Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 2002 0001 0072 HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD COVER SHEET Name of Site: Lammers Barrel EPA ID No. OHD981537582 Contact Persons Site Investigation: Rosita Clarke Moreno( 312) 886 7251 US EPA Region 5 Chicago, Illinois Scott R. Glum (937) 285 6357 Ohio EPA Dayton, Ohio Documentation Record: Jeanne Griffin (312) 886 3007 US EPA Region 5 Chicago, Illinois Julia Barr DynCorp I& ET Alexandria, Virginia Pathways, Components, or Threats Not Scored The Soil Exposure Pathway and Air Pathway were not evaluated at this time because of a lack of sufficient documentation to support a scoring analysis. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 1 HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD Name of Site: Lammers Barrel EPA Region: Region 5 Date Prepared: December 2001 Street Address of Site: 3990 East Patterson Road City, County, State: Beavercreek, Greene, Ohio, 45430 General Location in the State: South west Ohio, South east suburb of Dayton Topographic Map: Bellbrook, Ohio 1991 (Ref. 3)

Latitude: 39 o 43 ' 35" North Longitude: 84 o 5 ' 3.5" West Reference point: Southwest corner of property at intersection of Grange Hall Road and East Patterson Road (Ref. 4)

Scores Air Pathway NS Ground Water Pathway 100 Soil Exposure Pathway NS Surface Water Pathway 96.06 HRS SITE SCORE 69.33 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 2 WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE S S 2 1. Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (Sgw ) (from Table 3 1, line 13) 100 10,000 2a. Surface Water Overland/ Flood Migration Component (from Table 4 1, line 30) 96.06 2b. Ground Water to Surface Water Migration Component (from Table 4 25, line 28) NS 2c. Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (Ssw Enter the larger of lines 2a and 2b as the pathway score. 96.06 9227.5236 3. Soil Exposure Pathway Score (Ss (from Table 5 1, line 22) NS NS 4. Air Migration Pathway Score (Sa ) (from Table 6 1, line 12) NS NS 5. Total of Sgw 2 + Ssw 2 + Ss 2 + Sa 2 19227.5236 6. HRS Site Score Divide the value on line 5 by 4 and take the square root 69.33 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 3 TABLE 3 1 GROUND WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY SCORESHEET Factor Categories and Factors Likelihood of Release to an Aquifer Maximum Value Value Assigned 1. Observed Release 550 550 2. Potential to Release 2a. Containment 10 NS 2b. Net Precipitation 10 NS 2c. Depth to Aquifer 5 NS 2d. Travel Time 35 NS 2e. Potential to Release [lines 2a x (2b + 2c + 2d)] 500 NS 3. Likelihood of Release (higher of lines 1 and 2e) 550 550 Waste Characteristics 4. Toxicity/ Mobility a 10, 000 5. Hazardous Waste Quantity a 100 6. Waste Characteristics 100 32 Targets 7. Nearest Well 50 50 8. Population 8a. Level I Concentrations b 222 8b. Level II Concentrations b 21.2 8c. Potential Contamination b 532 8d. Population (lines 8a + 8b + 8c) b 775.2 9. Resources 5 0 10. Wellhead Protection Area 20 5 11. Targets (lines 7 + 8d + 9 + 10) b 830.2 GROUND WATER MIGRATION SCORE FOR AN AQUIFER 12. Aquifer Score [( lines 3 x 6 x 11)/ 82,500] c 100 100 GROUND WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY SCORE 13. Pathway Score (Sgw ), (highest value from line 12 for all aquifers evaluated) c 100 100 TABLE 4 1 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 4 SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/ FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORESHEET Factor Categories and Factors Maximum Value Value Assigned DRINKING WATER THREAT Likelihood of Release 1. Observed Release 550 550 2. Potential to Release by Overland Flow 2a. Containment 10 NS 2b. Runoff 25 NS 2c. Distance to Surface Water 25 NS 2d. Potential to Release by Overland Flow (lines 2a x [2b + 2c]) 500 NS 3. Potential to Release by Flood 3a. Containment (Flood) 10 NS 3b. Flood Frequency 50 NS 3c. Potential to Release by Flood (lines 3a x 3b) 500 NS 4. Potential to Release (lines 2d + 3c, subject to a maximum of 500) 500 NS 5. Likelihood of Release (higher of lines 1 and 4) 550 550 Waste Characteristics 6. Toxicity/ Persistence a NS 7. Hazardous Waste Quantity a NS 8. Waste Characteristics 100 NS Targets 9. Nearest Intake 50 NS 10. Population 10a. Level I Concentrations b NS 10b. Level II Concentrations b NS 10c. Potential Contamination b NS 10d. Population (lines 10a + 10b + 10c) b NS 11. Resources 5 NS Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 5 Factor Categories and Factors Maximum Value Value Assigned DRINKING WATER THREAT (Concluded)

12. Targets (lines 9 + 10d + 11) b NS Drinking Water Threat Score 13. Drinking Water Threat Score ([ lines 5 x 8 x 12]/ 82,500, subject to a maximum of 100) 100 NS HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT Likelihood of Release 14. Likelihood of Release (same value as line 5) 550 550 Waste Characteristics 15. Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation a 5 x 10 8 16. Hazardous Waste Quantity a 100 17. Waste Characteristics 1, 000 320 Targets 18. Food Chain Individual 50 45 19. Population 19a. Level I Concentrations b 0 19b. Level II Concentrations b 0. 03 19c. Potential Human Food Chain Contamination b 0 19d. Population (lines 19a + 19b + 19c) b 0. 03 20. Targets (lines 18 + 19d) b 45.03 Human Food Chain Threat Score 21. Human Food Chain Threat Score ([ lines 14 x 17 x 20]/ 82,500) (subject to a maximum of 100) 100 96.06 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 6 Factor Categories and Factors Maximum Value Value Assigned ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT Likelihood of Release 22. Likelihood of Release (same value as line 5) 550 550 Waste Characteristics 23. Ecosystem Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation a NS 24. Hazardous Waste Quantity a NS 25. Waste Characteristics 1, 000 NS Targets 26. Sensitive Environments 26a. Level I Concentrations b NS 26b. Level II Concentrations b NS 26c. Potential Contamination b NS 26d. Sensitive Environments (lines 26a + 26b + 26c) b NS 27. Targets (value from 26d) b NS Environmental Threat Score 28. Environmental Threat Score ([ lines 22 x 25 x 27]/ 82,500) (subject to a maximum of 60) 60 NS SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/ FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE FOR A WATERSHED 29. Watershed Score c (lines 13 + 21 + 28) (subject to a maximum of 100) 100 96.06 SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/ FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE 30. Component Score (Sof ) c , (highest score from line 29 for all watersheds evaluated, subject to a maximum of 100) 100 96.06 a Maximum= value applies to waste characteristics category. b Maximum value not applicable. c Do not round to nearest integer. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 7 Source: Base Map is a portion of the following 7.5 Minute Series U. S. G. S. Quadrangle: Bellbrook, OH, 1991 FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP 0 0.5 1 Miles LAMMERS BARREL BEAVERCREEK, OHIO DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2001 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 8 Source: Sample Location Map from Phase II Hydrogeologic Characterization Activities, June 27, 2000 (Ref. 7, figure 1)

FIGURE 2 SOURCE LOCATION MAP LAMMERS BARREL BEAVERCREEK, OHIO DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2001 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 9 REFERENCES Ref. No. Description of the Reference 1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Hazard Ranking System, 55 FR 51333 (40 CFR Part 300, Appendix A). December 14, 1990. 165 pages.

2. EPA. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (excerpt). June 1996. 14 pages.

3. U. S. Geological Survey (USGS). Bellbrook, Ohio, 1991; Waynesville, Ohio, 1981 Quadrangles, 7.5 Minute Series, Topographic Maps. 2 Maps.

4. EPA. Latitude and Longitude Calculation Worksheet. 1 page, 2 maps.

5. Ecology and Environment, Inc. Engineering Evaluation/ Cost Analysis Report for the Lammars Barrel Factory Site, Beavercreek, Greene County, Ohio. Prepared for the U. S. EPA. February 6, 1998. 349 pages.

6. Adrian Brown. Executive Summary of Hydrogeologic Characterization Activities, Lammers Barrel Facility, Beavercreek, Ohio. Prepared for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. June 27, 2000. 233 pages.

7. Adrian Brown. Draft Report  Phase II Hydrogeologic Characterization Activities, Lammers Barrel Facility, Beavercreek, Ohio. Prepared for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. November 10, 2000. 207 pages.

8. Ecology and Environment, Inc. Sample Analytical Data Report, The Lammars Barrel Factory Site, Beavercreek, Greene County, Ohio. Prepared for the U. S. EPA. May 15, 1997. 570 pages.

9. U. S. EPA Quick Reference Fact Sheet, Using Qualified Data to Document an Observed Release and Observed Contamination, Publication 9285.7 14FS, November 1996. 18 pages.

10. Ohio EPA Division of Emergency & Remedial Response. Site Inspection (SI) Report, Lammars Barrel Factory/ Valleywood Subdivision, Beavercreek, Greene County, Ohio. September 21, 1992. 66 pages.

11. Ohio EPA Division of Emergency & Remedial Response. Endangered Species Report Within Radius of Site. May, 01, 2001. 4 pages and 1 map.

12. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Ohio Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Little Miami State and National Scenic River. URL http:// www. dnr. state. oh. us/ odnr/ dnap/ sr/ lmiami. html . Accessed on July 25, 2001. 3 pages.

13. USGS. Streamflow data for the Little Miami River at Spring Valley. URL http:// water. usgs. gov/ oh/ nwis/ annual/? stie_ no= 03242050& agency_ cd= usgs . Accessed on July 24, 2001. 1 page.

14. Ohio EPA Division of Drinking and Ground Waters. Wellhead Protection Areas Within 4 miles of the Lammers Barrel Site and Ground Water Protection Plans Endorsed Under Ohio's Wellhead Protection Program. URL http:// www. epa. state. oh. us/ ddagw/ pdu/ swap_ whpplans. html . Accessed July 24, 2001. 3 pages.

15. U. S. Census Bureau. Table DP 1  Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000, Geographic Area: Beavercreek Township, Greene County, Ohio. p. 437. 1 page.

16. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory map for the base map of Bellbrook, Ohio, Draft. October 21, 1993. 1 map. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 10 17. Crawford, T. E., Chief of the Beavercreek Fire Department. Fire Report for Kohnen and Lammers Chemical Co. Undated. 5 pages.

18. Severn Trent Laboratories. Analytical Report for Ohio EPA. July 19, 2000. 31 pages.

19. Ohio Department of Natural Resources  Division of Water. The Water Resources of Greene County, Ohio. Bulletin 19. September 1956. 6 pages.

20. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Environmental Systems Division. Potentially Responsible Party Search Volume I: Final Report for Lammers Barrel Site, Beavercreek, Ohio, for EPA Region 5. December 1988. 44 pages.

21. Ohio EPA Division of Emergency & Remedial Response. Inter office Communication from Scott Glum, Site coordinator to Lammers Barrel Factory file. April and May 2001. 4 pages.

22. Ohio EPA Division of Emergency & Remedial Response. Community Public Water Supply Systems within 15 miles of Lammers Barrel Factory. May 1, 2001. 2 Maps and 11 pages.

23. U. S. EPA Region 5 Waste Management Division Emergency Response Section. On Scene Coordinator's Report, CERCLA Immediate Removal Action, Valleywood Subdivision, Beavercreek, Ohio. February 12, 1987. 30 pages.

24. Weston Sper Technical Assistance Team (TAT) Region 5. Site Assessment for Valleywood Groundwater Contamination, Beavercreek, Ohio prepared for U. S. EPA Region 5. March 1986. 51 pages.

25. Ecology and Environment. Telecon Note from Steven Clarke of conversation with Greg Buthker, Ohio EPA SW District, Re: Geology and general information about the site. October 21, 1986. 1 page.

26. Ohio EPA  Division of Emergency and Remedial Response. Division of Emergency and Remedial Response sites in Greene County, OH. May 17, 2001. 1 page and 1 map.

27. Ecology and Environment, Inc. Phillips Sand and Gravel Site Inspection Report, for Ohio EPA. February 19, 1981. 17 pages.

28. U. S. EPA. Pollution Report for the Durnbaugh Road Emergency Response, Beavercreek, Greene County, Ohio. February 16, 2001. 11 pages.

29. Ohio EPA  Division of Emergency and Remedial Response. CERCLIS sites located within Greene County Ohio  NuGlo Laboratories. URL http:// swdoweb. epa. state. oh. us/ nuglo. html . Accessed May 18, 2001. 1 page.

30. Ecology and Environment. Telecon Note from Steven Clarke of conversation with Greg Buthker, Ohio EPA SW District, Re: Recreational use of Little Beaver Creek. October 27, 1986. 1 page.

31. Ecology and Environment. Telecon Note from Steven Clarke of conversation with Tony Kohnen, KohnenLammer Chemical Company, Re: Types of solvents/ flammables accepted for recycling. November 13, 1986. 1 page.

32. DynCorp I& ET. Project Note from Julia Barr to Lammers Barrel File, Subject: Residential Well Number Cross Reference. October 2, 2001. 1 page and 1 map.

33. U. S. EPA EnviroMapper. Map of EPA regulated sites within 1 mile of Lammers Barrel. URL http:// www. epa. gov/ enviro/ html/ em/ index. html. Accessed November 16, 2001 with attachment of RCRA Query November 13, 2001. 10 pages.

34. In re Lammers Barrel Factory Site, Deposition of Anthony H. Kohnen ( June 6, 2001). 279 pages. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 11 35. Missouri State Census Data Center. Basic Demographic Trend Report for Greene County, Ohio. URL http:// www. oseda. missouri. edu/ mscdc/ census/ us/ trend/ counties/ S39) H/ C39057. Accessed January 7, 2002. 2 pages.

36. U. S. EPA. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes Physical/ Chemical Methods. Method 8082 for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas Chromatography. EPA Publication No. SW 846. December 1996. 41 pages.

37. U. S. EPA. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes Physical/ Chemical Methods. Method 8270C for Semivolatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spectrometry (GC/ MS). EPA Publication No. SW 846. December 1996. 54 pages.

38. U. S. EPA. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes Physical/ Chemical Methods. Method 8260B for Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spectrometry (GC/ MS). EPA Publication No. SW 846. December 1996. 86 pages.

39. U. S. EPA National Primary Water Regulations: Analytical Methods for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants, 63 FR 47097 (40 CFR Parts 141 and 143), September 3,1998 with attached analytical methods 502.2 and 524.2. 101 Pages.

40. DynCorp I& ET. Project Note from Julia Barr to Lammers Barrel File, Subject: Test Pit Logs and Chain of Custody forms. January 8, 2002. 13 pages. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 12 Site Description The Lammers Barrel property is now a vacant lot, approximately two acres in size, located in Beavercreek, Ohio. The property is bisected by Little Beaver Creek which flows west to east through the site. The property is bordered to the west and south by Grange Hall Road and East Patterson Road, respectively. An abandoned railroad right of way makes up the northern border. The facility experienced a fire in 1969, that completely destroyed the buildings. The only structures remaining are a concrete pad, a non functional production well, and pipes that appear to run from the former facility to the creek.

Operations began at Lammers Barrel Factory in 1953 and continued until the fire in October 1969. According to former employees, the facility bought, sold and reclaimed all types of solvents. Any inventories of chemicals handled at the facility were reportedly destroyed in the fire. During operation, the facility had an above ground storage capacity of over 500,000 gallons. This consisted of eighteen vertical tanks, ranging in size from 2,500 to 25,000 gallons and approximately 6,000 55 gallon drums.

Sampling of residential wells began in the mid 1980s. In 1985, analyses of approximately 90 residential well samples throughout Beavercreek identified an area of ground water contamination along the northern end of the Valleywood subdivision, located southeast of the facility. Sampling revealed that the presence of vinyl chloride was above the federal maximum contaminant level (MCL) for drinking water in some wells. Several wells contained other volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as chloroethane, 1,2 dichloroethene, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene. As a result, the Ohio National Guard brought a 350 gallon mobile water tank as an emergency water supply to five homes along Patterson Road. Nine homes that exceeded removal action levels of VOCs in drinking water were subsequently connected to the county municipal water system.

Periodic ground water sampling has continued since 1985, resulting in the extension of the county water line or installation of filtration systems at several homes. Sampling efforts in 1988, 1991 and 1997 show that the contaminated ground water plume has advanced into the adjacent Valleywood subdivision. In 1992, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted a Site Inspection (SI) at the site. Six soil samples, four sediment and four surface water samples from Little Beaver Creek were collected along with additional residential well samples. The six soil samples from the site indicate the presence of VOCs, lead and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The creek sediment samples revealed low concentrations of xylenes and heavy metals.

An Engineering Evaluation/ Cost Analysis (EE/ CA) was prepared for the U. S. EPA in 1997. Soil, sediment and ground water samples were collected in March, April, June and August of 1997. A total of 71 residential well samples from 54 homes were collected. VOCs were detected in 28 of the wells sampled serving 54 homes. Most of the homes sampled had been sampled in previous investigations. Some samples were collected from residential wells at homes that had already been connected to the municipal system to identify the extent of the plume. Sediment samples collected from Little Beaver Creek identified the presence of VOCs and semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs).

Soil contaminant concentrations indicate two potential source areas for ground water contamination, on each side of Little Beaver Creek. Both areas of subsurface soil contamination lie near the level of the water table. Similar VOCs were detected in both on site soil and monitoring well samples, and off site residential well samples. Concentrations of VOCs in on site soils indicate that they may be the source of the ground water contamination plume.

Similar contaminants were also detected in on site sediment and soil samples, indicating that the site may actually be impacting the sediments and associated water quality of Little Beaver Creek. Little Beaver Creek flows into the Little Miami National and State Scenic River, a popular recreation and wildlife area. Possible targets along the river in the vicinity of the site include a human food chain fishery, wetlands and a state threatened species. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 13 2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION 2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION Name of source: Contaminated Soil Number of source: 1 Source Type: Contaminated Soil Description and Location of Source:

The Lammers Barrel property is now vacant, approximately two acres in size, and located in Beavercreek, Ohio (Ref. 7, p. 2, Figures 1 and 2). The property is bisected by Little Beaver Creek which flows west to east through the site. The property is bordered to the west and south by Grange Hall Road and East Patterson Road, respectively. An abandoned railroad right of way makes up the northern border (Ref. 7, p. 1; figure 1). The facility experienced a fire in 1969 that completely destroyed the buildings and any record of operations (Ref. 17, p. 2). The only structures remaining are a concrete pad, a non functional production well, and pipes that appear to run from the former facility to the creek (Ref. 10, p. 3).

Operations began at Lammers Barrel Factory in 1953 and continued until the fire in October 1969 (Ref. 10, p. 5). According to Anthony Kohnen, the co owner of Lammers Barrel Factory, the facility bought, sold and reclaimed most all industrial solvents (Ref. 10, p. 6). Any inventories of chemicals handled at the facility were reportedly destroyed in the fire (Ref. 17, p. 2). During operation, the facility had an above ground storage capacity of over 500,000 gallons (Ref. 6, p. 2). This consisted of eighteen vertical tanks, ranging in size from 2,500 to 25,000 gallons and approximately 6,000 55 gallon drums (Ref. 10, p. 5). The amount of chemicals onsite at the time of the fire is unknown. It is believed that the contaminated soil resulted from normal operations and exploding drums and tanks during the fire (Ref. 17, p. 2)

Little Beaver Creek flows from west to east through the site and divides it into two areas. The contaminated soil at the site is located on either side of Little Beaver Creek. Both areas of subsurface soil contamination lie near the level of the water table (Ref. 5, p. 2 18). Approximately two thirds of the contaminated soil is located on the southern portion of the property where the structures at the facility were once located (Ref. 7, figure 7). Four above ground storage tanks, used to store `dirty' solvents from customers, and a pump house were formerly located on the property between the creek and the railroad (Ref. 34, p. 130 131).

Geoprobe® samples were collected from depths of 0 to 13 feet below ground surface on the northern and southern portions of the site (Ref. 6, p. 3). Based on the soil analytical results, the minimum amount of soil contaminated by VOCs above the site remedial action levels is estimated at 1.04 million cubic feet or 38,700 cubic yards (based on a depth of contamination of 20 feet) (Ref. 7, p. 10, Tables 2 3). More contaminated soil may be located at the site with concentrations below the remedial action levels (Ref. 7, Table 2 and 3). It is believed that the soil became contaminated during normal operations at the facility and as a result of damage to the storage tanks and drums during the fire (Ref. 5, p. 3 2). Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 14 2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE Soil samples collected in April 2000 were part of a hydrogeologic characterization performed at the request of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The study was intended to assess the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination at the site (Ref. 6, p. 1). Samples collected in August 2000 were part of the second phase of hydrogeologic characterization at the facility also requested by the USACE. They were intended to provide additional information on perched water zones, contaminated site soils and ground water and information on soil and ground water conditions along the proposed water line extension (Ref. 7, p. 1).

 Background Concentrations: Background samples were collected along the north and west perimeter of the facility property outside the apparent area of contamination using a geoprobe rig (Ref. 7, p. 5; Figure 2). Samples were collected approximately 60 to 180 feet from the former facility (Figure 2). On site sampling was performed by Matrix Tech and off site samples were sent to Burgess and Niple, an EPA contracted laboratory (Ref. 7, pp. 6, B 3, D 1). Numbers in parentheses indicate depth of sample.

Sample ID Sample Medium Date Reference GP 11 (12 16) Soil 4/ 12/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 154 GP 14 (5 6) Soil 8/ 17/ 2000 7, p. A 2 GP 14 (16 17) Soil 8/ 17/ 2000 7, p. A 2 GP 19 (10 13) Soil 8/ 21/ 2000 7, p. A 7; 40, p. 12 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg)* Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ kg)* Reference 1,1 Dichloroethane GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 105 GP 14 (5 6) ND 3. 5 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 3.5 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.04 7, p. D 25 1,1,1 Trichloroethane GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 1. 8 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 1.8 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.08 7, p. D 26 1,2 Dichloroethane GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 105 GP 14 (5 6) ND 1. 9 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 1.9 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.06 7, p. D 25 1,2,3 Trichloropropane GP 11 (12 16) ND .32 6, Att. 3, p. 106 Benzene GP 11 (12 16) 8 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 105 GP 14 (5 6) ND 0. 8 7, p. C 19 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg)* Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ kg)* Reference Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 15 Benzene (cont.) GP 14 (16 17) ND 0.8 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) 23 0.04 7, p. D 25 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 105 GP 14 (5 6) ND 2. 3 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) 5 2. 3 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.12 7, p. D 25 Ethylbenzene GP 11 (12 16) 300 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 1. 9 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 1.9 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) 1,300 D 0. 06 7, p. D 26 Styrene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 19 (10 13) 8 0. 04 7, p. D 26 Tetrachloroethene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.14 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 1. 4 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) 6 1. 4 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.14 7, p. D 26 Toluene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 2. 5 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 2.5 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) 1,300 D 0. 11 7, p. D 26 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 3. 2 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 3.2 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.06 7, p. D 25 Trichloroethene GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 1. 8 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) 6 1. 8 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.19 7, p. D 26 Vinyl chloride GP 11 (12 16) ND 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 7. 2 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 7.2 7, p. C 20 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg)* Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ kg)* Reference Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 16 Vinyl Chloride (cont.) GP 19 (10 13) ND 0.17 7, p. D 26 Xylenes (total) GP 11 (12 16) 180 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 106 GP 14 (5 6) ND 3. 1 7, p. C 19 GP 14 (16 17) ND 3.1 7, p. C 20 GP 19 (10 13) 3,800 D 0. 13 7, p. D 26 Anthracene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 27 Benzo( a) anthracene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 27 Benzo( a) pyrene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 27 Chrysene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 27 Fluoranthene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 28 2 Methylnaphthalene GP 19 (10 13) 860 660 7, p. D 28 Naphthalene GP 19 (10 13) 2,700 660 7, p. D 28 Phenanthrene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 28 Pyrene GP 19 (10 13) ND 660 7, p. D 28 Aroclor 1248 GP 11 (12 16) ND 70 6, Att. 3, p. 107 GP 19 (10 13) ND 70 7, p. D 28 Aroclor 1254 GP 11 (12 16) ND 70 6, Att. 3, p. 107 GP 19 (10 13) ND 70 7, p. D 28 ND Hazardous substance concentration below detection limits of analysis D Result from diluted analysis  has no effect on contaminant identification or quantification ( ) Numbers in parentheses denote sample depth Items shaded indicate the highest background concentration for the hazardous substance. This concentration was used for comparison with the source samples. * MDLs are from References 36, p. 2; 37, pp. 31 35; 38, pp. 30 32. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 17  Source Samples: Source samples were collected from the center of the property where normal operations were believed to take place at the facility (Ref. 7, figure 1). TP# samples were collected from the excavated material of test trenches at various depths during the Phase II characterization activities (Ref. 7, p. 9). The source samples are compared with the highest background concentration for each substance regardless of sample depth.

Sample ID Sample Medium Date Reference Sample ID Sample Medium Date Reference GP 1 (20 24) Soil 4/ 4/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 148 GP 8 (8 12) Soil 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 3 (16 20) Soil 4/ 5/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 8 (16 20) Soil 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 3 (20 24) Soil 4/ 5/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 9 (16 20) Soil 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 4 (34 36) Soil 4/ 6/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 10 (8 12) Soil 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 154 GP 5 (16 20) Soil 4/ 6/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 150 GP 15 (surface) Soil 8/ 17/ 2000 7, p. C 21 GP 6 (12 16) Soil 4/ 7/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 151 GP 15 (11 12) Soil 8/ 17/ 2000 7, p. A 3 GP 6 (16 20) Soil 4/ 7/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 151 TP 5 (8 9) Soil 8/ 23/ 2000 7, p. A 7; 40, p. 2, 13 GP 7 (16 20) Soil 4/ 10/ 200 6, Att. 3, p. 152 TP 6 (9 10) Soil 8/ 23/ 2000 7, p. A 37; 40, p. 3, 13 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg) Method Detection Limit( MDL) * (µg/ kg) Reference 1,1 Dichloroethane GP 3 (16 20) ND 120 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 3 (20 24) ND 8 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 19 GP 5 (16 20) ND 8 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 28 GP 7 (16 20) ND 190 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 82 TP 5 ND 880 0.04 7, p. D 7 1,1,1 Trichloroethane GP 7 (16 20) ND 58 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 83 TP 5 ND 990 0.08 7, p. D 8 1,2 Dichloroethane GP 7 (16 20) ND 15 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 82 TP 5 ND 220 0.06 7, p. D 7 1,2,3 Trichloropropane GP 3 (16 20) ND 63 .32 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 10 (8 12) ND 24 .32 6, Att. 3, p. 100 Benzene GP 7 (16 20) 23 74 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 82 GP 8 (8 12) 23 15,000 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 85 GP 8 (16 20) 23 330 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 88 GP 10 (8 12) 23 99 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 99 TP 5 23 11,000 D 0. 04 7, p. D 7 cis 1,2 dichloroethene GP 3 (16 20) 5 450 .12 6, Att. 3, p. 16 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg) Method Detection Limit( MDL) * (µg/ kg) Reference Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 18 cis 1,2 dichloroethene (cont.) GP 4 (34 36) 5 84 0. 12 6, Att. 3, p. 25 GP 5 (16 20) 5 40,000 D .12 6, Att. 3, p. 28 GP 6 (16 20) 5 15 .12 6, Att. 3, p. 57 GP 7 (16 20) 5 320 .12 6, Att. 3, p. 82 GP 8 (8 12) 5 810 .12 6, Att. 3, p. 85 TP 5 5 6, 700 D .12 7, p. D 7 Ethylbenzene GP 3 (16 20) 1,300 7,700 D 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 8 (8 12) 1,300 76,000 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 86 GP 9 (16 20) 1,300 20,000 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 92 GP 15 (11 12) 1,300 46,000 0.06 7, p. C 22 TP 5 1,300 710,000 D 0. 06 7, p. D 8 Styrene GP 3 (16 20) 8 56 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 8 (8 12) 8 460 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 86 GP 8 (16 20) 8 73 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 89 GP 9 (16 20) 8 57 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 92 TP 5 8 200 0.04 7, p. D 8 Tetrachloroethene GP 3 (16 20) 6 220 0.14 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 8 (8 12) 6 220 0.14 6, Att. 3, p. 86 GP 15 (surface) 6 60 J 0. 14 7, p. C 21 TP 5 6 12,000 D 0. 14 7, p. D 8 Toluene GP 3 (16 20) 1,300 11,000 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 8 (8 12) 1,300 120,000 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 86 GP 9 (16 20) 1,300 14,000 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 92 GP 15 (11 12) 1,300 12,000 0.11 7, p. C 22 TP 5 1,300 4,200,000 D 0. 11 7, p. D 8 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 3 (16 20) ND 37 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 5 (16 20) ND 37 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 28 Trichloroethene GP 3 (16 20) 6 370 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 16 GP 4 (34 36) 6 65 0. 19 6, Att. 3, p. 25 GP 5 (16 20) 6 6, 500 D 0. 19 6, Att. 3, p. 28 TP 5 6 11,000 D 0. 19 7, p. D 8 Vinyl chloride GP 1 (20 24) ND 51 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 2 GP 3 (16 20) ND 89 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 17 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg) Method Detection Limit( MDL) * (µg/ kg) Reference Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 19 Vinyl chloride (cont.) GP 3 (20 24) ND 3 0. 17 6, Att. 3, p. 21 GP 5 (16 20) ND 53 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 28 GP 6 (16 20) ND 54 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 57 Xylenes (total) GP 3 (16 20) 3,800 30,000 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 17 GP 6 (12 16) 3,800 21,000 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 54 GP 8 (8 12) 3,800 320,000 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 86 GP 9 (16 20) 3,800 87,000 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 92 GP 15 (11 12) 3,800 1,100,000 0.13 7, p. C 22 TP 5 3,800 3,500,000 D 0. 13 7, p. D 8 Anthracene TP 5 ND 1, 000 660 7, p. D 9 Benzo( a) anthracene TP 5 ND 860 660 7, p. D 9 Benzo( a) pyrene TP 5 ND 520 660 7, p. D 9 Chrysene TP 5 ND 970 660 7, p. D 9 Fluoranthene TP 5 ND 2, 200 660 7, p. D 10 2 Methylnaphthalene TP 5 1,600 9,700 D 660 7, p. D 10 Naphthalene TP 5 2,600 47,000 D 660 7, p. D 10 Phenanthrene TP 5 ND 4,100 660 7, p. D 10 Pyrene TP 5 ND 2,800 660 7, p. D 10 Aroclor 1248 TP 6 ND 6,200 70 7, p. D 40 Aroclor 1254 TP 5 ND 31,500 70 7, p. D 11 GP 8 (8 12) ND 26,000 70 6, Att. 3, p. 87 GP 8 (16 20) ND 5,000 70 6, Att. 3, p. 90 D Result from diluted analysis  has no effect on contaminant identification or quantification. J  While the concentration cannot be quantified, the presence of the hazardous substance is not in question. * MDLs are from References 36, p. 2; 38, pp. 30 32 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 20 2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY Containment Description Containment Factor Value Ref.

Gas release to air: NS Particulate release to air: NS Release to ground water: Residential and monitoring well samples provide evidence of hazardous substance migration from the source area, and none of the following are present at the source: liner, maintained engineered cover, functioning and maintained run on control system and runoff management system, or functioning leachate collection and removal system immediately above a liner. 10 10, p. 19 Release via overland migration: Samples collected from Little Beaver Creek show hazardous substances in the creek sediments. The site was covered with a thin layer of gravel and soil after the fire in 1969, however, there is no maintained containment system to prevent the overland flow of water from the site into Little Beaver Creek. 10 10, p. 21 Notes: NS Not Scored Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 21 2.2.4 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY <IP_ADDRESS>.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity Hazardous Constituent Quantity Assigned Value: NS <IP_ADDRESS>.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Assigned Value: NS <IP_ADDRESS>.3. Volume The Volume of contaminated soil was calculated for the site during the USACE Phase II Hydrogeologic Characterization at the Lammers Barrel facility, in June 2000. Hazardous substances were found at a depth up to 20 feet below ground surface, although some substances were reported as deep as 34 feet (Ref. 7, p. 10). 38,700 cubic yards of contaminated soil were measured assuming a 20 foot depth throughout. Based on the samples collected it is not known if the contamination is vertically continuous, therefore a complete volume estimate could not be generated. Volume Assigned Value: NS <IP_ADDRESS>.4. Area The area of the contaminated soil is used to determine the source hazardous waste quantity value. Based on the USACE Phase II estimate of the extent of the soil contamination, the surface area of the contaminated soil is 5,805 yd 2 (52,245 ft 2 ). This figure was derived by factoring out the 20 foot depth assumption.

Source Type Units (ft 2 ) References Contaminated Soil 52,245 Ref. 7, p. 10 Sum (ft 2 ): 52,245 Equation for Assigning Value (Table 2 5): 52,245 / 34,000 Area Assigned Value: 1.54 <IP_ADDRESS>.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value Highest assigned value assigned from Table 2 5: 1.54 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote Source Characterization 22 SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS Source No. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value Source Hazardous Constituent Quantity Complete? (Y/ N) Containment Factor Value by Pathway Ground Water (GW) (Ref. 1, Table 3 2) Surface Water (SW) Air Overland (Ref. 1, Table 4 2) GW to SW (Ref. 1, Table 3 2) Gas (Ref. 1, Table 6 3) Particulate (Ref. 1, Table 6 9)

1 1. 54 N 10 10 NS NS NS Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW General 23 3.0 GROUND WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY 3.0.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Ground Water Migration Pathway Description  Aquifer/ Stratum 1 (uppermost): surficial glacial outwash deposits Three buried valley tributaries form the broad lowland area in the location of Beaver Creek Township. This area is underlain with permeable sands and gravels and is traversed by the Little Miami River and Beaver Creek (Ref. 19, p. 4). The buried valley aquifer consists of Wisconsin age, well sorted glacial outwash sand and gravel deposits (Ref. 23, p. 1). The uppermost aquifer is located at depths between 25 and 80 feet and is composed of highly permeable outwash deposits of sand and gravel (Refs. 23, p. 1; 24, p. 5). These deposits provide water to shallow private residential wells in the vicinity of the site (Ref. 23, p. 1). The unconsolidated glacial deposits in the area are lying unconformably atop the Ordovician Richmond limestone and Maysville shale bedrock (Ref. 23, p. 1). The direction of local ground water flow in the area of the site is to the southeast and influenced by the dip of the bedrock units (Ref. 24, p. 5).

In most cases, private water supply wells have been installed at depths of approximately 40 to 50 feet below ground surface (BGS) [800 to 810 feet above mean sea level (amsl)] (Refs. 5, p. 2 4; 10, p. 4; 25). Static water levels are generally from 5 to 25 feet BGS (845 825 feet amsl). Yields of up to 50 gallons per minute have been reported for this aquifer. Wells were generally developed at flow rates of 8 to 10 gallons per minute (Ref. 5, p. 2 4). Ground water flow direction in the area is heavily influenced by the rate of pumping in local residential wells. These local residential wells are typically not pumped at a constant rate. A number of the wells are no longer heavily utilized since residences were connected to the county water supply. Therefore, it is possible that the spread of ground water contamination in the area at any one time is a result of shifts in ground water flow direction as the utilization rates of residential wells shifted (Ref. 5, p. 2 4).

SUMMARY OF AQUIFER( S) BEING EVALUATED Aquifer No. Aquifer Name Is Aquifer Continuous within 4 mile TDL? (Y/ N) Is Aquifer Karst? (Y/ N)

1 Surficial glacial outwash deposits Yes No Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 24 3.1 LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE 3. 1. 1 OBSERVED RELEASE Chemical Analysis Samples collected in April 2000 were part of a hydrogeologic characterization performed at the request of the USACE. The study was intended to assess the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination at the site (Ref. 6, p. 1). Samples were collected in the uppermost aquifer of surficial glacial outwash deposits. Samples were sent to an EPA contracted laboratory (Burgess & Niple) for analysis using EPA method 8260 (Ref. 6, p. 5).

Monitoring well samples  April 2000  Background Concentrations: The background sample was collected from MW1, located hydrogeologicaly upgradient of wells MW2 and MW3 (Ref. 6, figure 1). Well MW1 was drilled during the same sampling event as wells MW 2 and MW 3 (March April 1997) and approximately the same screened interval (Ref. 5, p. A 2, A 4, A 7).

Sample ID Screened Interval (feet amsl) Date Reference MW1 829.5  839.5 4/ 13/ 2000 5, p. A 2; 6, p. 3 155 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration 4/ 1997 (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L)* Reference MW1 Benzene ND 0. 04 6, p. 3 115 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 0.12 6, p. 3 115 Ethylbenzene ND 0. 06 6, p. 3 116 Trichloroethene ND 0. 19 6, p. 3 116 Xylenes (total) ND 0. 13 6, p. 3 116 * MDLs are from Reference 38, pp. 30 32. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 25  Contaminated Samples:

Sample ID Screened Interval (feet amsl) Date Reference MW2 828.25  838.25 4/ 13/ 2000 5, p. A 4; 6, p. 3 155 MW3 814.69  824.69 4/ 12/ 2000 5, p. A 7; 6, p. 3 154 Hazardous Substance Background Concentration (µg/ L) MW1 Contaminated Samples (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L)* MW2 MW3 Benzene ND 13 ND 0.04 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND ND 12 0.12 Ethylbenzene ND 30 ND 0.06 Trichloroethene ND ND 7 0.19 Xylenes (total) ND 25 ND 0.13 References: 6, pp. 3 109 110, 3: 118 119; 38, pp. 30 32 Notes: µg/ L micrograms per liter Concentrations shaded and in bold indicate samples significantly above background concentrations. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 26 Geoprobe® Ground water samples Samples collected in April 2000 were part of a hydrogeologic characterization performed at the request of the USACE. The study was intended to assess the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination at the site (Ref. 6, p. 1). Samples collected in August 2000 were part of the second phase of hydrogeologic characterization at the facility also requested by the USACE. They were intended to provide additional information on perched water zones, contaminated site soils and ground water and information on soil and ground water conditions along the proposed water line extension (Ref. 7, p. 1).

 Background Concentrations:

Background samples were collected along the perimeter of the facility property upgradient of the apparent area of contamination (Ref. 7, figure 1). The property at the facility is approximately 900 feet amsl (Ref. 3). Water samples were collected from approximately 16 20 and 28 32 feet BGS in the surficial glacial deposits. On site sampling was performed by Matrix Tech and off site samples were sent to Burgess and Niple, and EPA contracted laboratory (Ref. 7, pp. 6, B 3, D 1).

Sample ID Screened Interval (feet BGS) Date Reference GP 11 28 32 4/ 12/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 154 GP 17 16 20 8/ 18/ 2000 7, p. A 5 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Concentration (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L)* Reference 1,1 Dichloroethane GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 04, 0.4 6, Att. 3, p. 126; 7, p. C 12 1,1,1 Trichloroethane GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 08, 0.35 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 Benzene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 04, 0.15 6, Att. 3, p. 126; 7, p. C 12 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 12, 0.45 6, Att. 3, p. 126; 7, p. C 12 Ethylbenzene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 06, 0.38 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 Styrene GP 11 ND 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 127 Tetrachloroethene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 14, 0.27 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 Toluene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 11, 0.49 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 06, 0.43 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 Trichloroethene GP 11, GP 17 ND 0. 19, 0.36 6, Att. 3, p. 127; 7, p. C 12 Vinyl chloride GP 11 ND 0. 17 6, Att. 3, p. 127 Xylenes (total) GP 11 ND 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 127 GP 17 6 0.41 7, p. C 12 * MDLs are from References 37, pp. 31 35; 38, pp. 30 32 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 27  Contaminated Samples: These samples were collected during the same sampling events as the background samples. Numbers in parentheses indicate feet BGS.

Sample ID Screened Interval (feet BGS) Date Reference Sample ID Screened Interval (feet BGS) Date Reference GP 1 36 40 4/ 4/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 148 GP 7 22 26 4/ 10/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 2 20 24 4/ 4/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 148 GP 8 20 24 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 2 34 38 4/ 4/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 8 28 32 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 3 18 22 4/ 5/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 9 20 24 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 152 GP 3 34 38 4/ 5/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 9 28 32 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 153 GP 4 20 24 4/ 6/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 149 GP 10 24 28 4/ 11/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 154 GP 4 32 36 4/ 6/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 150 GP– 16 16 20 8/ 18/ 2000 7, p. A 4 GP 5 10 14 4/ 6/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 150 GP 18 16 20 8/ 21/ 2000 7, p. A 6 GP 6 8 12 4/ 7/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 151 GP 20 16 20 8/ 22/ 2000 7, p. A 1; 40, p. 12 GP 6 30 34 4/ 7/ 2000 6, Att. 3, p. 151 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration (µg/ L) Hazardous* Substance Concentration Method Detection Limit (MDL) (SQL)* References 1,1 Dichloroethane GP 1 (36 40) ND 16 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (20 24) ND 9 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 190 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 20 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 3 (34 38) ND 35 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 8 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 35 GP 4 (32 36) ND 17 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 45 GP 6 (8 12) ND 1,200 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 60 GP 7 (22 26) ND 32 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 64 1,1,1 Trichloroethane GP 2 (20 24) ND 83 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 1,900 D 0. 08 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 4 (20 24) ND 14 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 4 (32 36) ND 72 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 6 (8 12) ND 100 0.08 6, Att. 3, p. 60 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration (µg/ L) Hazardous* Substance Concentration Method Detection Limit (MDL) (SQL)* References Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 28 Benzene GP 1 (36 40) ND 44 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 7 GP 2 (34 38) ND 69 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 41 GP 3 (18 22) ND 29 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 37 GP 4 (20 24) ND 15 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 35 GP 4 (32 36) ND 6 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 45 GP 5 (10 14) ND 29 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 47 GP 6 (8 12) ND 130 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 59 GP 7 (22 26) ND 9 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 64 GP 8 (20 24) ND 58 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 68 GP 8 (28 32) ND 6 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 70 GP 9 (20 24) ND 5 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 72 GP 10 (24 28) ND 8 0. 04 6, Att. 3, p. 128 GP 16 (16 20) ND 14 0.15 7, p. C 11 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 1 (36 40) ND 440 D 0. 12 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (20 24) ND 49 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 770 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 50 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 3 (34 38) ND 580 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 25 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 35 GP 4 (32 36) ND 500 D 0. 12 6, Att. 3, p. 45 GP 5 (10 14) ND 1,900 D 0. 12 6, Att. 3, p. 48 GP 6 (8 12) ND 4,100 D 0. 12 6, Att. 3, p. 60 GP 8 (20 24) ND 11 0.12 6, Att. 3, p. 68 GP 20 (16 20) ND 780 0.45 7, p. C 16 Ethylbenzene GP 1 (36 40) ND 820 D 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (20 24) ND 61 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 640 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 400 D 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 3 (34 38) ND 210 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 130 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 36 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration (µg/ L) Hazardous* Substance Concentration Method Detection Limit (MDL) (SQL)* References Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 29 Ethylbenzene (cont.) GP 4 (32 36) ND 85 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) ND 10 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 48 GP 6 (8 12) ND 15,000 D 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 60 GP 6 (30 34) ND 16 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 63 GP 8 (20 24) ND 290 D 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 69 GP 8 (28 32) ND 48 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 71 GP 9 (20 24) ND 290 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 73 GP 9 (28 32) ND 84 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 77 GP 10 (24 28) ND 82 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 129 GP 18 (16 20) ND 200 0.38 7, p. C 14 GP 20 (16 20) ND 31 0.38 7, p. C 16 Styrene GP 1 (36 40) ND 16 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (34 38) ND 33 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 10 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 6 (8 12) ND 200 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 60 GP 8 (20 24) ND 12 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 69 GP 9 (20 24) ND 10 0.04 6, Att. 3, p. 73 Tetrachloroethene GP 2 (20 24) ND 7 0. 14 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 84 0.14 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 29 0.14 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 8 (20 24) ND 6 0. 14 6, Att. 3, p. 69 GP 18 (16 20) ND 14 0.27 7, p. C 14 Toluene GP 1 (36 40) ND 3,600 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (20 24) ND 770 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 17,000 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 660 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 3 (34 38) ND 140 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 110 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 4 (32 36) ND 140 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) ND 86 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 48 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration (µg/ L) Hazardous* Substance Concentration Method Detection Limit (MDL) (SQL)* References Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 30 Toluene (cont.) GP 6 (8 12) ND 62,000 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 60 GP 6 (30 34) ND 56 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 63 GP 7 (22 26) ND 20 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 65 GP 8 (20 24) ND 960 D 0. 11 6, Att. 3, p. 69 GP 8 (28 32) ND 140 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 71 GP 9 (20 24) ND 280 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 73 GP 9 (28 32) ND 52 0.11 6, Att. 3, p. 77 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene GP 2 (20 24) ND 5 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 80 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 4 (32 36) ND 5 0. 06 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) ND 14 0.06 6, Att. 3, p. 48 Trichloroethene GP 1 (36 40) ND 2,600 D 0. 19 6, Att. 3, p. 8 GP 2 (20 24) ND 48 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 2,100 D 0. 19 6, Att. 3, p. 42 GP 3 (18 22) ND 30 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 3 (34 38) ND 24 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 10 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 4 (32 36) ND 99 0.19 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) ND 380 D 0. 19 6, Att. 3, p. 48 Vinyl chloride GP 1 (36 40) ND 5 0. 17 6, Att. 3, p. 9 GP 2 (20 24) ND 12 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) ND 12 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 43 GP 3 (18 22) ND 29 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 38 GP 3 (34 38) ND 33 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) ND 6 0. 17 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 4 (32 36) ND 28 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) ND 140 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 48 GP 6 (8 12) ND 1,600 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 61 GP 7 (22 26) ND 28 0.17 6, Att. 3, p. 65 GP 20 (16 20) ND 1,700D 1.43 7, p. C 16 Hazardous Substance Sample ID Background Concentration (µg/ L) Hazardous* Substance Concentration Method Detection Limit (MDL) (SQL)* References Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 31 Xylenes (total) GP 1 (36 40) 6 2, 700 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 9 GP 2 (20 24) 6 350 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 12 GP 2 (34 38) 6 5, 400 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 43 GP 3 (18 22) 6 1, 800 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 39 GP 3 (34 38) 6 880 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 31 GP 4 (20 24) 6 780 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 36 GP 4 (32 36) 6 470 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 46 GP 5 (10 14) 6 110 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 49 GP 6 (8 12) 6 56,000 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 61 GP 6 (30 34) 6 73 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 63 GP 8 (20 24) 6 1, 400 D 0. 13 6, Att. 3, p. 69 GP 8 (28 32) 6 240 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 71 GP 9 (20 24) 6 1, 400 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 73 GP 9 (28 32) 6 340 0.13 6, Att. 3, p. 77 GP 18 (16 20) 6 950D 0.41 7, p. C 14 GP 20 (16 20) 6 580D 0.41 7, p. C 16 * Notes: µg/ L micrograms per liter D Result from diluted analysis  has no effect on contaminant identification or quantification. * MDLs are from References 37, pp. 31 35; 38, pp. 30 32 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 32 Residential well samples Samples were collected as part of the Engineering Evaluation/ Cost Analysis Report for the USEPA in March 1997 (Ref. 5). Release samples collected before 1997 are listed in the residential well database (Ref. 5, App. B).

 Background Concentrations:

Background samples were collected from residential wells located north west of the contaminated ground water plume and show no contamination since 1985 (Ref. 5, App. B, p. 10, 12).

Sample ID Aquifer screened Date Reference RW1 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 10; 32 RW43 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 12; 32 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L)* Reference RW1 1, 1 Dichloroethane ND 0. 04 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 0. 08 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 Benzene ND 0. 04 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene (DCE) ND 0. 12 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 trans 1,2 dichloroethene ND 0.06 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 Trichloroethene (TCE) ND 0. 19 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.17 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 4 RW43 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 0.04 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 0. 08 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 Benzene ND 0. 04 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene (DCE) ND 0. 12 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 trans 1,2 dichloroethene ND 0.06 5, p. 2 41; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 Trichloroethene (TCE) ND 0. 19 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.17 5, p. 2 42; 8, Att. 2, p. 115 * MDLs are from Reference 39, pp. 524.2 35  524.2 36. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 33  Contaminated Samples: The wells below show contamination at similar depths and are most likely to be screened in the same part of the aquifer. In most cases, private water supply wells have been installed at depths of approximately 40 to 50 feet (810 to 800 feet amsl) (Ref. 10, p. 4). Wells 50  104 were included to show continuous contamination since sampling began in 1985, through the present. Concentrations of hazardous substances were obtained from the residential well database. Analytical information was not available. These wells were identified as having concentrations above EPA safe drinking water standards and placed on the municipal water system prior to 1997 (Ref. 10, p. 5).

Sample ID Aquifer Screened Date Reference RW2 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 11; 32 RW3 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 10; 32 RW10 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 10; 32 RW4 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 10; 32 RW5 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 9; 32 RW6 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 9; 32 RW13 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 8; 32 RW14 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 8; 32 RW16 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 21; 32 RW18 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 23; 32 RW19 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 22; 32 RW20 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 22; 32 RW21 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 22; 32 RW23 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 15; 32 RW24 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 15; 32 RW30 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 15; 32 RW31 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 15; 32 RW35 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 24; 32 RW41 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 3/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 8; 32 RW50 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 6/ 1997 5, App. B, p. 22; 32 RW101 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 6/ 1988 5, App. B, p. 8; 32 RW104 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 12/ 1985 5, App. B, p. 23; 32 RW103 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 11/ 1985 5, App. B, p. 9; 32 RW102 Surficial glacial outwash deposits 1/ 1986 5, App. B, p. 7; 32 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 34 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Background Concentration (µg/ L) Concentration (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L) Reference RW2 Benzene ND 1. 03 0. 04 8, Att. 2, p. 6 RW3 1, 1 Dichloroethane ND 1. 95 0. 04 8, Att. 2, p. 8 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 70.3 0. 12 8, Att. 2, p. 10 Vinyl Chloride ND 45.9 0. 17 8, Att. 2, p. 10 RW4 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 8. 64 0. 12 8, Att. 2, p. 16 RW5 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 17.8 0. 12 8, Att. 2, p. 18 Vinyl Chloride ND 103 0.17 8, Att. 2, p. 20 RW6 Vinyl Chloride ND 47.8 0. 17 8, Att. 2, p. 26 RW10 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 2.03 0.04 8, Att. 2, p. 12 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 75.7 0. 12 8, Att. 2, p. 14 Vinyl Chloride ND 46.1 0. 17 8, Att. 2, p. 14 RW13 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 1.44 0.04 8, Att. 2, p. 41 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 7.13 0.12 8, Att. 2, p. 41 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 2.05 0.06 8, Att. 2, p. 41 Vinyl Chloride ND 1.90 0.17 8, Att. 2, p. 41 RW14 Vinyl Chloride ND 1.71 0.17 8, Att. 2, p. 43 RW16 Trichloroethene ND 1. 09 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 47 RW18 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 1.78 0.04 8, Att. 2, p. 51 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 1. 47 0. 08 8, Att. 2, p. 51 Trichloroethene ND .782 0.19 8, Att. 2, p. 51 Vinyl Chloride ND 3.69 0.17 8, Att. 2, p. 51 RW19 Trichloroethene ND 6. 76 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 53 RW20 Trichloroethene ND 2. 33 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 55 RW21 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 1.85 0.04 8, Att. 2, p. 57 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 2.91 0.12 8, Att. 2, p. 57 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 0.809 0.06 8, Att. 2, p. 57 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 2. 22 0. 08 8, Att. 2, p. 57 Trichloroethene ND 5. 01 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 57 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Background Concentration (µg/ L) Concentration (µg/ L) Method Detection Limit (MDL) (µg/ L) Reference Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 35 RW23 Trichloroethene ND 2. 22 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 61 RW24 Trichloroethene ND 1. 85 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 63 RW30 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 11.8 0. 04 8, Att. 2, p. 80 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 5.89 0.12 8, Att. 2, p. 80 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 1.35 0.06 8, Att. 2, p. 80 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 5. 02 0. 08 8, Att. 2, p. 80 Trichloroethene ND 5. 94 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 80 RW31 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 11.7 0. 04 8, Att. 2, p. 82 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 5.84 0.12 8, Att. 2, p. 82 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 1.37 0.06 8, Att. 2, p. 82 1,1,1 Trichloroethane ND 4. 98 0. 08 8, Att. 2, p. 82 Trichloroethene ND 5. 87 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 82 RW35 1,1 Dichloroethane ND 6.06 0.04 8, Att. 2, p. 90 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 2.56 0.12 8, Att. 2, p. 90 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene ND 0.862 0.06 8, Att. 2, p. 90 Trichloroethene ND 4. 61 0. 19 8, Att. 2, p. 90 RW41 Vinyl Chloride ND 36.5 0. 17 8, Att. 2, p. 111 Notes: µg/ L micrograms per liter * MDLs are from Reference 39, pp. 524.2 35  524.2 36. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Likelihood of Release 36 Level I Samples Wells in this table were found to have concentrations of hazardous substances above the maximum limits established in the Safe Drinking Water Act (1996). These wells have been systematically closed and the residents placed on municipal water systems.

Sample ID Hazardous Substance Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ L) Benchmark Concentration (µg/ L) Benchmark Reference for Benchmark RW 3 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene 70.3 70 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 29 Vinyl Chloride 45.9 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 RW5 Vinyl Chloride 103 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 RW6 Vinyl Chloride 47.8 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 RW10 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene 75.7 70 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 29 Vinyl Chloride 46.1 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 RW18 Vinyl Chloride 3.69 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 RW19 Trichloroethene 6. 76 5 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 40 RW21 Trichloroethene 5. 01 5 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 40 RW30 Trichloroethene 5. 94 5 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 40 RW31 Trichloroethene 5. 87 5 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 40 RW41 Vinyl Chloride 36.5 2 MCL/ MCLG 2, p. B 41 Notes: MCL/ MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level/ Maximum Contaminant Level Goal as defined in the Safe Drinking Water Act (1996). Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 37 Attribution Between 1953 and 1969 Lammers, Inc. operated a waste storage and reclamation facility for all types of industrial solvents and flammables on the site. The company would take in approximately 4,000 to 5,000 gallons of chemicals per day from various generators, purify the solvents and then return them to the generators. According to former and present government officials and employees familiar with the site, Lammers, Inc. ran a "sloppy operation." Frequent spills occurred on the site and chemical wastes were dumped into Little Beaver Creek, which runs through the facility property (Ref. 20, p. 5 3). Tony Kohnen, former co owner of Kohnen Lammer Chemical Company, stated that the Lammers Barrel facility accepted most all industrial solvents primarily from the paint and automobile industries including 1,1,1 Trichloroethane (Ref. 31).

Lammers, Inc. 's Articles of Incorporation indicate that the purpose for which the Company was formed included "To manufacture, reclaim, compound, assemble, formulate, amalgamate, distill, analyze, manipulate, mix, prepare for market, buy, broker, market, sell, vend, deal and trade in, import, export, transport, and distribute, or in any manner turn to account or dispose of solvents, oil, grease, gasoline, alcohol benzol, auto accessories and parts, tires, or chemical compounds for treating gasoline and other liquid fuels and also for treating lubricating oils and other purposes, and any other compounds or products known in industrial chemistry or any of the ingredients thereof..." (Ref. 20, p. 5 4). While petroleum related contaminants are found in soil and ground water samples, these substances were received by the facility as part of a mixed waste containing other man made contaminants (i. e. chlorinated solvents). Further, no evidence suggests that the contamination in the sources was the result of a spill of petroleum product.

Because as much as 500,000 gallons of solvents spilled or burned at Lammers Barrel and chlorinated solvents were stored on site, the samples taken during the 1992 SI, the 1997 EE/ CA, and the 2000 Phase II Hydrogeologic Characterization Activities, indicated extremely high levels of solvent and chlorinated solvent in the soil (Refs. 5; 7; 10). Substances shown to have been released to the ground water are also present in the soil at the facility. Geoprobe samples collected from the facility show continuous vertical contamination from as shallow as 12 feet to as deep as 40 feet below the ground surface (Refs. 6, pp. 3 148  3 154; 7, pp. A 1, A 4, A 6). This is characterized by geoprobe location GP 6, where high concentrations of ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene are not only found in shallow samples (8 12 ft), but also deep samples (30 34 ft) at the same location (Ref. 6, pp. 3 60, 3 61, 3 63).

The Ohio EPA Division of Emergency and Remedial Response lists three sites within 1.5 miles of the Lammers Barrel facility that could contribute similar contaminants to the ground water (Ref. 26, Figure 1). These sites are all located hydrogeologicaly down gradient from the Lammers Barrel facility and drinking water wells listed in this document (Ref. 26, Figure 1). The Durnbaugh Road, NuGlo and Phillips Sand and Gravel sites have not been shown to be contributing to the ground water contamination in the Valleywood subdivision adjacent to the Lammers Barrel facility (Refs. 27, p. 1; 28, pp. 7  10; 29). In addition, the USEPA's listing of hazardous waste handlers documents that there have been no known releases to the ground water upgradient of the site within 1 mile (Ref. 33).

Hazardous Substances Released Benzene cis 1,2 Dichloroethene Ethylbenzene Trichloroethene Xylenes (total) Styrene Tetrachloroethene Toluene Vinyl Chloride 1,1 Dichloroethane trans 1,2 dichloroethene 1,1,1 Trichloroethane Ground Water Observed Release Factor Value: 550 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Waste Characteristics 38 3.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 3.2.1 TOXICITY/ MOBILITY Hazardous Substance Source No. Toxicity Factor Value Mobility Factor Value* Does Haz. Substance Meet Observed Release? Toxicity/ Mobility (Ref. 1, Table 3 9) Reference 1,1 Dichloroethane 1 10 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 7 1,1,1 Trichlorethane 1 1 1 Yes 1 2, p. B 19 1,2 Dichloroethene (total) 1 100 1 Yes 100 2, p. B 7 1,2,3 Trichloropropane 1 10,000 1 No 10,000 2, p. B 20 2 Methylnaphthalene 1 NA 0. 01 No NA 2, p. B 14 Anthracene 1 10 0.01 No 0.1 2, p. B 2 Aroclor 1254 1 10,000 0.0001 No 1 2, p. B 16 Aroclor 1248 1 10,000 0.0001 No 1 2, p. B 16 Benzene 1 100 1 Yes 100 2, p. B 2 Benzo (a) anthracene 1 1000 0.01 No 10 2, p. B 2 Benzo (a) pyrene 1 10,000 0.0001 No 1 2, p. B 2 Chrysene 1 10 0. 01 No 0. 1 2, p. B 5 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene 1 100 1 Yes 100 2, p. B 8 Ethylbenzene 1 10 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 10 Fluoranthene 1 100 0.01 No 1 2, p. B 10 Naphthalene 1 100 1 No 100 2, p. B 14 Phenanthrene 1 NA 0. 01 No NA 2, p. B 16 Pyrene 1 100 0.01 No 1 2, p. B 17 Styrene 1 10 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 18 Tetrachloroethene 1 100 1 Yes 100 2, p. B 18 Toluene 1 10 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 19 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene 1 100 1 Yes 100 2, p. B 8 Trichloroethene 1 10 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 19 Vinyl chloride 1 10,000 1 Yes 10,000 2, p. B 20 Xylene (total) 1 1 1 Yes 10 2, p. B 20 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Waste Characteristics 39 * Liquid, non karst mobility factor value or substances found in the observed release received a mobility factor value of 1 (Ref. 1, Sec. <IP_ADDRESS>).

1,2,3 trichloropropane and vinyl chloride are the hazardous substances with the highest toxicity/ mobility factor value of 10,000.

Toxicity/ Mobility Factor Value: 10, 000 (Ref. 1, Table 3 9) Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Waste Characteristics 40 3.2.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity 1 Contaminated Soil 1.54 Sum of Values: 1.54 A minimum value of 100 was used for the Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value because Level I and Level II targets have been identified (Ref. 1, sec. <IP_ADDRESS>).

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 (Level I and II targets) (Ref. 1, Section <IP_ADDRESS>)

3.2.3 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FACTOR CATEGORY VALUE Toxicity/ Mobility Factor Value: 10, 000 Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 Toxicity/ Mobility Factor Value X Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 1 x 10 6 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 32 (Ref. 1, Table 2 7) Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Targets 41 3.3 TARGETS 3.3.1 NEAREST WELL Well ID: RW3, RW10 Level of Contamination (I, II, or potential): Level I If potential contamination, distance from source in miles: NA Nearest Well Factor Value: 50 (Ref. 1, Table 3 11)

3.3.2 POPULATION <IP_ADDRESS> Level of Contamination <IP_ADDRESS> Level I Concentrations The following residential wells from the Valleywood subdivision, were identified as having concentrations above the MCL/ MCLG. These wells have been abandoned for drinking water purposes. The residents are using the municipal water system as a result of the contamination. Wells RW3, RW10 and RW30, RW31 serve the same households. The county average of 2.65 was used from the 2000 census (Ref. 15).

Level I Well Aquifer No.* Population** Reference RW3, RW10 (abandoned in 1985) 1 2. 9 35; 32 RW5 (abandoned in 1985) 1 2. 9 35; 32 RW6 (abandoned in 1985) 1 2. 9 35; 32 RW18 (abandoned in 1985) 1 2. 9 35; 32 RW19 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW21 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW30, RW31 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW41 1 2. 65 15; 32 * Aquifer 1 is composed of surficial glacial outwash deposits. ** Wells abandoned in 1985 use the county average of 2.9 from the 1980 census (Ref. 35).

Sum of Population Served by Level I Wells: 22.2 Sum of Population Served by Level I Wells x 10: 222 Level I Concentrations Factor Value: 222 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Targets 42 <IP_ADDRESS> Level II Concentrations There are 10 residential wells that have hazardous substances that meet Level II concentration criteria. The county average of 2.65 was used (Ref. 15). Well RW13 was abandoned in 1985 and has not been included in the target score, however current samples show contamination is present at levels significantly higher than background.

Level II Well Aquifer No. Population Reference RW2 1 2.65 15; 32 RW4 1 2.65 15; 32 RW13 (abandoned in 1985) 1 32 RW14 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW16 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW20 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW23 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW24 1 2. 65 15; 32 RW35 1 2. 65 15; 32 Sum of Population Served by Level II Wells: 21.2 Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 21.2 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote GW Targets 43 <IP_ADDRESS> Potential Contamination Potential contamination targets are calculated from community and non community public wells located within four miles of the sources at the site. The summed population used is lower than the total population of the area, however the exact number of people using the ground water within each distance category were not available. Populations scored as level I and level II above, were not considered in the following calculations. Well information and population values were collected from the Ohio EPA Division of Emergency and Remedial Response. The location of the wells and population breakdown per well is found in reference 22.

Distance Category Population Reference Distance Weighted Population Value (Table 3 12)

0 1/ 4 205 (5 wells) 22, pp. 7, 8 164 1/ 4  1/ 2 240 (4 wells) 22, pp. 7, 8, 11 102 1/ 2  1 2, 030 (27 wells) 22, pp. 7, 8, 11 523 1  2 1, 623 (21 wells) 22, pp. 1, 6, 7, 8, 11 294 2  3 614 (8 wells) 22, pp. 6, 8, 11 68 3  4 38,960 (17 wells) 22, pp. 1, 6, 8, 9, 11 4,171 Calculations:

Sum of Distance Weighted Population Values: 5,322 Sum of Distance Weighted Population Values/ 10: 532.2 (Ref. 1, Section <IP_ADDRESS>) Potential Contamination Factor Value: 532 3.3.3 RESOURCES There are no documented resources using ground water within four miles of the sources at the site.

3. 3. 4 WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA Part of the wellhead protection area for the Dayton public water system is located within 4 miles of the sources at the site (Ref. 14).

Wellhead Protection Area Factor Value: 5 (Ref. 1, Section 3.3.4) Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote 44 4.0 SURFACE WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY 4.1 OVERLAND/ FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT <IP_ADDRESS> Definition of Hazardous Substance Migration Path for Overland/ flood Component The two acre Lammers Barrel facility is located at the intersection of Grange Hall Road and East Patterson Road. Little Beaver Creek divides the property into northern and southern portions, which are approximately equal in size. Little Beaver Creek flows from west to east across the property (Ref. 7, pp. 1, 2; Figure 1). Several pipes can be observed leading from the southern portion of the property into the creek. On the southern side of the property, the creek banks slope steeply downward eight to ten feet to the creek. The remainder of the southern portion of the property is flat (Ref. 5, p. 2 2). Evidence of concrete building foundations remain on portions of the southern side of the property. Small trees and brush cover the area between the concrete foundations and the southern bank of the creek (Ref. 5, p. 2 2). The northern portion of the property also has steeply sloping banks down to the creek. In this area, there are numerous small, vegetation covered soil piles adjacent to the creek. Remnants of a dirt access road are visible along the railroad right of way, comprising the northern border of the property. The northern portion of the property is more heavily vegetated than the southern portion (Ref. 5, p. 2 2).

Runoff from rainfall on the contaminated soil, in the northern portion and southern portion of the property, drains into Little Beaver Creek (Ref. 3). Because there are many locations along the creek bed that hazardous substances can enter the stream, the entire length of the stream segment is considered the probable point of entry (PPE) for the contaminated soil source (Ref. 3). Little Beaver Creek extends from the most downstream PPE at the site, 3. 4 miles to the confluence of Beaver Creek. Beaver Creek flows south into the Little Miami River 1. 1 miles from the previous confluence. The target distance limit (TDL) is located 10. 5 miles downstream in the Little Miami River, south of the town of Spring Valley (Ref. 3). Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW Likelihood of Release 45 <IP_ADDRESS> Likelihood of Release <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Observed Release Direct Observation There is no documentation to support an observed release by direct observation.

Chemical Analysis Sediment samples were collected as part of the EE/ CA Report for the USEPA. Three samples and two duplicate samples were collected from location in the portion of the creek passing through the Lammers Barrel property. Sediment samples were collected at depths of 0 to 6 inches (Ref. 5, p. 2 9). The background sample (SED7) was collected in Little Beaver Creek, upstream from the influence of the site (Ref. 5, p. 2 27).

 Background Concentrations:

Sample ID Sample Medium Sample Location Date Reference SED7 Sediment Upstream of Grange Hall Road 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, p. 6 1 Sample ID Hazardous Substance Concentration (µg/ kg) Method Detection * Limit (MDL) (µg/ kg) Reference SED7 Chrysene ND (110J) 660 5, p. 2 73; 8, p. 6 22 Ethylbenzene ND 0. 06 8, p. 4 18 Fluoranthene ND (230J) 660 5, p. 2 74; 8, p. 6 22 Phenanthrene ND (120J) 660 5, p. 2 74; 8, p. 6 22 Xylene (total) ND 0. 06 8, 4 18 Notes: J  The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because the reported concentrations were less than the required detection limits (Ref. 8, p. 6 3).

* MDLs are from References 37, pp. 32 34; 38, p. 31. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW Likelihood of Release 46  Contaminated Samples: Sediment samples were collected as part of the EE/ CA Report for the USEPA. Three samples and two duplicate samples were collected from location in the portion of the creek passing through the Lammers Barrel property. Sediment samples were collected at depths of 0 to 6 inches (Ref. 5, p. 2 9). Sample locations are shown in figure 2 9 in reference 5.

Sample ID Sample Medium Sample Location Distance from PPE Date Reference SED2 Sediment Most downstream sample location on property 0 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, Att. 6, p. 1 SED3/ DUP2 Sediment Most downstream sample location on property 0 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, Att. 6, p. 1 SED4 Sediment Stream bed on property to the east of center 0 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, Att. 6, p. 1 SED5/ DUP4 Sediment Stream bed on property to the east of center 0 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, Att. 6, p. 1 SED6 Sediment Center of stream segment, where pipes enter surface water 0 4/ 3/ 1997 5, p. 2 27; 8, Att. 6, p. 1 Hazardous Substance Background Concentration SED7 Contaminated Samples (µg/ kg)*

SED2 SED3 SED4 SED5 SED6 Chrysene ND 680J 730J 500 510J ND Ethylbenzene ND ND 4,000 6,100 3,100 770D Fluoranthene ND ND ND 900 1,100 ND Phenanthrene ND 450J ND 590 800 ND Xylene (total) ND 37,000 97,000 1,400J 900J 590D References 5, p. 2 73, 2 74 8, Att. 4, p. 6, Att. 6, p. 8 8, Att. 4, p. 8, Att. 6, p. 11 8, Att. 4, p. 10, Att. 6, p. 14 8, Att. 4, p. 12, Att. 6, p. 17 8, Att. 4, p. 16, Att. 6, p. 20 Notes: J  The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because the percent difference between the initial calibration and continuing calibration were not within the recommended limits of less than or equal to 25%( Ref. 8, pp. 6 2). Adjusted value shown in parentheses for samples significantly above background( Ref. 9, p. 14).

D  Diluted Concentration  has no effect on contaminant identification or quantification.

*  Concentrations in bold denote an observed release to surface water. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW Likelihood of Release 47 Attribution Between 1953 and 1969 Lammers, Inc. operated a waste storage and reclamation facility for all types of industrial solvents and flammables on the site. The company would take in approximately 4,000 to 5,000 gallons of chemicals per day from various generators, purify the solvents and then return them to the generators. According to former and present government officials and employees familiar with the site, Lammers, Inc. ran a "sloppy operation." Frequent spills occurred on the site and chemical wastes were dumped into Little Beaver Creek, which runs through the facility property (Ref. 20, p. 5 3). Tony Kohnen, former co owner of Kohnen Lammer Chemical Company, stated that the Lammers Barrel facility accepted most all industrial solvents primarily from the paint and automobile industries (Ref. 31). The substances identified in the observed release to surface water were also found in the contaminated soil on site.

Lammers, Inc. 's Articles of Incorporation indicate that the purpose for which the Company was formed included "To manufacture, reclaim, compound, assemble, formulate, amalgamate, distill, analyze, manipulate, mix, prepare for market, buy, broker, market, sell, vend, deal and trade in, import, export, transport, and distribute, or in any manner turn to account or dispose of solvents, oil, grease, gasoline, alcohol benzol, auto accessories and parts, tires, or chemical compounds for treating gasoline and other liquid fuels and also for treating lubricating oils and other purposes, and any other compounds or products known in industrial chemistry or any of the ingredients thereof..." (Ref. 20, p. 5 4). While petroleum related contaminants are found in soil and ground water samples, these substances were received by the facility as part of a mixed waste containing other man made contaminants (i. e. chlorinated solvents). Further, no evidence suggests that the contamination in the sources was the result of a spill of petroleum product.

The Ohio EPA Division of Emergency and Remedial Response lists three sites within 1.5 miles of the Lammers Barrel facility that could contribute similar contaminants to the ground water (Ref. 26, Figure 1). These sites are located downstream from the Lammers Barrel facility and would not be able to contribute to the contaminated sediment located in the stream segment on the property (Ref. 26, Figure 1). Upstream from the facility is a waste water treatment plant. This plant has not contributed to the contamination on site according to samples collected between the Lammers Barrel facility and the treatment plant (Ref. 5, pp. 2 73, 2 74; 8, pp. 4 18, 6 22). In addition, the USEPA's listing of hazardous waste handlers documents that there have been no known releases to the surface water upstream of the site within 1 mile (Ref. 33).

Hazardous Substances Released Chrysene Ethylbenzene Fluoranthene Phenanthrene Xylene (total)

Surface Water Observed Release Factor Value: 550 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW/ HFC Waste Characteristics 48 <IP_ADDRESS> Human Food Chain Threat Waste Characteristics <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation Hazardous Substance Source No. Toxicity Factor Value Persistence Factor Value* Bioaccumulation Value** Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation Factor Value (Table 4 16) Ref.

1,1 Dichloroethane 1 10 0. 4 5 20 2, p. B 7 1,1,1 Trichloroethane 1 1 0. 4 5 2 2, p. B 19 1,2 Dichloroethane 1 100 0.4 5 200 2, p. B 7 1,2,3 Trichloropropane 1 10,000 0.4 50 2 x 10 5 2, p. B 20 2 Methylnaphthalene 1 NA 0. 4 5,000 NA 2, p. B 14 Anthracene 1 10 1 5,000 5 x 10 4 2, p. B 2 Aroclor 1248 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 2, p. B 16 Aroclor 1254 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 2, p. B 16 Benzene 1 100 0.4 5, 000 2 x 10 5 2, p. B 2 Benzo( a) anthracene 1 1, 000 1 50,000 5 x 10 7 2, p. B 2 Benzo( a) pyrene 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 2, p. B 2 Chrysene 1, OR 10 1 500 5,000 2, p. B 5 cis 1,2 Dichloroethene 1 100 0.4 5 200 2, p. B 8 Ethylbenzene 1, OR 10 0.4 50 200 2, p. B 10 Fluoranthene 1, OR 100 1 5, 000 5 x 10 5 2, p. B 10 Naphthalene 1 100 0.4 500 2 x 10 4 2, p. B 14 Phenanthrene 1, OR NA 1 50 NA 2, p. B 16 Pyrene 1 100 1 50 5, 000 2, p. B 17 Styrene 1 10 0.4 50 200 2, p. B 18 Tetrachloroethene 1 100 0.4 50 2, 000 2, p. B 18 Toluene 1 10 0.4 50 200 2, p. B 19 trans 1,2 Dichloroethene 1 100 0.4 50 2, 000 2, p. B 8 Trichloroethene 1 10 0.4 50 200 2, p. B 20 Vinyl chloride 1 10,000 0.0007 5 35 2, p. B 20 Xylene (total) 1, OR 1 0. 4 50 20 2, p. B 20 Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW/ HFC Waste Characteristics 49 Notes: * Persistence value for Rivers ** Bioaccumulation factor value for Freshwater The hazardous substances with the highest Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation factor value are Aroclor 1248, Aroclor 1254, and benzo( a) pyrene (5 x 10 8 ).

Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 10 8 <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity 1 Contaminated Soil 1.54 Sum of Values: 1.54 A maximum value of 100 was used for the Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value because Level II targets have been identified (Ref. 1, Sec. <IP_ADDRESS>).

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 (Level II targets) (Ref. 1, Section <IP_ADDRESS>)

<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value Toxicity/ Persistence Factor Value: 10,000 Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 50,000 Toxicity/ Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 1 x 10 6 (Toxicity/ Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value) x Bioaccumulation Factor Value : 5x10 10 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320 (Ref. 1, Table 2 7) Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW/ HFC Targets 50 <IP_ADDRESS> Human Food Chain Threat Targets Little Beaver Creek is used for fishing (Ref. 30). During an April 2001 site visit, fishing lures and bait were seen on the banks of the Lammers Barrel property (Ref. 21). Some of the fish species found in Little Beaver Creek include: white sucker (Catostomus commersoni), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), Largemouth bass (micropterus salmoides), and gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) (Ref. 5, p. 3 95).

Actual Human Food Chain Contamination The following substances were detected in the surface water pathway and have a bioaccumulation factor value of 500 or higher (Ref. 1, section <IP_ADDRESS>).

Sample ID Sample Medium Distance from PPE Hazardous Substance Bioaccumulation Factor Value Refs.

SED2 SED5 Sediment 0 Chrysene 500 2, p. B 5; 5, p. 2 27 SED2, SED3 Sediment 0 bis( 2 Ethylhexyl) phthalate 50,000 2, p. B 3; 5, p. 2 27 SED4, SED5 Sediment 0 Fluoranthene 5, 000 2, p. B 10; 5 , p. 2 27 Level I Concentrations There are no Level I concentrations within the Target Distance Limit (TDL).

Most Distant Level II Sample Sample ID: SED2, SED3 Distance from the probable point of entry: 0 feet Reference: 5, p. 2 27 Level II Fisheries Identity of Fishery Extent of Level II Fishery (Relative to PPE or Level I Fishery) Refs.

Little Beaver Creek Level II fishery ends at SED2, 0 feet from PPE 5, p. 2 27 <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Food Chain Individual The substances listed below were found in the observed release samples. They all have bioaccumulation factor values of 500 or higher.

Sample ID: SED 2, SED3 Level I/ Level II/ or Potential: Level II Hazardous Substance: bis( 2 Ethylhexyl) phthalate (50,000), chrysene (500), fluoranthene (5,000) Bioaccumulation Potential: 50,000 Food Chain Individual Factor Value: 45 (Ref. 1, Section <IP_ADDRESS>.1) Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW/ HFC Targets 51 <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Population <IP_ADDRESS>.2.1 Level I Concentrations There are no documented level I concentrations within the TDL.

<IP_ADDRESS>.2.2 Level II Concentrations Little Beaver Creek is fished by local residents (Ref. 30). During an April 2001 site visit, fishing lures and bait were seen on the banks of the Lammers Barrel property (Ref. 21). Some of the fish species found in Little Beaver Creek include: white sucker (Catostomus commersoni), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), Largemouth bass (micropterus salmoides), and gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) (Ref. 5, p. 3 95).

Identity of Fishery Annual Production (pounds) References Human Food Chain Population Value (Table 4 18)

Little Beaver Creek from Grange Hall Road to sample SED2/ SED3. > 0 5, pp. 2 27, 3 95; 21 0.03 While Little Beaver Creek is known to be a fishery, the annual production is greater than 0, however the exact amount is unknown.

Sum of Level II Human Food Chain Population Values:

Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 0.03 <IP_ADDRESS>.2.3 Potential Human Food Chain Contamination Potential targets exist downstream of the site, however they were not scored because they would not significantly impact the site score. Enforcement Confidential Draft  Do Not Cite or Quote SW/ ENV Targets 52 4.1.4 Environmental Threat The environmental threat for the surface water pathway was not scored. However, the environmental threat posed by the Lammers Barrel facility extends from Little Beaver Creek down to the Little Miami River. Within this 15 mile TDL are several sensitive environments. Sensitive environments within this area include the habitat of the snuffbox (Epioblasma Triquetra) and the Little Miami Scenic River, federal and state designated (Refs. 11, p. 4 and map; 12). Wetlands along the Little Beaver Creek and Little Miami River are also potential targets of contamination from the Lammers Barrel Facility. Approximately 0.1 miles of wetlands along the Little Beaver Creek and 0.25 miles of wetlands along the Little Miami River are threatened (Ref. 16).