Superfund Information Systems: Site Profile

Superfund Site:

BYRON BARREL & DRUM
BYRON TOWNSHIP, NY

Cleanup Activities

On this page:

On related pages:


Background

The Byron Barrel & Drum site is located in Genesee County, New York. The site is about 2 acres of an 8-acre property off Transit Road in a rural area. .

The site is bordered by heavily wooded areas and farmland. Surface water drains to Oak Orchard Creek, which is within 1/2 mile of the site. The property lies within 2 miles of a residential area. Approximately 20 people draw drinking water from wells within 1 mile of the site.; 2,200 others live within a 3-mile radius. Water supplies are privately provided and use both surface water and ground water. Testing of residential wells near the site didthrough early 1994 has not shown any site-related contaminants to be present. Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a combination of federal and potentially responsible party's actions.

The site was used as a salvage yard for heavy construction equipment. .In 1982, it was revealed that the site had been used for hazardous waste disposal. Approximately 200 drums of solid and liquid chemical wastes were abandoned on the site without any spill control or containment provisions. Over 200 additional drums were ripped open or crushed, mixed with soil, and covered over. Other drums were disposed of in a ravine. Testing by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation showed hazardous substances, including polychlorinated biphenyls, in many of the drums.

 

Top of Page


What Has Been Done to Clean Up the Site?

The site is being addressed in two stages: emergency actions and a long-term remedial phase focused on cleanup of the entire site.

Emergency Actions: In 1984, EPA removed approximately 400 drums and 64 tons of contaminated soils and debris from the site and disposed of them at an EPA-approved facility. EPA installed a monitoring well, sampled soils, and tested nearby private wells. In 1990, during an EPA site inspection, 10 additional drums were found and disposed of at an EPA-approved disposal facility.

Cleanup of the contaminated soils finished in 2002.

Long-term Cleanup: In 1989, following the completion of a remedial investigation and feasibility study to determine the nature and extent of contamination and to evaluate remedial alternatives, EPA selected a remedy in a Record of Decision, or ROD. It included extracting contaminated water by pumping, evaporating volatile groundwater contaminants from the extracted groundwater by air stripping, decontaminating the collected vapors with activated carbon, and reinjecting the treated groundwater to flush contaminants from the subsurface soil.   Because sampling data found that contaminant concentrations in the groundwater in one area of the site were only marginally above cleanup levels and that the levels of inorganic contaminants in the surface soil in another area were consistent with background concentrations, EPA concluded in the ROD that action in those areas was not warranted.

To enhance the cleanup of contaminated soil, EPA modfied the remedy to include an infiltration gallery, consisting of perforated pipe and gravel. It was installed after several feet of contaminated soil were dug up and transported off-site for treatment and disposal. EPA documented this change in a 2000 Explanation of Significant Differences. The soil flushing remedy started in June 2000.

As part of the soil remedy, approximately 650 cubic yards of contaminated soil were remediated.

Five-year reviews are conducted toensure that remedies that are put in place protect public health and the environment and function as intended by site decision documents. Five-year reviews were condcuted in September 2007, September 2014, and June 2017.  The most recent five-year review concluded that the remedy at the site protects human health and the environment in the short-term. In order for the remedy to be protective in the long-term, institutional controls related to prohibiting the installation of groundwater wells for drinking or irrigation until groundwater standards are achieved, and evaluating the vapor intrusion pathway for new construction overlying the groundwater contaminant plume are needed.
.

Top of Page


What Is the Current Site Status?

The groundwater extraction, treatment and reinjection system continues to operate.

The institutional controls called for in the 2017 five-year review are being implemented. 

 

 

 

 

Top of Page