmumVf Eelatioas

-OE' ^0R»

Michael H. McCeasv, EPA Project Manager 1^8(Ki"227-S9!7, Ext. 7169

Hal Dunmng, EPA Commanitv Reiatioas 1"8(K>"227 8917. ExL 1142

.9.

State of Utah Dept. of Environmeeisi Qa^ity Div. of EnviroEmental Resp. & Remediation !950 W^t N o ^ Temsjie S3ltLake C?ry, L T 84H4-^84C^