NCD980799019_19960531_Cherokee Oil_FRBCERCLA RMVL_Immediate Removal 1991 - 1996-OCR

· SENT '3Y:E R R B
1'4J:e. -lj!..:.:s~.. ~ ~*
~-;c·
E P A REGION .JV➔
.. .' ,, .•
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
& REMOVAL BRANCH
919 733 4811;# 1/10
~J OIL • RUARDOU9 8Cll!ll!C1$•; U.S. EPA REGION IV . RECEIVED
345 COURTLAND STREET N.E. c::!
TO:
PRO
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30365
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
REGIONAL RESPONSE CENTER
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
\)t:,u-3 '(v\a~re...
TELEPHONE:
MAY 311996
SUPERFUND SECTION
.,.----, ' FROM: ___ -=_~"i--"'-·.,.__r_· _\_,\/\_;__ _________ _
TELEPHONE:
. NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
MESSAGE:
IF THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE IS RECEIVED POORLY OR INCOMPLETF,,
PLEASE NOTIFY SENDER.
SENT ·3Y:E R R B · 5-31-96 •• 15:32 919 733 4811;# 2/10
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
345 COURTLAND 5TAEET, N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
4WD-ERRB
ACTION MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT•
FROM:
TO: Joseph R. Franzmathes, Director
waste ManAgQfflent Division
Site ID: WD
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to request and document approval of the proposed removal action described herein for the Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site (the Site), Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, North Carolina.
II. SITE CONDITIONS ANO BACKGROUND
A. Site Description
,
J ;-
1. Removal Site Evaluation -On August 26-27, 1994, the Emergency Response & Rrunoval BrAnch (ERJW) conducted a site investigation at this facility which fonnerly operated as a waste oil handling facility which allegedly blended hazardous wastes with non-hazardous waste. Company officials are currently awaiting sentencing after being convicted of Clean Water Act (CWA) violations for disposal of oil and chemioals into the city sewer.
Approximately 1000 drums in various stages of deterioration ..ere observed closely stored dlld precariously stacked on the facility p:.:operty. In addition to the drums, approximately 13 aboveground tanks, 2 tanker.trailers, and l roll-off, Stl8pected to contain hllz4r<lous .sul;)stances, are abandoned on-site. During the investigation, a large quantity of oily waste material, suspected to have leaked.from the drums and tanks, was observed covering the ground on-site. There was evidence that waste material is migrating onto adjoining properties.
r · SENT £Y:E RR B • 5-31-96 [5:32 919 733 4811;# 3/10
Samples collected during the investigation confirmed
the presence of numerous hazardous substances including
ethylbenzene, 1,1,1 trichloroethane, styrene,
chlorobenzene, and nwnerous drums containing corrosive
liquids.
2. Physical Location -The Site is located at 1201
Berryhill Road, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Drums stored on-site are located within a few feet of a
busy city street and the Site is closely bordered by
two operating businesses. During the investigation
heavy pedestrian traffic was observed along the road
bordering the facility. The area consists of urban
mixed residential and light industry.
3. Site Characteristics -The Site was fo:cmerly the
location of the Cherokee Oil Company, who accepted
waste oil and various hazardous substances for
processing and shipment to other facilities. It-is
suspected, based on observations during the
investigation, sample results from the· ERRB
investigation, and a previous RCRA invastigation, that
the facility was accepting hazardous substances and
hazardous waste that it was not permitted to accept and
blending this material with waste oils. The owner and
operator of the facility were convicted of CWA
violations in Federal court and t~ey are currently
awaiting sentencing. f '
The Berryhill Road facility is associated with the
Cherokee Oil-Summit Avenue superfund Removal Site at
which EPA ERRB conducted an extensive removal beginning
in August 1991 and concluding in March 1993. Tha EPA
spent in excess of$ 3 million to mitigate the
bmnediate threats posed by the waste stored at the
Summit Avenue location. The Berryhill Road facility
was used by Cherokee Oil as a waute processing
facility, and the Summit Avenue site was used for
storage of various waste. Tha operator of both -
facilities, Keith Eidson, informed the OSC during the
investigation that both facilities are no longer operating.
4, Release or Threatened Release Into thg Enviroruaent of a
Hazardous Substance, or Pollutant or Contaminant -BPA
has determined that a release of a hazardous substance
ae defined by section 101(14) of CERCLA has occurred at
the Site. Ana1ytical dGta and field testing reeu1ts
indicate the presence of numerous hazardous subetances
including, but not limited to, chlorobenzene,
tetrachloroethene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, bis-
phthalate, naphthalene, lead, and chromiillll,
· SENT·BY:E RR B · 5-31-86 • 15:32 919 733 48]];# 4/10
In addition to the hazardous substances detected in the ERRB investigation samples, field testing during the investigation indicated that nine of sixteen drum samples collected during the investigation had pH levels below 2.0 unlts or exceeding 12.5 units which classifies this abandoned material a hazardous waste based on the characteristic of corrosivity. Hunch:ads of other drums on-site have corrosive labels indicating that they likely contain materials similarly classified as a hazardous waste,
The caustic and acid liquids contained in these drums are incompatible with the numerous drums containing organic materials stored on-site. Reaction between the two materials could result in fire or explosion, exposing nearby businesses and residents to hazardous fumes.
In addition to the drums, an estimated 125,000 gallons of waste oil contaminated with various hazardous-substances 1B currently stored 1n tanks, vats, tanker trailers, and tank dike areos on-site. An oily sludge covers the ground and two dike areas full of oily liquid are near over-topping. The osc observed staining and residue where an oily liquid was migrating off-site onto an operating business during rain events, Also, off-site contaminant migration could reach the city sewer system and pose an exp~osion hazard.
;
5. NPL Status -The Site is not currently listed on the NPL. It is likely that once the removal is completed the site will not have sufficient threats to warrant ranking on the NPL; however, all information generated during the removal will be made available to the EPA Site Assessment Branch for evaluation.
6. Maps and Other Graphic Representations -All removal file information, whJ.ch includes photos, sketches, maps, etc., will be maintained by the OSC, and rele~ed to the EPA record center for inclusion in the 1i'ita file.
B. Other Actions to Date
1, Previous Actions -In July 1991, a criminal
inveatigation wae conducted by the EPA Hazardous Waste Section, the EPA CJ:-iminal Investigation Division, the Office of the FBI, and several other supporting agencies. A cx:iminal. search warrant was served to the operator of the facility, and a site investigation was
•
· SENT·BY:E RR B • 5-31-96 15:33 E P A REG Ii Jy-, 919 733 4811;# 5/10
conducted at the both the Cherokee Oil-Berry Hill Road location and the Cherokee Oil-Suromit Avenue location. From August 1991 to March 1993 the EPA ERRB conducted an extensive removal action at the Cherokee Oil-Swnmit Avenue location.
As a result of the criminal inv-estigation, the owner and operator of Cherokee Oil were convicted of criminal charges for Clean Water Act violations related to discharge of hazardous substances to the Charlotte sewer system. They are currently awaiting sentencing.
2. Current Actions -There are no current remediation or additional investigatory actions for this Site. The osc is aware that the Charlotte Fire Department has been attempting to gain access to the Site to conduct an inspection, but they have been denied access by the operator of the facility.
c. State and Local Authorities Role
1. State and Local Actions to Date -The State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health m1d Natural Resources (DEHNR) has issued Cherokee Oil a Notice of Violation for solid and hazardous waste regulation violations, The operator of Cherokee Oil has denied the DEHNR violations stated in the NOV, In a January 1994 letter, the DEHNR requested that the EPA ERRB evaluate the Site for a possible removal action. I The DEHNR, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utility Department, and the Mecklenburg County Environmental Protection Agency participated in the July 1991 investigation of the Berryhill Road and SUllllllit Avenue Cherokee Oil facilities. Several of these local agencies provided testimony and evidence for the criminal trial that was concluded in August 1994,
2. Potential for Continued State/Local Response -The DRHNR has requested that EPA undertake a remo~al action at the Berryhill Road site. Since the cr:i.,ninai trial is over, and the ERRB will be conducting the removal action if this memorandum is approved, there will be limited direct involvement by the state or local aqencies related to the EPA removal, The OSC will contact these agencies to determine what resouroos they can provide to assist in the removal action.
III. THRHATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE OR THB ENVIRONMENT
A. Threat to Public Health or Welfare
The EPA ERRB has determined that a release of a hazardous substance into the environment has occurred
. SENT BY:E RR B • 5-31-96 15:33 919 733 4811:g 6/10
at the Site, as defined by Section 101 of CERCLA and
established in Section 102, Part 302/Table 302.4 of
CERCLA. Summarized below are the specific criteria
from Section 300.415(b)(2) of the National Contingency
Plan (NCP) that the Site meets for initiating a removal
action baaed on threats to public health or welfare.
The Site poses an actual or potential exposure to
hazardous substances by nearby populations. Over 1000
drums, many leaking, are stored in close proximity to a
busy road. Drum samples indicated the presence of
numeroue hazardous substances including volatile and
semi-volatile compounds such as benzene, methylene
chloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, acetone, and
naphthalene. Some of the drums, tanks, and vats on-
site are suspected to have already leaked onto the
ground. A sample from the waste material covering the
ground indicated the presence of hazardous substances
including benzene, chloroben2ene, methylene chloride,
acetone, and xylene. During the investigation, t]!.e OSC
observed an area on the back-side of the facilit:fwhere
waste material is migrating ott-site onto the adjacent
business parking lot where exposure could occur.
The Site also meets NCP criteria related to fire and
explosion potential. Many of the drums contain
corrosive materials which may be incompatible with the
large quantity at organic liquids stored on-site. A
fire or explosion would necessitate the evacuation of
hundreds of people from businesse,i and homes around tha
Site due to the potential for exposure to hazardous
fumes.
There a.re hundreds of dr=, numerous tanks, vats,
dikes full of waste liquids, and other bulk storage
containers. that pose a threat of release. There is
. over 100,000 gallons of waste liquids and sludges
stored in the open top vats and tanks. Several of
these tanks appear to be leaking onto the ground anCI.
into the UmQB.i.ntained dikes, Numerous drums are
stacked precariously on pallets di.rectly adjace·nt to
the road and could easily fall during high winds or
rain.
As previously stated the ground in covered w1th wo.ute
liquid and sludge. The majority of the Sito ie
believed to be covered with a concrete pad which
facilitates off-site migration. Stormwater runoff
carries contlSlllina.tion off-site and eventual leads to
the city sewer syutem. The operator of the facility
has been convicted fo~ past illegal discharges to the
city sewer.
· SENT· BY:E R R B • 5-31-86 15:33 EPA REG, IV-> 919 733 4811:# 7/10
B. Threat to the Environment
There are hazardous substances in drums, tanks, vats,
and other bulk storage containers that may pose a
threat of relea:,e. The containers are deteriorating
and numerous containers are leaking.
There is an actual or potential exposure to hazardous
substances to nearby animals or the food chain. During
the ERRB site investigation a bird was observed trapped
in the oily liquids in a dike 41:ea, The bird was
rescued and cleaned, but later died at the ani.mal
shelter due to exposure to the waste.
IV, ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
The actual and tru:eatened releases of hazardous aubstruicea
from the Site, if not addressed by implementing the n>uponse
action selected in this memorandum, will present an lJl!llli,nent
and substantial endangerment to public health, or welfare,
or the environment.
V. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
A. Proposed Actions
l. Proposed Action Description -The ERRB will utilize the
ERCS contractor to sample, secure, and characterize the
various waste streams on-site. }faterials determined to
contain hazardous substances that pose a threat will be
treated on-site and/or transported to and disposed of
at a permitted disposal/treatment facility. All off-
aite disposal will comply with EPA's off-site disposal
policy.
2. Contribution to Remedial Perfo:i:mance -The Site is not
currently on the NPL. The proposed removal actions
will not impede future remedial responses based on the
available infonnation, and data generated during the
removal will be forwardM to the Site Assessmerit•Branch
for consideration.
J. Description ot Alternate Technologies -Disposal
options wil1 be evaluated at a later date during the removal action.
4. Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARARS)
The potential Federal ARAR's for the proposed removal
action at the Site are those portions of the Resource
Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA) dealing with land
·, disposal restrictions and storage of a hazardous waste.
· SENT•BY:E RR B ; 5-31-96 • 15:34 EPA REG Ii IV.., 919 733 4811:# 8/10
The ERRB intends to comply, to the extent practicable, with the substantive requirement5 for these ARAR's.
The RCRA and Department of Transportation requirements for transportation of a hazardous waste were determined to be applicable to any off-site actions. Therefore, the ERRB will comply with the administrative and substantive requirements which may be applicable.
No State ARAR's have been identified yet as substantively additional ARAR's. These requirements will be evaluated as they are identified during the removal and complied with if applicable,
5. EE/CA -This is a time critical removal not requiring an EE/CA.
6. Project schedule -Upon approval of this memorandwn, the ERRll removal would be initiated within two weeks. The first phase of the project will involve arunpling and securing the drums, tanks, and other bulk containers on-site. Due to the large quantities of containers on-site and the limited working space, the firat phase of the project will take approximately four months. The total projeot including ultimate treatment/disposal of any waste matgrials is estimated to take approximately eleven months.
B, f;stimated Costs
Extramural Costs
Regional Allowance Costs: Clean-up Contractor Costs
(15% Contingency Applied)
Other Extramural Costs,
TAT costs1
subtotal, Extramural Costs:
Extramural Contingency (20%)
Total, Extramural Costs:
Intramural costs
Direct Costs1
Indirect Costs:
Total, 1ntr&11ura1 Costs:
Total Project Ceiling:
,
J .I
$1,450,000
$ 75,000
$1,525,000
s :ms ,ooo
$1,830,000
$ 15,000
$ 27,000
$ 42,000
$1,872,000
SENT.BY:E RR B • 5-31-96 15:34 E p A REGI IV-> 919 733 4811;# 9/10
VI. EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED OR
NOT TAKEN
If action is delayed or not taken, the risks posed to the
public health or welfare and the environment would increase.
Delayed action will increase public health risks to the
adjacent population through expoBure to off-site migration
of contaminants from leaking containers or via contact with
airborne emissions should a fire occur.
VII. OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES
None.
VIII. ENFORCEMENT
See Enforcement Sensitive Information Attached.
IX. RECOMMENDATION
Because conditions at the Site meet the NCP section 300.415
criteria for a removal, I recommend your approval of this
removal request. The estimated total project costs are
$1,872,000, of which $1,450,000 are for the extramural
cleanup contractor costs. You may indicate your approval or
disapproval by signing below. Approv~w~~:.:::~
Disapprove; _________ _ Date; _____ _
· SENT. BY:E R R B • 5-31-96 E F A REGi IV.., 919 733 4811:#10/10
ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE
Mr. Keith Ridson and Mr. Gabe Hartsell, the operator and
owner, respectively, of Cherokee Resources (Cherokee Oil)
are responsible parties for the Berryhill Road Site. The
EPA determined that both parties were not financially
capable of undertaking the removal action at the Cherokee
Oil Summit Avenue Sita in 1991-19931 therefore, they are not
currently considered viable responsible parties to undertake
the clean-up at the Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site. Both
parties are currently awaiting sentencing in Federal court
for CWA violations. It is likely that both individua1s·w111
be aerving jail time for these violations.
During the removal at Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site, EPA
will be generating Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)
information from drwn label information and other records
available on-site. EPA will determine the viability 6t any
PRP's identified and undertake the appropriate anforca,nant
action.
NC SUPERFUND SECTION Fax:[phone] • • ** Transmit Conf.Report **
Ma~ 14 '96 9:38
NC SUPERFUND SECTION ---> 82158511420
No. 0002
Mode NORMAL
Time 0'34"
Pages 1 Page(s)
Result 0 K
1s:2s APR 28, 1993 ID= USEPA SUPERFUND TEL NO= 603-9204 ~----===----'------===--:-------------(7:i
\_~ '
SUPERFUND
RESPONSE ALERT
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
CHEROKEE OIL REMOVAL SITE
SUPERFUND REMOVAL COMPLETION
Wednesday, April 28, 1993
U.S. EPA's Region IV Superfund program completed a removal action at the
Cherokee Oil Removal site, Charlotta, North Carolina on March 17, 1993.
Approximately 6,000 drums were found on-site with mixed storage of incompatible
wastes. Thirteen tractor trailers loaded with drums had apparently bean parked on-
site for months, along w~h a tanker trailer and two liquid-containing tank trucks.
Drum contents included cyanides, acids, oxidizers, and organic materials. U.S.
EPA's Suparfund program started this removal on September 4, 1991.
Superfund secured the site, bulked and containerized loose waste and debris,
overpacked and staged deteriorating drums, and crushed empty drums. Superfund
also sampled and excavated contaminated soil, arranged for transport to
appropriate disposal facilities, and took other measures to rid the site of hazardous
wastes. Final activities included cleaning the parking lot and the floor of the
building, and complete repair and installation of fencing around the lot and building.
The costs of the removal action are estimated at approximately $6.5 million.
, The one-acre Cherokee Oil site is a non-permitted temporary storage facility for
wastes located in a light industrial sector of Charlotte. Bordered by business
establishments, it is within one mile of four hospitals and numerous residences.
If you have any questions regarding this removal, please contact Katie Daly of the Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response at [phone].
Post-it® Fax Note 7671 D #Of ►1-ate ~-/'f·"l' pages
Pnst-W' Fax Note 7671 Date~-N-"l' o'a8~,► 1-
From-z:.,U6 /'v1 c~J:
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION4
3◄5 COURTLAND STREET, N.E.
AT LANT A GEORGIA 3036S
NOV O 2 1995
Mr. Michael Kelly, Deputy Director
Solid Waste Management Division
NC Division of Solid Waste Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, ~iarolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. ~y; ·
RECEIVED
NOV 13 1995
We are pleased to provide a copy of the Action Memorandum
for 12 Month Statutory Limit Exemption at the Cherokee Oil-
Berryhill Road Site, Charlotte, North Carolina. If you have any
questions or comments concerning this document, please contact
the On-Scene Coordinator at the following address:
Steve Spurlin
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Response & Removal Branch
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
404-347-3931, VMX 6135
Enclosure
Removal Branch
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
HS COURTLAND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
NOV O 2 1995
4WD-ERRB
ACTION MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Request for Exemption from the 12 Month Statutory Limit
at the Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site, Charlotte,
North Carolina·
FROM: Steve Spurlin
On-Scene Coordinator
Emergency Response & Removal Branch
TO: Joseph R. Franzmathes, Director
Waste Management Division
Site ID#: WD
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to request and
document approval of an emergency exemption :from the 12 Month
Statutory Limit. This request is made in a~ effort to continue
removal actions at the Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site ("Site"),
located at 1201 Berryhill Road, Charlotte, North Carolina.
Additional time is needed to continue and complete the removal
actions necessary to eliminate the imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health, welfare, and the environment posed
by the hazardous substances remaining at the Site.
II. SITE CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND
Please refer to the September 9, 1994, Action Memorandum
(see attachment) for the general site conditions and background
information. The following information discusses current site
conditions and updates the status of the removal information.
A. Site Description
1. Current Site Conditions
The original Action Memorandum was approved September 9,
1994, and the removal was initiated November 2, 1994. An
• •
2
Action Memorandum for a Removal Action Ceiling Increase with
Exemption from the $2 Million Statutory Limit was approved
June 19, 1994 (see attachment). Ongoing actions and actions
remaining include the following:
a. Bulking and disposal of the remaining 750 drums
comprising ten (10) different wastestreams.
b. Bulking and disposal of the sludges from the
aboveground tanks.
c. Excavation of nine (9) underground tanks and
disposal of· the sludges contained in these tanks.
d. Excavation and disposal of contaminated soils as
determined by the OSC.
e. Site restoration.
The limited work space on-site, along with the large volume
of varying wastestreams, presents a logistical problem in
handling, treating, and disposing of the wastes. For instance, a
large crane had to be used to lower the remaining aboveground
tanks because the tanks had to be cut-up in order to remove the
sludges .. This type of logistic problem has extended the project
schedule.·
: Therefore, the 12 month exemption is ~eeded to continue the
handling, transportation, and disposal of the remaining
wastestreams.
Should this exemption request not be approved, the worst-
case scenario would involve the drums currently secured across
the street from the Site. The drums are extremely deteriorated,
and if the drums are not dealt with in the near future they will
likely release their contents resulting in exposing the
neighborhood, located within 100 feet of the Site, to potentially
toxic materials.
2. Physical Location
The physical location is consistent with the description
provided in attached September 1994 and June 1995 Action
Memorandums.
3. Site Characteristics
The Site. characteristics are consistent with the description
provided in the September 1994 Action Memorandum.
• •
3
4. Release or Threatened Release Into the Environment of a
Hazardous Substance, or Pollutant or Contaminant
Information regarding a release or threatened release into
the environment of a hazardous substance remains consistent with
the description provided in the September 1994 and June 1995
Action Memorandums with the following updated information:
Wastestream classification for the .second group of 1400
drums has been completed since approval of the June 1995 Actio.n
Memorandum. Wastestreams similar to the those identified for the
first 1400 drums are present in the second group. These include
the following groups: Peroxide liquids, peroxide solids,
sulfides, organic acid chlorinated liquids, oxidizing acid
liquids, oxidizing base chlorinated liquids, flammable organic
chlorinated liquids, and organic solids. Total volume for the
remaining.750 drums is estimated at 41,000 gallons.
Releases from the remaining deteriorating drums pose a threat
of migration of hazardous substances into the city sewer system
and the nearby creek. A fire would release potentially toxic
fumes into the adjacent neighborhoods and businesses. Migration
of the hazardous substances continues to pose a direct contact
threat to everyone in close proximity to the Site.
5. NPL Status
;
The Site is not listed on the NPL. The/Remedial Site
Assessment will be undertaken after the removal action is
completed. The North Carolina Department of Health, Environment,
and Natural Resources (DEHNR) has visited the Site to begin
determining the scope of their site assessment.
6. Maps, pictures and other graphic representations.
A photo log documenting past and current removal
actions. is available upon request.
B. Other Actions to Date
1. Previous Actions
Previous actions remain consistent with those actions
described in the September 1994 and June 1995 Action Memorandums.
2. Current Actions
The ERRB continues to utilize the ERCS contractor to conduct
removal actions consisting of removal, solidification, and off-
site disposal of the waste sludges contained in the remaining
four (4) above-ground storage tanks, and the bulking and disposal
of the liquids and sludges from the remaining drums.
• •
4
c. State and Local Authorities Role
1. State and Local Actions to Date
State and local actions remain the same as documented in the
previous Action Memorandums. The North Carolina DEHNR has
visited the Site during the removal to aid in planning the future
State site assessment.
2. Potential for Continued State/Local Response
Please see the previous Action Memorandums.
III. THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE OR THE ENVIRONMENT
The Site continues to pose the same threats to the public
health or·welfare as previously addressed in September 1994 and
June 1995 Action Memorandums.
IV. ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from
this Site, if not addressed by continued implementation of the
response action selected in this Action Memorandum, may present
an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, or
welfare, or the environment.
i
V. EXEMPTION FROM STATUTORY LIMITS
This Action Memorandum seeks an exemption from the 12 month
statutory limit based on the emergency exemption. A $2 million
statutory limit exemption was approved in the June 1995 Action
Memorandum based on the emergency exemption criteria. The
emergency criteria specified in the June memorandum is also
applicable for this 12 month exemption request. Section
104(c)(l)(A) of CERCLA allows an emergency exemption to the
statutory limit if the following criteria are met.
A. There is an immediate risk to public health or welfare
or the environment:
The Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site in its present
state continues to pose an immediate risk to public health
or the environment. The threat will continue to exist, and
likely worsen, if the removal actions outlined in the
previous memorandums are not continued. Volatile,
flammable, corrosive, carcinogenic, and reactive substances
are contained in the 750 drums which remain in the drum
staging area adjacent to a densely populated neighborhood.
These incompatible substances are stored next to each other
• •
5
in deteriorating drums, presenting a high risk of
fire/explosion and subsequent spread of toxic fumes to the
nearby residences and businesses.
Runoff from a fire response would likely result in the
release of hazardous substances to a nearby creek. The
drums are in poor condition, and continued exposure to the
weather would result in hazardous substance releases which
would pose an immediate direct contact threat when
contaminated rain runoff migrates to adjacent yards,
businesses, and the public roadway.
B. Continued response actions are immediately required to
prevent, limit, or mitigate an emergency:
Continued response actions are immediately required to
prevent a fire/explosion emergency situation resulting from
the release of incompatible substances from the
deteriorating drums. Also, nearby residents and passers-by
would be in immediate danger to exposure (inhalation,
absorption, and ingestion) to toxic materials. The drum
staging area is bordered by a neighborhood, businesses, a
busy roadway, and a city bus stop, increasing the need for
an.immediate and continued response.
Site conditions will not improve, but will only worsen
if the removal can not continue past 1~ months. November 2,
1995, is the end of 12 months of site pctivity at which time
there will still be approximately 300~400 drums and 200-300
tons of hazardous waste sludges remaining on-site.
Appropriate disposal of the waste that remains on-site
will prevent future releases of hazardous substances into
the air, soil, and surface water. Removal of the drums and
tank sludges is the only means of eliminating the threat to
human health and the environment from a release of hazardous
substances from a fire/explosion or other mechanisms of
release from the drum and tanks.
C. Assistance will not otherwise be provided on a timely
basis:
The State and local governments do not have the
appropriate resources to properly and timely undertake site
maintenance or continue the removal actions.
EPA has collected some information which may identify
viable potential responsible parties (PRP's); however, this
information will take an extensive amount of time to
evaluate. Therefore, no PRP's will be able to abate the
potential emergency threats at the Site on a timely basis.
• •
6
VI. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
A. Proposed Actions
1. Proposed Action Description
The proposed actions for this 12 month exemption request are
consistent with the actions outlined in the September 1994 and
June 1995 Action Memorandums.
Currently, 750 drums., 4 above-ground tanks, 9 underground
tanks, and an undetermined .quantity of contaminated soil
containing hazardous substances remain on-site.
Approval of this Action Memorandum request is needed to
continue and implement the following proposed actions:
Removal, stabilization, and disposal of approximately 200
tons .of hazardous sludge remaining in the aboveground tanks.
Removal, stabilization, and disposal of an undetermined
quantity of hazardous sludge from the underground tanks.
Re~oval, stabilization, and disposal of the liquids and
sludges from the remaining 750 drums.
Excavation of contaminated soils as ne9essary.
Site restoration. /
2. Contribution to Remedial Performance
This Site is not currently on the NPL. The removal
actions to date and the completion of the removal pursuant
to approval of this document will abate the immediate
threats identified in the Action Memorandums. The removal
actions will not impede future remedial responses based on
the available information, and data generated during the
removal will be available to the EPA Remedial Branch for
consideration during future evaluation of the Site.
3. Description of Alternate Technologies
See June 1995 Action Memorandum.
4. Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARAR's) -See September 1994 Action Memorandum.
• •
7
5. Project Schedule
Removal actions began November 2, 1994. The tentative
schedule for the proposed removal actions is as follows:
a. Stabilization and disposal of the tank sludge:
October through December, 1995
b. Drum waste handling, bulking, and disposal: October
through November, 1995
c. Excavation and disposal of contaminated soil:
November through December, 1995
d. Site restoration: one to two weeks (after completion
of all other actions)
These continued response actions are dependent upon
approval of this Action Memorandum.
B. Estimated Costs
Estimated costs are detailed in the June 1995 Action
Memorandum which documents approval of an exemption from the $2
million.limit.
VII. EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED OR
NOT TAKEN /
This Section remains consistent with the attached September
1994 and June 1995 Action Memorandums.
VIII. OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES
As stated in the September 1994 Action Memorandum, there
are no outstanding policy issues.
IX. ENFORCEMENT
See previous Action Memorandums.
• •
8
X. RECOMMENDATION
Conditions at the Site meet the criteria for the CERCLA
104(c) emergency exemption, and I recommend your approval of an
exemption from the 12 month statutory limitation to allow a
continued removal response. The total project ceiling is
$3,940,000 of which an estimated $3,000,000 will be funded from
the Regional removal allowance.
Disapprove: Date:
I
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
345 COURTLAND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
JUil I J li95
4WD-ERRB
ACTION MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Request for Removal Action Ceiling Increase with
Exemption from the $2 Million Statutory Limit at the
Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site, Charlotte, North
Carolina
FROM: Steve Spurlin~~
On-Scene Coordinator
Emergency Response & Removal Branch
TO: Richard D. Green, Associate Director
Office of Superfund and Emergency Response
Waste Division
Site IDit: WD
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to request and
document approval of a ceiling increase and an emergency
exemption from the $2 Million Statutory Limit. This request is
made in an effort to continue removal actions at th'i:i · Cherokee
Oil-Berryhill Road Site ("Site"), located at 1201 Berryhill Road,
Charlotte, North Carolina. Additional funds are needed to
complete actions necessary to eliminate the imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, and the
environment posed by the hazardous substances remaining at the
Site.
II. SITE CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND
Please refer to the previous September 9, 1994, Action
Memorandum (see attachment) for the general site conditions and
background information. The following information discusses
current site conditions and updates the status of the removal
information.
A.
• •
2
Site Description
1. Current Site Conditions
The original Action Memorandum was approved September 9,
1994, and the removal was initiated November 2, 1994.
Actions to date include the following:
a. Re-location, staging, and sampling of 2851 drums, 12
aboveground tanks, 9 underground tanks, and 2 tanker
trailers.· The drums had to be re-located to a
secure area across the street from the Site due to
inadequate working space on-site.
b. A mobile on-site lab has completed hazard
categorization (hazcat) testing and PCB screening
for all samples. The data has been entered into
EPA's Drum Trak program.
c. Bulk sampling for the first 1400 drums is complete
and the analytical results to be used for disposal
are pending.
d. Off-site waste disposal to date includes the
following:
Approximately 110,000 gallons of hazardous
flammable liquids from the tanks transported to a
RCRA permitted facility.
Approximately 100,000 gallons of non-RCRA
regulated wastewater contaminated with hazardous
substances.
Approximately 700 cubic yards of non-RCRA
regulated solidified sludge containing hazardous
substances.
Approximately 100 tons of debris contaminated
with hazardous substances.
Site conditions which support this ceiling increase
request include the following:
The exact drum count (2851) far exceeded initial
estimates (i.e. approx. 1000) which results in
higher handling and disposal costs.
Nine (9) large underground tanks containing over
100,000 gallons of waste liquids were discovered
after the initiation of the removal resulting in
higher handling and disposal costs.
• •
3
Preliminary testing of some waste materials
indicates that the material will have to be
classified as a RCRA hazardous waste which falls
under more stringent Land Disposal Restrictions
(LDR's), essentially dictating that the waste be
incinerated, which drastically increases disposal
costs.
The limited workspace on-site, along with the large volume
of waste, presents a logistical problem in handling, treating,
and disposing of the wastes. Logistic problems have extended the
project schedule and thus the total costs of the removal actions.
Therefore, the ceiling increase will be used to cover the
costs to handle, transport and dispose of the additional waste
volumes listed above, and cover the additional disposal costs
resulting from recent changes in the LDR's.
Should this ceiling increase not be approved, the worst-case
scenario would involve the drums currently secured across the
street from the Site. The drums are extremely deteriorated, and
if the drums are not dealt with in the near future they will
likely release their contents resulting in exposing the
neighborhood, located within 100 feet of the Site, to potentially
toxic·materials.
2. Physical Location
The physical location is consistent with the description
provided in the September 1994 Action Memorandum, with the
following updated information: An access agreement was secured
by EPA for utilization of property located at 1200 Drum Street.
This property is directly across the street from the Cherokee
facility, and it has been utilized by EPA to stage and secure
2850 drums.
3. Site Characteristics
The Site characteristics are consistent with the description
provided in the September 1994 Action Memorandum.
4. Release or Threatened Release Into the Environment of a
Hazardous Substance, or Pollutant or Contaminant
Information regarding a release or threatened release into
the environment of a hazardous substance remains consistent with
the description provided in the September 1994 Action Memorandum
with the following updated information:
Hazardous waste, and therefore hazardous substances,
currently identified include the following RCRA waste codes: D001
(ignitable), D002 (corrosive), D003 (reactive), D004 (arsenic),
• •
4
0005 (barium), 0006 (cadmium), 0007 (chromium), 0008 (lead), 0009
(Mercury), 0018 (benzene), 0039 (tetrachloroethylene), and 0040
(trichloroethylene).
In addition to the above hazardous substances, the following
waste streams have been identified for the first 1400 drums:
Peroxide liquids, peroxide solids, organic acid chlorinated
liquids, Organic acid solid, PCB solid, PCB liquid, flammable
organic chlorinated liquid, and organic solid. Total volume for
these 1400 drums is estimated at 70,000 gallons. Over 1400 drums
remain to be characterized.
Releases from the deteriorating drums pose a threat of
migration of hazardous substances into the city sewer system and
the nearby creek. A fire would release potentially toxic fumes
into the adjacent neighborhoods and businesses. Migration of the
hazardous substances continues to pose a direct contact threat to
everyone in close proximity to the Site.
S. NPL Status
The Site is not listed on the NPL. The Remedial Site
Assessment will be undertaken after the removal action is
completed.
6. Maps, pictures and other graphic representations.
A photo log documenting past and current removal
actions is available upon request.
B. Other Actions to Date
1. Previous Actions
In July 1991, a criminal investigation was conducted by
the EPA Hazardous Waste Section, the EPA Criminal
Investigation Division, the Office of the FBI, and several
other supporting agencies. A criminal search warrant was
served to the operator of the facility, and a site
investigation was conducted' at the both the Cherokee Oil-
Berry Hill Road location and the Cherokee Oil-Summit Avenue
location. From August 1991 to March 1993 the EPA ERRB
conducted an extensive removal action at the Cherokee Oil-
Summit Avenue location.
As a result of the criminal investigation, the owner
and operator of Cherokee Oil were convicted of criminal
charges for Clean Water Act violations related to discharge
of hazardous substances to the Charlotte sewer system. Both
individuals were sentenced to 46 months in Federal Prison
just prior to the initiation of the removal action.
• •
5
Please refer to the "Current Site Conditions" section
of this document for a summary of the removal actions to
date.
2. Current Actions
The ERRB continues to utilize the remaining ERCS funds
to continue removal actions consisting of sludge
solidification and disposal, and bulk sampling and analysis
of the second group of 1400 drums. It is anticipated that
handling and disposal of the hazardous sludge will deplete
the remaining funds approved in the September 1994 Action
Memorandum.
C. State and Local Authorities Role
1. State and Local Actions to Date
The State of North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR) has issued Cherokee Oil
a Notice of Violation (NOV) for solid and hazardous waste
regulation violations. The operator of Cherokee Oil has
denied the DEHNR violations stated in the NOV. In a January
1994 letter, the DEHNR requested that the EPA ERRB evaluate
the Site for a possible removal action.
The DEHNR, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utility
Department, and the Mecklenburg County Environmental
Protection Agency participated in the July 1991
investigation of the Berryhill Road and Summit Avenue
Cherokee Oil facilities. Several of these local
agencies provided testimony and evidence-for the
criminal trial that was concluded in August 1994.
2. Potential for Continued State/Local Response
The State and local agencies do not have the resources
to undertake the necessary removal actions. The State
originated the request to ERRB for a removal action at the
Site. Due to the substantial quantity of waste still on the
Site, it is highly unlikely that the State would be capable
of obligating the necessary resources to complete the
removal action should this ceiling increase request be
denied.
III. THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE OR THE ENVIRONMENT
The Site continues to pose the same threats to the
public health or welfare as previously addressed in the
September 1994 Action memorandum. The following updates
that information:
A.
B.
• •
6
Threat to Public Health or Welfare
The EPA ERRB has determined that a release.of a
hazardous substance into the environment has occurred
at the Site, as defined by Section 101 of CERCLA and
established in Section 102, Part 302/Table 302.4 of
CERCLA. Summarized below are the specific criteria for
undertaking a removal action from Section 300.415(b)(2)
of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) that will
continue to exist until the removal action is complete. ' .
The Site poses an actual or potential exposure to
hazardous substances by nearby populations. Over 2800
deteriorating drums are stored within 100 feet of a bus
stop along a busy road and a residential area. Drum
samples indicated the presence of numerous hazardous
substances including volatile and semi-volatile
compounds such as benzene, methylene chloride, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, acetone, and naphthalene.
Analytical data from the drums indicates a large
volume of flammable, corrosive, reactive, and
chlorinated compounds which if not removed could expose
nearby residents and passers-by to toxic materials.
The Site also continues to meet the NCP criteria
related to fire and explosion potential. Many of the
drums contain corrosive materials which may be
incompatible with the large quantity of flammable
organic liquids stored on-site. A fire or explosion
would necessitate the evacuation of hundreds of people
from businesses and.homes around the Site-·due to the
potential for exposure to hazardous fumes.·
Threat to the Environment
There are hazardous substances in drums and tanks
that may pose a threat of release. The containers are
deteriorating and numerous containers were found to be
leaking during the removal action and had to be
overpacked into a secure container. If this request is
not approved, additional drums will continue to
deteriorate and release hazardous substances.
There is an actual or potential exposure to
hazardous substances to nearby animals or the food
chain. If the drums are allowed to release their
contents the material would migrate into the street and
stormwater sewer which leads to a nearby creek.
Hazardous substances such as the ones identified on-
site have proven to be harmful to wildlife and
organisms typically found in freshwater creeks.
• •
7
IV. ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances
from this Site, if not addressed by implementing the
response action selected in this Action Memorandum, may
present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public
health, or welfare, or the environment.
V. EXEMPTION FROM STATUTORY LIMITS
This Action Memorandum seeks an exemption from the $2
million limit based on the emergency exemption. Section
104(c)(l)(A) of CERCLA allows an emergency exemption to the
statutory limit if the following criteria are met.
A. There is an immediate risk to public health or welfare or
the environment:
The Cherokee Oil-Berryhill Road Site in its present
state continues to pose an immediate risk to public health
or the environment. The threat will continue to exist, and
likely worsen, if the removal actions outlined in this
memorandum are not approved. Volatile, flammable,
corrosive, and reactive substances are contained in the 2851
deteriorating drums which ERRB had to re-locate even closer
to a densely populated neighborhood. These incompatible
substances are stored next to each other, presenting a high
risk of fire/explosion and subsequent spread of toxic fumes
to the nearby residences and businesses.
Runoff from a fire response would likely result in the
release of hazardous substances to a nearby creek. The
drums are in poor condition, and continued exposure to the
weather would result in hazardous substance releases which
would pose an immediate direct contact threat when
contaminated rain runoff migrated to adjacent yards,
businesses, and the public roads.
B. Continued response actions are immediately required to
prevent, limit, or mitigate an emergency:
Continued response actions are immediately required to
prevent a fire/explosion emergency situation resulting from
the release of incompatible substances from the
deteriorating drums. Also, nearby residents and passers-by
would be in immediate danger to exposure (inhalation,
absorption, and ingestion) to toxic materials. The drum
staging area is bordered by a neighborhood, businesses, a
busy roadway, and a city bus stop, increasing the need for
an immediate and continued response.
• •
8
Site conditions will not improve, but will only worsen
as time passes. EPA installed and maintains a security
fence around the drum staging area. In addition to the
fence, a security guard is utilized to prevent unauthorized
access to the Site. The drums are currently covered with
plastic and are inspected daily to identify any leaking
drums which need immediate attention (i.e. overpacking). If
this exemption request is not granted, it is unlikely that
EPA will be able to continue to maintain site security and
monitor the drums.
Appropriate disposal of the drums that remain on-site
will prevent future releases of hazardous substances into
the air, soil, and surface water. Removal of the drums is
the only means of eliminating the threat to human health and
the environment from a release of hazardous substances from
a fire/explosion or other mechanisms of release from the
drums.
C. Assistance will not otherwise be provided on a timely
basis:
The State and local governments do not have the
appropriate resources to properly and timely undertake site
maintenance or removal actions.
EPA has collected some information which may identify
viable potential responsible parties (PRP's); however, this
information will take an extensive amount of time to
evaluate. Therefore, no PRP's will be able to abate the
potential emergency threats at the Site on a timely basis.
VI. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
A.
1 .
Proposed Actions
Proposed Action Description
The proposed actions for this $2 million exemption and
ceiling increase Action Memorandum are consistent with the
actions outlined in the September 1994 Action Memorandum.
Currently, 2851 drums, 2 tanker trailers, 9 underground
tanks, and 12 aboveground tanks have been logged, sampled,
and classified through hazard categorization testing. Bulk
samples representing material from 1400 of the 2851 drums
have been generated and analyzed. Over 200,000 gallons of
hazardous liquids and 1000 tons of hazardous solids have
been shipped off-site for disposal.
• •
9
Approval of this Action Memorandum ceiling increase
request is needed to continue and implement the following
proposed actions:
Removal, stabilization and disposal of approximately
1000 tons of hazardous waste sludge remaining in the above
and below ground tanks. The RCRA Waste classification for
this material may result in the material being incinerated
at a high cost.
Continu'ation of the bulk sample compositing and
analysis for the other 1400 drums. Bulk sampling for the
first 1400 drums has already identified 14 different
potential waste groups which will have to be handled and
disposed of. It is possible that additional waste groups
will be identified after analysis of the other 1400 drums.
Total project costs increase as the number of waste groups
increase due to the additional handling, processing and
disposal costs.
Once testing is complete, waste solids and liquids from
the drums will be bulked for disposal. Due to the poor
condition of the drums and a substantial cost savings, large
volume waste streams will be bulked on-site prior to off-
site disposal. Small volume and/or extremely reactive or
sensitive waste streams will remain in drums, or be re-
packaged as necessary, prior to disposal.
Empty drums will be crushed and disposed of as
hazardous or non-hazardous depending upon sample results.
Residual contaminated soils and debris will be
excavated, collected and properly disposed of arid the office
trailer and drum storage area will be restored to its
original condition.
2. Contribution to Remedial Performance
This Site is not currently on the NPL. The removal
actions to date and the completion of the removal pursuant
to approval of this document will abate the immediate
threats identified in the Action Memorandums. The removal
actions will not impede future remedial responses based on
the available information, and data generated during the
removal will be available to the EPA Remedial Branch for
consideration during future evaluation of the Site.
3. Description of Alternate Technologies
Alternate technologies
during the removal action.
off-site treatment/disposal
will continue to be evaluated
However, it is likely that only
alternative technologies would
• •
10
be appropriate due to the limited working space at the Site,
and the Site's close proximity to residents.
4. Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARAR's) -See September 1994 Action Memorandum.
5. Project Schedule
Removal actions began November 2, 1994. The tentative
schedule for the proposed removal actions is a~ follows:
a. Stabilization and disposal of the tank sludge:
June 15 through July 15, 1995
b. Drum waste handling, bulking, and disposal: July
1995 through October 1995
c. Site restoration: one to two weeks (after completion
of all other actions)
These continued response actions are dependent upon
approval of this Action Memorandum.
B. Estimated Costs
Provided on the next page is a breakdown of the current
and proposed ceilings based on current cost projections
estimates:
EXTRAMURAL COSTS
Regional Allowance Costs:
(ERCS)
Other Extramural Costs:
(TAT)
Subtotal, Extramural Costs:
Extramural Contingency (20%)
Total, Extramural Costs:
Intramural Costs
Direct Costs:
Indirect Costs:
Current Ceiling
$1,450,000
$ 75,000
$1,525,000
$ 305,000
$1,830,000
$
$
15,000
27,000
Proposed
$3,000,000
$ 225,000
$3,225,000
$ 645,000
$3,870,000
$
$
25,000
45,000
•
Total, Intramural Costs:
Total Project Ceiling:
11
$ 42,000
$1,872,000
•
$ 70,000
$3,940,000
VII. EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED OR
NOT TAKEN
This Section remains consistent with the attached September
1994 Action Memorandum; however, it should be noted that if the
proposed actions in this memorandum are not approved, the risks
posed to public health would substantially increase. This is
because the limited work space on the facility property resulted
in EPA staging the drums across the street on property closer to
a residential area. The drum staging area has been monitored
during the removal to ensure that no fugitive emissions are
migrating to the nearby residences; however, if the proposed
removal actions are not approved, the deteriorating drums will
remain at the location, degrading further, and ultimately
releasing hazardous substances into the surrounding area.
VIII. OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES
As stated in the September 1994 Action Memorandum, there
are no outstanding policy issues.
IX. ENFORCEMENT
See attached updated "Enforcement Sensitive" information.
X. RECOMMENDATION
Conditions at the Site meet the criteria for the CERCLA
104(c) emergency exemption, and I recommend your approval of an
exemption from the $2 million limitation and a ceiling increase
of $2,068,000. The total project ceiling if approved will be
$3,940,000 of which an estimated $3,000,000 will be funded from
the Regional removal allowance.
Approve: R. ~ ~~ • Date:
Disapprove: Date:
State of North Ca[L.a
Department of En.'nment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Woste Management
Jomes B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathon B. Howes, Secretory
William L. Meyer, Director •
Mr. Doug Lair, Chief
January 4, 1993
Emergency Response and Removal Branch
Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365 jVtB,J 9-k f
RE: Cherokee Resources, Inc./Cherokee Oil Company
RECE\VED
J/'IN O 5 1994
Ti n•.• RfuND SEC ··-· sUPE ~:::....----------
1201 Berryhill Road, Charlotte, NC !UW qso 799 0/C/
Dear Mr. Lair:
The North Carolina Hazardous Waste Section, Solid Waste Management
Division, requests that the Region IV Emergency Response and Removal
Branch inspect the Cherokee Resources facility (Berryhill Road site)
in Charlotte for a possible removal action. This site is owned by
the same company that operated the Cherokee Oil site at 725 South
summit Avenue and is the site where waste processing occurred.
Based on observations by our staff and comments by other state and
federal offices, it appears that Cherokee has ceased operations at
the Berryhill Road site. This agency sent an NOV (copy enclosed) to
Cherokee on October 18, 1993, which (among other things) contained a
request for an inventory of the contents of all tanks and containers
on the site. About this same time we received notice that Defense
Reutilization and Marketing Service had improperly shipped hazardous
material/waste to Cherokee (attached memo).
Cherokee's reply was that they have not ceased operation (attached).
However, we were recently informed by the FBI that Cherokee is not
processing and their sewer connection has been cut off.
Thank you for any assistance you can give us.
Sincerely,
,/--'-'• ,•S oA-•,
/
/' .L /' .
Jerome H. Rhodes, Chief
Hazardous Waste Section
JHR/ppb
Attachments
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh. Ncirth Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-73'-~996 FAX 919-71$-3605
An Equal Opporlunily Affirmative AcHOn Employer 50% recycled;' 1 0't posl-consurner paper
• Ref. 5
345 COURTL.A.NQ :37 R':::ET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GZC:-,=:s:_-~ 30355
ACTION-MEMORANDUM
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
AUG 2 8 1991
Removal Authorization for Cherokee Oil Company
Charlotte, North Carolina . -,J@C) /-----;--,"y_~, !"~?~, I// Michael TayloriDora Ann Dai!ner, On-Scene Coordinators Emergency Response and Removal Branch
Donald J. Guinyard, Director
Waste Management Division
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to request and document approval of the proposed removal action described herein for the Cherokee Oil Company Site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, hereafter referred to as "the Site''.
II. SITE CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND
The Site is one of two operations being run by Cherokee Resources in the Charlotte area. The main operation for a~~inistrative matters, and initial waste oil receiving/processing is a facility on 1201 Berry Hill Road. The site EPA is currently investigating is located approximately one mile from the primary facility on Summit Avenue. Existing conditions on this facility include the storage of approximately four tnousand drums, thirteen roll-offs, three tankers, and several tractor trailers which contain full drums known to be contaminated with hazardous substances. Several drums are leaking and many contain highly volatile waste liquids. The site was referred to the Emergency Response and Removal Branch (ERRB) by the RCRA program due to the life threatening situations that exist and due to the instability of the waste materials on site.
A. Site Description
1. Removal Site Evaluation -On July 19, 1991, EPA ERRB responded to a report of lee.2,ing and potentially hazardous drums at the site in Charlotte, North Carolina. The responding OSC, accompanied by the Technical Assistance Tecm, found
• ... ------· -.. _ ----·-----
approximately four thousand drums. Incompatible wastes were stored next to each other. Many were ··stacked three and four high. Some showed a pH of less than 2.0 while others were above 12.5. Thirteen rolloffs with contaminated soil are also located on the property. In addition, there are three tanker trailers containing liquids with one tanker badly damaged and runoff threatening to enter a nearby waterway, Irwin Creek.
2. Physical Location -The Cherokee Oil Company Site is located at the end of Summit Avenue in a industrial park in Charlotte, North Carolina, 28208.
3. Site Characteristics -The site consists of a temporary storage facility for wastes until such time the company chooses a disposal method. The site is not a permitted facility for transporting and storing hazardous wastes. This will be the first removal requested for this site.
4. Release or threatened release into the environment of a hazar(ous substance or pollutant or contaminant -The following substances were found on site as a result of sampling several areas and waste containers. These samples were collected on 7/19/91 by Roy F. Weston (TAT).
Hazardous Substance
Fluoranthene
Concentration
370 ppb
22000 bis (2-Ethylhexyl)ohthalate
Di-n-octyl phtha' _, 800
bis (2-Ethylhexyl)~ithalate 5600 ppb Methylene chloride 780
Napthalene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
bis (2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
Toluene
Xylene, total
Napthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene, total
77000 ppb
29000
56000
140000
280 ppm
ppm 640
59000 ppb
130000
26000
51000
3000
3 ~ ~ i'
1.:;: ;
Location
Cardboard
drum in
warehouse
Soil at
leaking
trailer
Florida
Roll off
Drum in
warehouse
Drum in
warehouse
5. NPL Status -The site is not listed on the NPL. )
B. Other Actions to Date
1. Previous Actio~s -There has been no CERCLA related site activities on this site to date. The site has been under criminal investigation by FBI and EPA for an unknown period of time.
2. Current Actions -EPA's Office of Criminal Investigations is currently undertaking a criminal investigation of the property/operation. EPA's ERRB has secured the site by providing 24 hour security and by denying site access.
c. State and Local Authorities' Role
1. State and Local Actions to Date -No legal action has been undertaken by the State at this time. North Carolina and City/County Officials have been involved in the current criminal investigation. State RCRA officials are cooperating with EPA, ERRB/RCRA for this CERCLA action. The State may initiate RCRA legal actions on the primary facility, not the site, in the next few weeks.
2. Potential for Continued State/Local Response -It is unlikely that any State or other political subdivision will undertake any response activity on this site in the future due to the lack of available funding.
III. THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE OR THE ENVIRONMENT, AND STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITIES
A. Threats to Public Health or Welfare
The site has been temporarily secured from unauthorized site access by instituting the OSC's initial contracting authority. The roll-offs, which contain large volumes of contaminated soil, are leaking an oily liquid which poses a threat to nearby Irwin Creek. There are hundreds of incompatible drums of mixed variety (acids, bases, oily wastes) stacked together, thus posing a direct threat of human exposure.
There are additional businesses adjacent to the site, which presents an imminent and substantial danger to the public health and welfare.
1
r B. • • Threats r.s :,1e Env ir'.J!'.lllent
; Many of the drums are improperly stored, three drums high, as well as mixed drum stacking containing toxic, corrosive and highly flammable substances with documentation of some leaking drums, posing threats of runoff to the nearby creek as well as explosion hazard.
IV. ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this site, if not addressed by implementing the response action selected in this Action Memorandum, may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare or the environment.
V. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
· Removal of hazardous substances and off-site RCRA disposal is the only feasible solution for mitigating threats posed by the situation. Site stabilization without disposal would provide only a temporary solution to the threats posed by the site.
A. Proposed Actions
1. Proposed Action Description -The proposed actions for this site are to stabilize contaminated soils in the thirteen roll-offs, and arrange for disposal to an appropriate facility.
Sampling and categorizing approximately 4,000 dr will be necessary to determine hazardous and nonhazardous wastes, to include separation and staging of the drums, in addition to overpacking the leaking drums then shipping the drums for treatment and/or disposal to an appropriate f~cility. The three tanker trailers will be sampled to determine their content and a proper disposal method to be determined based upon analysis.
2. Contribution to Remedial Performance -This removal action will abate the immediate threats identified in the preceding sections of this memorandum. No further actions are foreseen after removal is complete.
3. Description of Alternative Technologies -This determination will ce conducted after the drums have been properly categorized.
i
d ••••• _:::-c-:::~:· -.·-----:--.-.-. -~ ·.
--------------~-------------_:;-----~------4. Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs). The Federal ARAR determined to be practicable for the Site is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
S. Project Schedule -Response action at the si~e will be initiated upon approval of this Action Memorandum. Foregoing any unexpected delays, all actions are expected to be completed within one year of mobilization.
B. Estimated Costs
Extramural Costs
Regional Allowance Costs (ERCS) Non-Regional Allowance Costs (TAT)
Subtotal
20% Contingency
TOTAL EXTRAMURAL COST
Intramural Costs
Direct (500 hrs at $30/hr) Indirect (800 hrs at $54/hr)
TOTAL, INTRAMURAL
TOTAL, ·:oVAL PROJECT CEILING
$1,499,800
$ 75,000
$1,574,800
$ 314,950
$1,889,760
$
$
$
15,000
43,200
58,200
$1,947,960
VI. EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED OR NOT TAKEN
If action is delayed there is an increased risk of a release to the environment, and an increased risk of explosion, posing a danger to the public health and welfare.
VII. OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES
None
VIII.ENFORCEMENT
• "Enforcement Sensitive"
IX. RECOMMENDATION
This decision document represents the selectec removal action for the Cherokee Oil Company Site, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, developed in accordance with CERCLA as amended and not inconsistent with the NCP. This decision is based on the administrative record for the site. Conditions at the site meet the NCP section 300.415 (b)(2) criteria for a removal and I recoilllllend your approval of the proposed removal actions. The total projec iling, if approved, will be $1,947,960. Of this, an estimate 499,8:_Q:_0 es from the Regional removal allowance.
C-'1 "--"[/ Approval: .!....:.~c=:::'.----..\-..:::..=--=:.::::::==------------Date: ~u l
Disapproval: Date:
• ---·--. -···--·-··•-•-.·-----~ -·-·-··--
ADDENDUM
Er.fo~cement
In July 1991, RCRA Enforcement notified the Emergency Response and Re~oval !~ranch of a possible emergency situation at the Cherokee Oil Site ( the "Site"). In response, on July 14, 1991, Dora Ann Danner, On Scene Coordinator, visited Site. Danner observed thousands of drums containing hazardous substances. Numerous drums were found to be in poor condition and many were leaking. Additionally, drums of incompatible waste liquids were located side by side creating the potential for an explosion. The Site poses an imminent and substantial danger to the public health and welfare.
In August 1991 a Section 106 Administrative Order was issued to Cherokee Resources, Inc. as an operator, E.C. Griffith an owner, and Associated Grocers Mutual of Carolinas, Inc. as a generator. On August 13, EPA held a meeting providing all respondents with an opportunity to discuss the Order. Both E.C. Griffith and Associated Grocers declined to participate in the cleanup of the Site. Cherokee Oil submitted to EPA~ proposed cleanup plan and financial statement.
After havins thoroughly reviewed Cherokee's proposal, EPA has determined t~at the necessary response action cannot be conducted promptly and ~roperly by Cherokee Resources. Cherokee's proposed cleanup team lacks the requisite technical expertise warranted at this Site. Further, Cherokee Resources does not have the financial resources necessary to successfully complete the response action. Consequently, E?~ has decided to pursue a funo 'ead removal action.
-. . . .