Case Study : Services Inc.

Assessments began to take place in the mid 1980’s, shortly after the site made the National Priorities list in 1983. Relevant standards and guidance levels were used to measure the effect of the Helen Kramer Landfill. The initiation of the EPA’s remedial investigation and feasibility study deemed the nature of the Helen Kramer landfill as an extreme risk to the environment, characterizing the site “by randomly placed, uncompacted, and uncovered refuse, with numerous settlement cracks which vented methane and water vapor” (2). According to the EPA, several million gallons of chemical wastes and over two million cubic yards of solid waste were estimated to have been disposed of at the landfill (2). Studies were performed by the EPA, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, federal natural resource trustees in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to evaluate the onsite and nearby environmental effects due to the landfill. During these studies, contaminants were detected in air, sediments, and aquifers, including high levels of volatile organic compounds and heavy metals in the air and sediments. VOCS and heavy metals expose humans to carcinogens, developmental toxicants, and reproductive toxicants. The assessments also detected numerous contaminants such as (but not limited to),

The Tar Creek Superfund Project is located in northeastern Oklahoma. It covers parts of Picher, Cardin, Quapaw, North Miami, and Commerce (4). Picher was a small town with a population of around 20,000 people (6). Tar Creek is slowly bringing the town of Picher to its knees. During the 1990’s a study found that the

1) The remedy chosen must attain a degree of cleanup that assures the protection of human health and environment. 2) The hazardous substances that will remain after the cleanup, they must meet the applicable and/or relevant and appropriate requirements under federal and state law (ARARs). 3) The remedy chosen must utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent applicable. 4) There must be cost effective response, taking into consideration total long-and short-term costs of the actions. And 5) It must be in accordance with the NCP to a practicable

The next Superfund that has greatly influenced the environment of Butler County is the Skinner Landfill. The Landfill is on 85 acres in West Chester (2). The facility was privately owned and was never actually licensed, so it closed in the 1970's (5). The landfill contains about 100 drums of chlorinated organics, and heavy metals. Along with the presence of the drums is the fact that a nearby lagoon was once used as a disposal for these contaminants, and that the site had problems with unauthorized dumping (5). Fortunately, no contaminants have been discovered leaving the site (5). The presence of these

McBride Financial Services must control the risk of its use of toxic chemicals. “In its 2009 report Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, the NAS recommended a process to address and communicate the uncertainty and variability inherent in a risk assessment…”

The CHSEP, also is known as the State Superfund Program, administers the assessment of properties not listed on the EPA’s NPL that are suspected to be contaminated with hazardous substances. The CHSEP monitors hazardous site that are known or could potentially be contaminated with CHS or oil through its Brownfield Master Inventory (BMI). Once a potential site is added to the BMI, the CHSEP will attempt to identify the person or organization responsible for the release of hazardous substances. If the responsible party either refused or was unable to perform the necessary remediation work, the CHSEP will use State general funds to conduct assessments and carry out remediation at the contaminated site. The CHSEP also coordinates with the EPA in conducting preliminary investigations of NPL sites. The VCP encourages eligible purchasers and parties responsible for contamination to voluntarily clean up and redevelop brownfield sites.4 In 1997, Governor Parris N. Glendening singed Maryland's Brownfields Legislation (Senate Bill 340/House Bill 409) into law by, which allowed for the establishment of the VCP and the Brownfields Revitalization Incentive Program (BRIP). The VCP works to facilitate the reuse of eligible brownfield sites contaminated CHS substances or oil since October 2004. Applicants seeking to enroll a property in the VCP must submit a Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessment, a $6,000 application fee, and any other information required by the Maryland VCP. After reviewing the application, the MDE will notify the applicant whether the application is approved, incomplete, or denied. There are two types of final site approval documents: a No Further Requirements Determination (NFRD) or a Certificate of Completion (COC). A NFRD is a notice by the MDE that the

The article, "PFOS found almost 31 times EPA's advisory level at Issaquah well", is about an incident that happened in Issaquah, WA where the wells in the city displayed a level high of perfluorooctane sulfonate. The displayed level of PFOS was extremely higher than the advisory level provided by the Enviornmental Protection Agency. The Monitoring Wells No. 6, 5 and 3 were all tested for PFOS, and the results for all three wells were higher than EPA's standards. The Eastside Fire and Rescue headquarters is believed to be the source of the PFOS because Monitoring Well No. 5 and 6 are located "about 500 feet downgradient" from the headquarters. The soil of Eastside Fire and Rescue have been sampled three times, and all three samples contained

The superfund site program established by the federal government is when the EPA interferes to clean up an area that has been left poisoned, normally by

Despite the ongoing issues about Superfunds being an effective means of proper regulations, Superfunds allow the usage of the land that once was contaminated. By allowing the Superfund some flexibility, the superfund should be monitored on some sort of level to follow through with the process of the cleanup. Limiting (and monitoring) the flexible contaminated levels prevents the land from becoming overly contaminated (harming humans and the environment) and suggests that the cleanup show improvements. By limiting the flexible requirements, it prevents the unwanted actions of the Superfund causing more damage then there was previously. For example; situations such as the Love Canal located in Niagara Falls, New York the Superfund stated the following: “Complaints about odors and residues were first reported at the site during the 1960’s, and increased in the 1970’s as the water level rose, bringing contaminated ground water to the surface” (EPA, 2012). The Superfund should also have limited regulations which monitor the amount of hazardous wastes that is allowed in the site. In some regards, the Superfund should show proper representation of the hazardous wastes increasingly residing. Without this type of representation (or exceeding the limits within) the cleanup process should be put to a halt and find

Although, the Superfund program is making a visible and lasting difference in communities by cleaning up nation’s worst hazardous waste site, a threat to public health and our natural environment, enhancing the quality of life and leading to advances in technology. This process is taking years for implementation which is affecting the resident near contaminants and also the nation’s money, making it expensive and unfair for some

Contaminated sediments are a significant problem in the Great Lakes basin. To reduced the discharge of toxic and persistent chemicals to the Great Lakes we must concentrations of contaminants in the bottom of rivers and harbors and have to raised considerable concern about potential risks to aquatic organisms, wildlife, and

As a result, it became overloaded with dangerous chemicals and heavy metals such as copper, arsenic, cadmium, zinc and sulfuric acid that leached from the rock. It soon became a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund site. A Superfund site is any land in the U.S. that has been contaminated by hazardous waste. Identified by the EPA as a candidate for cleanup, superfund sites pose extreme risk to human health and/or the environment. These sites are placed on the National Priorities List. Obviously, superfund sites also pose a tremendous threat ecologically to wildlife, including migrating

Through CERCLA, the EPA established a National Priorities List (NPL) of the most contaminated sites nationwide. The list contains both federal and non-federal sites that post the greatest risk to humans and the environment. Proposed, established and deleted sites categorize the NPL; a Hazardous Ranking System (HSR) screening is conducted to determine the site’s status. The NPL is updated periodically. The NPL sites are funded either by the responsible parties, the Trust Fund or other divisions of the federal government (Barden, 2012).

Mentors: Environmental Scientist/Hydrogeologist/Geologist/ Environmental Engineers, Underground Injection Control (UIC) Unit in Region 8 U.S. EPA.

DePue, Illinois, has been overlooked by ExxonMobil for decades. Being one of the small towns among many in the Illinois Valley, DePue doesn't get much attention from outsiders. Despite that fact, DePue is known for being on the national priority list (NPL) and having one of the most complicated Superfund sites (Illinois EPA). Ever since the discovery of harmful contaminants in DePue soil and lake, residents have been trying to find a solution. To ensure the safety of DePue residents, ExxonMobil needs to take responsibility of the contaminants found in DePue by cleaning the mess themselves or funding a clean-up.