DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE,(PHASE II)

LOCK HAVEN, PENNSYLVANIA

SUPERFUNDRECORD OF DECISION

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION III

PHILADELPHIA, PA

(Red)

William A. HagelRemedial Project ManagerApril 1986

AR3GIH7

ORIGINAL(Red)

CONTENTS

Section Page

1. Site Background Information. ..............2. Nature and Extent of Problems.............2a. Buildings, Tanks, and Debris..............2b. Li ned Lagoon..............................3. Health and Environmental Concerns.........4. Screening of Remedial Action Technologies,5. Remedial Action Alternatives..............5a. Alternative 1.............................5b. Alternative 2.............................5c. Alternative 3.............................3d. Alternative 4............................5e. Alternative 5............................6. Recommended Alternative ..................,7. Compliance with Other Environmental Laws.,8. Evaluation of Alternatives Not Selected...8a. Alternative 1............................8b. Alternative 3............................8c. Alternative 4. ............................8d. Alternative 5............................9. Proposed Action...........................

RR36U1*8

ORIGINAL(Red)

Summary of Remedial Alternative Selection

Drake Chemical (Phase II)

1. Site Background Information:

The Drake Chemical Site is located in Lock Haven, Clinton County,Pennsylvania. The Drake Chemical Site is bounded on the west by theAmerican Color and Chemical Company. An apartment complex, a shoppingcenter, and Castanea Township Park are located within 1/4 mile of thesite. Bald Eagle Creek is located less than 1/2 mile south of the site,and the West Branch of the Susquehanna River is located approximately 3/4mile north of the site. A leachate stream originates at the leachatelagoon and flows through Castanea Township to Bald Eagle Creek.

The eight-acre site, shown on Figure 1, is inactive and contains sixmajor buildings, including former offices, production facilities, and awastewater treatment building. Inside and surrounding the processbuildings are approximately 60 process tanks and reactors. Outside thesebuildings are approximately 10 large tanks that were used for bulk storageof acids, bases, and fuel oils. Also located on site are two linedwastewater treatment lagoons, an unlined Lagoon (leachate lagoon) fromwhich a leachate stream originates, a second small unlined lagoon (canallagoon), and an unlined sludge lagoon. Chemical sludge and contaminatedsoil covers or underlies much of the open area on site and was detectedas deep as 20 feet below the ground surface. Drums and bulk waste mayalso be buried at the site. Construction debris is strewn about the site.

Drake Chemical, Inc., purchased the site in 1962. Site use before1962 is not completely known, but it is reported that the site was usedfor the production of chemicals. Aerial photographs show that tanks,buildings, and a lagoon were located on the site between 1951 and 1959.

The early production history at Drake Chemical, Inc., is unclear,but the facility had been involved for many years in the manufacture ofbatches of specialty, intermediate chemicals for producers of dyes,pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, herbicides, and pesticides. The organiccompound, 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid (Fenac), a herbicide manufacturedat the plant, is a major site contaminant. The chemical products wereproduced using the processes of chlorination, cyanation, sulfonation, andamination. Most processes at Drake Chemical, Inc., were not highlyautomated and required hand charging of chemicals into reactor vessels.Many waste streams produced during the various manufacturing processeswere either treated or placed directly in drums and stored on site. Muchof the former lagoon area of site was filled with treated and untreatedprocess wastes and sludges, along with demolition debris and othermiscellaneous fill materials.

Drake Chemical, Inc., was cited several time between 1973 and 1982for violations of environmental and health and safety regulations. AfterDrake Chemical, Inc., failed to respond to a request for voluntary cleanup,the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), began emergency

ORIGINAL

ORIGINAL(Red)

cleanup activities at the site on February 28, 1982. During the emergencycleanup,' surf ace drums and sludges, and liquids from process and storagetanks were removed from the site. A fence was also erected around thesite. The cleanup was completed ion April 21, 1982. The EnvironmentalResponse team (ERT) of EPA performed an Extent of Contamination (EOC)Study in March 1982, which focused on the area around the leachate stream.The results of this study were summarized in the Phase I Record of Decision(September 30, 1984).

In August 1982, the EPA initiated remedial action studies at theDrake Chemical site. A Phase I (leachate stream) Remedial InvestigationReport was completed in August 19;84. A draft RI report on the remainderof the site was released in April. 1985, while the Phase II (Buildings andStructures) Feasiblity Study Report was completed in March 1986.

2. Nature and Extent of Problems

2a: Buildings, Tanks, and Debris:

Samples from buildings, process equipment and indoor and outdoortanks were collected during October 1983 to determine the chemicalcompounds contained in and about the buildings at the Drake Chemical Site.Sampling points for the building samples included tanks, drippings, onfloors and soil, rafters, sweepings, decomposed bags, ovens centrifuges,baths, open drums, filter presses, drains, and outdoor debris.

Figure 2 shows building locations on site. Figure 3 shows the layoutof Building 1. Figures 4 and 5 show the first and second floors ofBuilding 2. Figures 6 and 7 show layouts of Building 3 and 4 respectively.

Analysis for the building samples included the organics on theHazardous Substances List (HSL), Fenac, Total Organic Halogens (TOH), andbeta-naphthylamine. Fenac was detected in all but four of the samplesanalyzed for the compound. Beta-naphthylamine was detected only inBuilding 1. These samples were collected from ovens, the top of Tank1-1, Tank 1-2, and a filter press.

Building samples and analysis for the indicator compounds showcontamination in a concentration range of <0.1-460,000 ug/g of Fenac(2,4,6 trichlorophenyl acetic acid), 30-232,000 ug/g of TOH and NoDetection - 3,800 ug/g of beta-naphthylamine.

A wide range of organic compounds were detected during the investigationat concentrations which varied from part-per-billion to percent levels.Compounds with the highest concentrations were detected mostly in samplesfrom Buildings 1 and 2 and in debris samples from outside the buildings.

i

The compounds detected are listed on Tables 1 and 2.

AR3GU5

Hrl §03

Q!ZUJoUJ

ORIGINAL(Red)

CM

oLb

AR30U52

ORIGINAL(Red)

UJec3o

2__•

UJ

KZUJ

<<r<

CMUJ

d

oUJoUJ

ITO

ftR30IU53

ORIGINAL(Red)

UJcc3O

UJ

h-zUJ

LJO

1cr

cr sU|g<LJ

OUJ

cro

<o

ORIGINAL(Red)

toUle3O

UJ>

-'U*uj1Wl~ -u,

crevl

crUJzUI

8M

_f<UlX,

LJ

cro

<o

ORIGINAL(Red)

3O

H-Ul2UJo

LJCO8LJcr

UlI

z!icrcr

<crUJzUJ

ro

cro

LU

I

§

UlK3O

u»-UJcrooo

S 5;! o

flC

"UJ

33:HUlUlO

CDI-UJ

Ulcr

_jcruiIs

O3.

UJ

U5co OT

cr

oUlXoLUcro

ORIGINAL(Red)

TABLE 1

BUILDING SAMPLESMAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF BASE/NEUTRAL EXTRACTABLE ORGANICS

DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

______Parameter______ Maximum Concentration Building Number

Anthracene <2Q 1Benzo(a)anthracene 42,OOQQ 1Benzo(a)pyrene 6.5Q 1Ben2O(b)f!uoranthene 14Q 1Benzo(ghi}perylene <5Q 1Benzo(k)fluoranthene 14Q 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 78 2Butyl benzyl phthalate 9.9 2Chrysene 25Q 21,2-Dichlorobenzene 22,OOOQ 11,3-Dichlorobenzene 27,OOOQ 21,4-Dichlorobenzene 48Q 1Dimethyl phthalate 23Q 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <600Q outsideDi-n-octyl phthalate <2 21,2-Diphenylhydrazine <4 2Fluoranthene 11Q 1Hexachlorobenzene 1,381 outsideHexachlorobutadiene 120Q outsideHexachlorocyclopentadiene 110,OOOQ 2Hexachloroethane <2 outsidelndeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene <5Q 1Isophorone 64Q outsideNaphthalene 2,OOOQ outsideNitrobenzene 1.5Q 2Phenanthrene 850Q outsidePyrene 8.4Q 11,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2,705 outsideAniline 61Q 54-Chloroaniline 29,504 22-Methylnaphthalene 4,500Q outside

ug/g: micrograms per gramQ: questionable analysis based on results of data validation<: less thanoutside: outside tank, exterior of building, or debris surrounding building

OWGHWl

TABLE 2

BUILDING SAMPLESMAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF ACID EXTRACTABLE,

VOLATILE, AND PESTICIDE ORGANICSDRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

_____Parameter_____ Maximum Concentration Building Number

2-Chlorophenol 0.32Q 22,4-Dimethylphenol 430,OOOQ outsidePhenol <10,OOOQ outsideBenzoic acid . 300,OOOQ 12-Methylphenol <10,OOOQ outsideBenzene <2,500Q 2Chlorobenzene 32,130 outsideChloroform <2,500Q 2Ethyl benzene <2,500Q 2Methyl chloride 35Q outsideMethylene chloride 7,440Q outside1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.005 2Tetrachloroethylene 33Q outsideToluene <2,500Q 21,1,1-Trichloroethane O.OQg 4Trichloroethyiene 0.029 2Trichlorofiuoromethane <5,OOOQ 2Acetone 0.97 42-Hexanone 0.031 24-Methy!-2-pentanone 0.024 2Xylenes (total) <2,500Q 2beta-BHC 190Q 2gamma-BHC 62Q 2delta-BHC 140Q 24,4'-DDT 200Q outside4,4'-DDE 5.1Q outside4,4'-DDD 100Q outsideDieldrin 3.3Q outsidealpha-Endosulfan 67Q 2beta-Endosulfan 5.3Q outsidePCB-1254 11Q 2

yg/g: micrograms per gram<: less thanQ: questionable analysis based on results of data validationoutside: outside tank, exterior of building, or debris surrounding building

ffted)

Organic compounds detected in more than 10 samples are listed below. Thenumber of times detected is in parenthesis

0 Chlorobenzene (26)0 Bis(2-ethylhexl)phthalate (20)0 Toluene (19)° Methylene chloride (17)0 Benzo(a)anthracene (16)0 Acetone (14)° Benzole acid ( 13)0 Benzene (13)0 Trichloroetbylene (13)0 1,3-Dichlorobenzene (12)0 Chloroform (10)0 Ethyl benzene (10)0 Total xylenes (10)

The cyanide tank beside Building 2 (see Figure 4) was not sampled.The material in the tank was thought to be a solid; the level in the tankwas estimated by tapping the side of the tank. The difficulty in obtaininga sample of the material inside the tank and the danger of opening asealed cyanide tank to the atmosphere led the samplers to conclude thatit would be unsafe to open the tank. A former employee stated that thetank contained cyanide salts.

2b: Lined Lagoons:

The two line wastewater treatment lagoons located near the center ofthe site were sampled during August 1983.

Lagoon surface water samples were analyzed for the organics andinorganics on the HSL, Fenac, TOH, TOC, sulfate, chloride, ammonia, pH,and conductivity. Lagoon sediment samples were analyzed for the organicsand inorganics on the HSL and Fenac.

The surface water and sediment analysis for these lagoons aresummarized in Tables 3,4,5 and 6.

Based on the chemical analyses, it appears that water and sedimentin the lined lagoons are contaminated with metals, Fenac, and otherorganic compounds. The waters are also acidic with pH values of 2.3 and2.4.

The integrity of the liners is not known. A leak in a liner couldcause contaminants to migrate to soil beneath the lagoons then togroundwater or could cause migration as a seep from the banks of thelagoon. A large amound of rainfall could cause the lagoons to overflow.Bald Eagle Creek could flood to an extent that would inundate the lagoons.The site is in the 100-year floodplain. Flooding could cause contaminantsto migrate to surface water, sediment, soil, and/or groundwater.Contaminant migration to the air was not evidenced during the investigation,

The estimated total volume of liquid and sediments in the two lagoonsis 192,000 gallons.

ORIGINAL(Red)

TABLE 3

LINED LAGOONS - AQUEOUS PHASE DATACONCENTRATION RANGES OF INORGANIC AND INDICATOR PARAMETERS

DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

Parameter ____On Site____ Field Blanks

Aluminum 6,000 - 6,810 <100Antimony <20 - 118 <20Cadmium 4.2 - 7.6 5.8Chloride 776,000 - 1,170,000 <1,000Chromium 39 - 120 <10Conductivity 5,600 - 6,400 <5,000Copper 679 - 1,130 <50Cyanide 17 - 53 25Iron 20,800 - 25,500 <50Lead 26 - 38 <5Manganese 505 - 591 <10Mercury 0.7 - 1.1 0.3Nickel 60 - 122 <40pH 2.3 - 2.4 NASulfate 850,000 - 1,000,000 <5,000Zinc 398 C - 429 C 32 CFenac 13,100Q - 15,275Q NDTOH 48,560 - 55,900 NDTOC 3,000 - 255,000 < 1,000

All analyses expressed in ug/l (micrograms per liter) except conductivity(umhos/cm) and ph (units).

<: less thanC: corrected for lab blankQ: questionable data based on data validationNA: not analyzedTOH: total organic halogenTOC: total organic carbon

AR30U6I

ORlGfNAt 1(Red) '

TABLE 4

LINED LAGOONS - AQUEOUS PHASE DATACONCENTRATION RANGES OF ORGANICS

DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

________Parameter On Site Field Blanks

Acenaphthene ND - <4Q NDBenzo(a)anthracene ND - <1Q NDBenzo(a)pyrene ND - <1Q NDBis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate ND - <1Q ND - 10.3Di-n-butyl phthalate ND ND - 13.4Di-n-octyl phthatate ND ND - 1.5Naphthalene ND - 80Q NDPhenanthrene ND - <3Q NDPyrene ND - <2Q NDBenzyl alcohol ND - <4Q ND4-Chloroaniline ND - <10Q ND2,4-Dimethylphenol 60Q - 946 NDPentachlorophenol ' ND - <3Q NDPhenol ND - 155C ND - 8.2Benzoic acid ND - <40Q ND2-Methylphenol ND - <2Q ND4-Methylphenoi ND - 10Q ND2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND - <25Q NDChlorobenzene 13 - 120 NDEthyl benzene ND - 0.8 NDMethylene chloride ND - 57 NDToluene ND - 25 NDAcetone 1-180 NDCarbon disulfide ND - 10 ND

All analyses expressed in yg/i (micrograms per liter).

ND: not detected<: less thanQ: questionable concentration based on data validationC: corrected for lab blank

TABLE 5

LINED LAGOONS - SEDIMENT DATACONCENTRATION RANGES OF INORGANICS

DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

Parameter On Site

Aluminum 875 - 2,190Arsenic 1.6 - 2.5Barium 17.9 - 36.8Beryllium <0.25 - 0.3Cadmium 0.34 - 1.0Chromium 6.6 - 7.8Copper 189 - 218Cyanide 219 - 300Iron 2,900 - 4,540Lead 4.8 - 6.3Manganese 12 - 29.1Mercury 0.7 - 0.85Nickel 5.3 - 11.4Selenium 0.1Tin <1 - 4.4Zinc 8.8C - 16C

All analyses expressed in mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram)<: less thanC: corrected for lab blank

(Red)

TABLE 6

LINED LAGOONS - SEDIMENT DATACONCENTRATION RANGES OF ORGANICS

DRAKE CHEMICAL SITE

______Parameter______ Onsite

Benzo(a)anthracene ND - 105,OOOQBenzo(a)pyrene ND - 250Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND - 450Benzo(ghi)perylene ND - 100Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND - 340Butyl benzyl phthalate ND - 110Chrysene ND - 2701,4-Dichlorobenzene ND - 70,0000.Fluoranthene ND - 360Hexachlorobutadiene ND - 120,OOOQHexachlorocyclopentadiene ND - 350,0000.Phenanthrene ND - 160Pyrene ND - 2901,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND - 71,OOOQBenzene ND - 600Carbon tetrachloride ND - 800Chlorobenzene 90,000 - 5,000,0002-Chloroethylvinyl ether ND - 21,000Chloroform ND - 9,400Ethyl benzene 8,000 - 100,000Methylene chloride 3,000 - 6,000Tetrachloroethylene 3,000 - 8,000Toluene ND - 4,500Acetone ND - 13,000o-Xylene 64,000 - 1,000,000Dieldrin ND - 2,400Fenac 1.04 - 3,156Q

All analyses expressed in yg/kg (micrograms per kilogram)

Q: questionable analysis based on data validationND: not detected

ORIGINAL(Red)

3: Health and Environmental Concerns:

Present impacts of the lined lagoons are negligible, except fromdirect contact. Potential impacts could arise in the event of flood,lagoon overflow, or liner failure.

Of greater importance is the widespread building contamination. Thegreatest risks to human health are associated with direct contact withthe contaminants, many of which are highly toxic or carcinogenic. Beta-raphthylamine is a potent human bladder carcinogen which has been detectedat high levels in Building 1. This compound has been the focus of ahealth screening being performed in the Lock Haven Area by the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Health, Division of Environmental Epidemiology.

The buildings are presently in a dilapidated condition and continueto deteriorate, causing a hazard from collapse. A fire could causecontaminants to be released to the air. A flood could wash away contaminantspresent in the buildings, debris piles, and contaminated structures.

There has also been recent evidence of trespass at the site eventhough the site is fenced and the gates are locked. A portion of thefence has been cut out and a hole; large enough for human entry is present.

The objective of remedial action for Phase I at the Drake ChemicalSite is to reduce or eliminate exposure pathways by which buildingcontaminants may reach potential receptors. The exposure pathways ofmost concern are as follows:

0 Direct contact with contaminated areas on site0 Potential migration of contamination via fire or flood

General response actions and associated remedial technologies have tobe developed to meet the stated objectives.

4: Screening of Remedial Action Technologies:

Feasible remedial technologies for the buildings at the Drake ChemicalSite have been identified by screening general response actions forapplication to site problems caused by the buildings and contaminatedstructures and by evaluating site-specific information obtained for thebuildings during the Remedial Investigation (RI). Each general responseaction consists of one or more associated technologies that are alsoconsidered for applicability. The Drake Chemical Site general responseactions and associated technologies for the buildings and contaminatedstructures are presented in Table 7.

The technologies were then studied and reviewed in depth using thefollowing criteria:

0 Technical0 Environmental/Public Health0 Institutional° Cost

=>££§tft MC/5

gl

S5

o

= rEBH W

- Nu z n —* 811 12 HE 1^ O -i LU

<S) V) <.O v 2•» > n

ORIGINAL(Red)

g •o •=1 §) il s§ « 11 "1 £ = . l« gZ — » *• i_ w °« » I i ££ a•= != « P _ _ «~ -o ~ . . > ~2 i- « « 2 <=« » =

fi S S.g ES

| !^ s lls *iss ||§ oS * | e • £°-SS -I25 il v •«* s?ll 1^"" 3 = = |00 O J 0 3 3 -g -OZ_ CB° = 5*-*- D5*:«ni« ^OJ

WLUC2 I -=• 5 m 1 =o w g ^= £ 211 £255 £

2 . r t j * ^ D . <C(0 W>CE 55> t ®uu o^^^g ca>_ , _ .. . . -ia&

Q O _ _ _ _ _ _Z l " £ r a a u - S "a <- *- e. a a. a.

£•£ « p. ^ o. Q. 9- 9-•5 ~;: c <* m a. c cOiO C c Q- ... . . . . moQCCJ 2S. < B£O CB.OOT! HO

• * •

2Osi=; £ co_? 5 '<6D £ _

:g gU

• • • • • •

M

§Q) CO

==Oo.V) Q>

11c offi OO g

V!g sO u_ 7 cE

S > ® w (ft

a= g I HI iy- Hi!§I g ? 11^ 111 II 1o £ "S o ® e o n w w s ^ c c a.< & g- a <« o O te O Q Q CD co « | 1 > . . . oZ O Q. Oet)J3O Qeo^O'O O

5

C uJ

u <V) U

CO4o>Eoo

ORIGINAL(Red)

ccO °5a • • oE m w °_ o u >.O !S S 2u V> lf>

® !r, fe o iAI I I §t! f r Ii J I U I : ;^_ o« -D -0 00 __

_ _ ~> m 4~M en 3eo eg ?

!= 5 t B a ) a > o ) ™ £ — *• B>« S w t r t t o w ? T » = O ®•R ~ 3 3 3 3 .S 3 ^o ® to co eo co j - ^ - o c 1 "D p o u o o 3 cp e <« tov n V O O V T 9 £ C 0 3 ~•S g £ £ t J 3 J = « »~ g 5*. k. e M a> M e e o s e n j ® 0'~ O2-— S-— 33 5 !c*' -0 *'>• %^m<1"«*-'S^ i; SOi^ C D ( A C D e / } C O C Q Q ^^2i m mC 0> U ~ W .2 U U *i _= — —§ IssssSi. J £^ « fia> g a o a o a a c f w c " "S_- . s c c e o e B e o e c e o eo 3° "S "S

|I III1II1 | |f * «a| I Si o S< £ ( B J D O - O C B H - < C Z Z

a

elIIZ z </>< * ,, *O ^

UJ g £

»IuO O oZ owigr* ui C. a>

_ Uj W3 c "°§ 5 g g *o 5«'u £5" o£2 «=» 0- LU — !N i < s » 2U ss 5 O w .2U UJ S uj §05 <3< ° 2?< i K 2 <i- £ £ a

0> 4-*i cw w

4^ Cm c c £w » O toc E """ ®O 5 4- >Q. eo C r-M a> o —o >- c eo

O C eo±T ,. ® o

c£«(Q0 Ito t U ^- ^ £ <B CD

QW O : s g "5 ^ o o

fftoS" 9 £ ~ "o j?" 10 a> ^ ^ '«3— co c ecu's g o ?.£ as «P e «5 | £ * £ 5 5 S£9. g « * gt ^2- <i Oecjja d T>0> 55 O O OC

t>I eo oi »-O <r- CM

ORIGINAL(Red)

Feasible remedial technologies that remained after this screeningprocess were then combined into Remedial Action Alternatives that can beapplied to the remediation of the buildings and contaminated structuresat the Drake Chemical Site.

5: Remedial Action Alternatives:

Various remedial action alternatives were developed by assemblingappropriate remedial technologies iuto groups of actions to address theobjectives of the remedial action. The development of remedial actionalternatives to remove the contaminated buildings and structures onsiteis consistant with the various categories of cleanup as required by theNCP, Section 300.68. However, some of these categories may not be filledsince the only practical alternatives, except no action, must be designedto meet RCRA requirements (i.e. transportation and ultimate disposal).

The referenced categories are as follows:

0 I - Alternatives for treatment or disposal at an offsite facilityapproved by EPA.

0 II - Alternatives that attain applicable and relevant Federal publichealth or environmental standards.

0 III - Alternatives that exceed applicable and relevant publichealth or environmental standards.

0 IV - Alternatives that reduce the likelihood of present or futurethreat and meet CERCLA objectives of adequately protectingpublic health, welfare, and the environment.

° V - No action alternative.

In addition the remedial action alternatives must be further definedas a source control remedy, or a management of migration remedy, as requiredin the NCP (40 CFR 300.68 (d)).

Alternatives that include provisions for flood protection assumethat flood protection measures for Lack Haven proposed by the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers (USACOE) will not be implemented before remedial actiontakes place at the Drake Chemical Site.

5a: Alternative 1 - Tank, Building, Debris, and Lined Lagoon Removalwith Offsite Disposal at a RCRA-Approved Facility

The purpose of this alternative is to dismantle all structures foroffsite disposal. Included are the following tasks:

0 Draining and removal of the two lined wastewater treatment lagoons,with offsite treatment of liquid and sludge in a RCRA-approvedtreatment facility.

Removal of tanks, buildings, and debris.° Incineration of. chemicals in warehouse.c Disposal of all other materials, without decontamination, in an

offsite, RCRA-approved landfill.

Remedial Action Alternative. 1 is classified as a source controlremedy. This alternative calls for the dismantling of all buildings in acontrolled fashion. Tanks, debris, and the lined lagoons would also be removed,

All dismantled buildings, tanks, etc., will be loaded onto trucks,without decontamination, and hauled to the nearest offsite, RCRA-approvedlandfill for disposal. Liquid wastes will be hauled away for appropriatetreatment or disposal. Precautions would be taken to minimize any releaseof contaminants during transport.

This alternative's baseline capital cost is $3,632,000. There areno operation and maintainence costs anticipated.

5b: Alternative 2 - Tank, Building, Debris, and Lined Lagoon Removal;Decontamination; and Offsite Disposal

The purpose of this alternative is to dismantle all structures,decontaminate salvageable material, (metals), dispose of all otherstructures in an offsite RCRA-approved landfill. Included are thefollowing tasks:

0 Draining and removal of the two lined wastewater treatment lagoonswith offsite treatment of liquid and sludge in a RCRA-approvedtreatment facility.

0 Removal of tanks, buildings, and debris.0 Incineration of chemicals in warehouse.° Decontamination of savageable material (metals, steel structures,

etc.)0 Disposal of decontamination fluids and other liquid wastes.0 Disposal of all materials, other than decontaminated metals, in aRCRA-approved landfill.

Remedial Action Alternative 2 is classified as a source controlremedy. This alternative calls for the dismantling of all buildings in acontrolled fashion. Tanks, debris, and the lined lagoons would also beremoved. Salvageable materials (metals) would be cleaned and decontaminated,as required, prior to being turned over to the contractor. All othermaterial or structures would be loaded onto trucks and hauled to anoffsite, RCRA-approved facility. This alternatives baseline capital costis $3,143,000. There are no operation and maintenance costs anticipated.

5c: Alternative 3 - Tank, Building, Debris, and Lined Lagoon Removalwith Offsite Disposal Dependent on the Amount of Contamination;

The purpose of this alternative is to dismantle all structures,separate contaminated and uncontaminated materials based on wipe sampling,dispose of all contaminated materials in an offsite, RCRA-approvedlandfill, and dispose of all uncontaminated material in an offsite demolition

ORIGINAL(W)

waste landfill or other approved offsite facility. Included are thefollowing tasks:

0 Draining and removal of the two lined wastewater treatment lagoonswith offsite treatment of liquid and sludge in a RCRA-approvedtreatment facility.

0 Incineration of chemicals in warehouse.0 Sampling of the tanks, buildings, and debris to determine which

materials are contaminated and which materials are not contaminated,0 Removal of tanks, buildings, and debris.0 Disposal of contaminated materials in an offsite, RCRA-approved

landfill.0 Disposal of non-contaminated materials in an offsite, demolition

waste landfill or other approved offsite facility.

Remedial Action Alternative 3 is classified as a source controlremedy. This alternative calls for the dismantling of all buildings in acontrolled fashion. Tanks, debris, and the lined lagoons will also beremoved. All materials will be loaded onto trucks and hauled to anappropriate offsite facility according to the amount of contaminationpresent on the various materials involved with this operable unit.This alternative's baseline capital cost is $3,488,000. There are nooperation and maintenance costs anticipated.

5d: Alternative 4 - Tanks, Building, Debris, and Line Lagoon Removal;Offsite Disposal in a New Landfill Constructed Adjacent to the Site:

The purpose of this alternative is to dismantle all structures,construct a new RCRA-designed landfill adjacent to the site, and disposeof all materials in this landfill. Lagoon waste and chemicals in thewarehouse would be treated offsite.

The following tasks will be implemented as part of this alternative:

0 Draining and removal of the two lined wastewater treatment lagoonswith offsite treatment of liquid and sludge in a RCRA-approvedtreatment facility.

0 Incineration of chemicals in warehouse.0 Construction of a flood protection dike to protect against a

100-year flood.0 Construction of a double liner landfill within the area protected

by the flood dike.0 Removal of tanks, buildings, and debris with disposal in the newly

constructed landfill.° Capping, grading, and revegetation of the landfill and adjacent

areas.0 Performance of post closure monitoring.

Remedial Action 4 is classified as a source control remedy. Thisalternative calls for dismantling of all buildings in a controlled fashion.Tanks, debris, and the lined lagoons would also be removed. A landfillwould be constructed on property located between the railroad tracks andthe Route 220 embankment.

OR/GWAL(Red)

This alternative requires the construction of a levee to protect thelandfill from potential floods. This compacted, earthen levee would becovered with vegetation and rip-rap as floodwater velocity protectionmeasures. The elevation of the flood protection dike would be 565.5 MSLand would be based on the USACOE 100-year flood stage developed for theproposed Lock Haven Flood Control Project.

The first step would be the construction of the. flood protectiondike since this area is prone to flooding. A RCRA-style, double-linerlandfill would then be constructed within the flood protection dike (seefigure 8). As the buildings and contaminated structures are dismantled,they would be graded and capped with a multimedia cap. The imperviouszones of the cap and the liner would be connected to encapsulate the waste.The area would then be revegetated.

Leachate generation 'from the new landfill is expected to be minimalbecause of the nature of the wastes (dismantled building materials). Anyleachate that is generated would-be collected and hauled away forappropriate treatment or disposal.

The area required for the construction of the flood protection dikeand the landfill will require the purchase of land adjacent to the site.This property is in Castanea Township in the Clinton County Renewal Area.This area is the former residential area where the housing was removedwhen the area was dedicated as a corridor for Route 220. This option'sbaseline capital cost is $2,894,000. The operation and maintenance costfor this alternative is estimated to be $41,000 annually.

5e: Alternative 5 - No Action:

Remedial Action Alternative 5 involves taking no remedial action toremove tanks, buildings, debris, or the lined lagoons. The buildings andtanks would continue to deteriorate, presenting a hazard from collapse.The direct contact risk and the possibility of contaminant migration byairborne particulates would remain. Contaminants present in the buildingsand contaminated structures could migrate during a fire or a flood causingpotential exposure to downstream or downwind receptors.

6: Recommended Alternative;

Section 300.68 (i) of the NCP states that the appropriate extent ofremedy shall be determined by the lead agency's selection of a remedialalternative which the agency determines is cost-effective and whicheffectively mitigates or minimizes damage to and provides adequateprotection of the public health, welfare and the environment. In selectinga remedial alternative EPA considers all environmental laws that areapplicable and relevant. Based on the evaluation of cost-effectivenessof each of the proposed alternatives, the comments received from thepublic, information from the Feasibility Study and recommendations fromthe Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, we recommend thatAlternative No. 2 as described above, be designed and implemented asPhase II of the Drake Chemical Superfund Project.

ORIGINAL 4(Red) 1

This selected remedy will be designed to meet the Phase II remedialaction objective-of reducing or eliminating exposure pathways by whichbuilding contaminants may reach potential receptors.

For this alternative, the dismantling and removal of the buildings,process equipment, tanks, debris and lined wastewater lagoons will utilizecommon, well-established methods that involve standard engineeringpractices.

Building floors, foundations, roofing, and walls and all processequipment and other building contents would be dismantled using conventionalconstruction practices. The use of explosives would not be permitted.Shoring and bracing would be provided during the dismantling. Wallswould be removed from one story at a time. Masonry walls would bedismantled in small sections. Structural stell would be removed inindividual pieces and lowered carefully to the ground. Constant dustcontrol would be maintained during all operations. Walls and otherstructures would be wetted down prior to dismantling. Water used fordust control would be collected where possible.

Salvageable material, such as metal tanks or steel beams, would becleaned and decontaminated, then turned over to the contractor for salvageas scrap metal. One of the building pads can be used as a decontaminationpad if a curb is installed to contain decontamination fluids, however,it may be more cost-effective to use the decontamination pad which willbe constructed onsite as part of the Phase I remedy.

It is anticipated that a low-volume, high-pressure water spray systemwould be used for decontamination. This method minimized the volume ofdecontamination water requiring offsite treatment. For cost estimatingpurposes, the volume of material that can be decontaminated for disposalas non-hazardous waste were estmated based on building use and type ofmaterial. Tanks and structural steel were considered as salvageable oras scrap.

It is estimated that the total of 3,900 cubic yards of buildingmaterial, and site debris will need to be removed. Of this, approximately200 tons of metals may be decontaminated and salvaged as scrap. Quantityestimates for each building are shown in Table 8.

All materials that are not metal and therefore not decontaminatedwill be loaded on trucks and transported to a RCRA-permitted hazardouswaste landfill for ultimate disposal.

The chemicals which were stored in the warehouse on site will beremoved, loaded onto trucks and transported to a RCRA-permitted hazardouswaste incinerator for destruction. These stored chemicals were the DrakeChemical Co. stockpile that were to be used in their processing. However,since they have been stored for over four years determination to theirsalvage value would be difficult at best.

There are currently two lined wastewater lagoons onsite in whichDrake used for a short period of time in an effort to pre-treat thefacility's effluent before discharge. The amount of liquid which is in

AR30llt73

ORIGINAL(Red)

COo —£ jac/5 o>OI I I Oil O5

fx f

^30/474

ORIGINAL(Red)

the lagoons at any given time.is dependant upon the balance of precipitationas opposed to evapotranspiration and possibly leakage. The lagoons weresampled and analyzed and the sediment was found to be grossly contaminatedwith a variety of organic compounds. These lagoons will be drained andall sediment will be removed and taken to a RCRA-permitted treatmentfacility. The liner of the lagoon will be removed and loaded onto trucksfor disposal at a RCRA landfill. The earthern lagoon structure will thenbe sampled and if necessaty leveled, transported and disposed of properly.

The location of some buried pipelines is known at this time; however,there may be other unidentified pipelines. Utilities that serviced thebuildings, especially sewers, are assumed to be contaminated. Theseutilities would be abandoned, and the pipes would be plugged. Buriedpipes associated with plant operations .will be addressed during the PhaseIII remediation.

Utilities that cross the site and serve other properties would betemporarily or permanently moved or replaced if they interfere withimplementation of remedial actions.

7. Compliance With Other Environmental Laws;

The selected remedial action alternative was evaluated in the contextof site remediation in compliance with the NCP which requires that Federal,State and local laws and reulations be considered.i f

Applicable Federal regulations include the following:

° Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)0 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines0 Department of Transportation (DOT) hazardous materials transportation

regulations.

All disposal of hazardous material, aqueous or solid, will be hauledby licensed operators and will be disposed of at RCRA-permitted hazardouswaste facilities. All manifest requirements will be implemented forloaded hauls.

All licensed haulers must meet all DOT equipment and transportationrequirements.

All work will be performed under OSHA guidelines for work at hazardouswaste facilities.

8: Evaluation of Alternatives Not Selected;

8a: Alternative 1 - Removal with Offsite Disposal at a RCRA-Approved Facility

Although this alternative gives the same results as the selectedoption it does not attempt to decontaminate salvagable metal and thereforeallows for the maximum capacity of on-site material to be disposed in a RCRAfacility.

ORIGINAL(Red)

8b: Alternative 3 - Removal with Offsite Disposal Dependent on the Amountof Contamination.

In this option wipe samples would be taken of all materials todetermine the extent of building contamination. Based on this analysis,a determination will be made as to the location of ultimate disposal.The problem of sampling a representative amount of material for contaminationdetermination would make implementation of this option slow and tedious.Sample verfication through quality assurance checks would need to becompleted before any onsite material is transported offsite. Verificationthat material is not contaminated (even with wipe sample analyses) fordisposal in a municipal landfill would be difficult. Since there is notalot of room onsite for a staging area, dismantling of the buildingswould be slow at times stop waiting for sample analysis. Continuity ofwork would be solely dependent upon a laboratory efficiency.

8c: Alternative 4 - Offsite Disposal in a New Landfill Constructed Adjacentto the Site.

One of the problems with the option is the aquisition of land tobuild the landfill. EPA would have to rely on local government to dedicateland for a construction. Realization of that scenerio is not veryplausible. In addition, because the landfill would be constructed inwithin a 100-year floodplain, a flood protective dike/levee system wouldneed to be constructed. This may conflict with the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, which are currently planning a flood control levee in the LockHaven Area. Thirdly, this option has met with great opposition fromlocal officials, and the public when discussed at the public meeting.

8d: Alternative 5 - No Action.

The purpose of reviewing the no action alternative is to estimatethe effect of not performing remedial actions on the buildings andcontaminated structures.

Under the no action alternative, the buildings would remain standing.This alternative does not address the remediation of the buildings, nordoes it address the potential threat to the environment of publiuc healthvia the associated contamination pathways.

The potential for direct contact with contaminants in the buildingsand contaminated structures would not be addressed. There is also thepossibility of offsite migration via airborne particulates or by a fireor flood.

If No Action was chosen at this time it would only delay theineventability of building removal, probably until Phase III. Removal ofthe buildings and structures now would also enhance any remedial actiontaken in Phase III.

A comparison of all alternatives can be found in the AlternativesMatrix (Table 9).

ORIGINAL(Red)

9: Proposed Action :

We request your approval of. the .recommended alternative. Thisestimated base capital cost for this option is $3,413,00^. There areno operation and maintenance costs for this alternative.

W3QU77

no3rrto3Cu3*»*

(_,3•

HJO33*

-i. en'""f (<: m

rrO cu-h 03

rr3* ftro to£-u <;3 toro M

CL1

torrcr

•

> to -o3 3 0O rr 05C to3 C Mrf1 *o0 3 fDcn -a

rr fbD* 3ro CL1

rr cn <3- to tocu 3 CJcn -o cu

l-J CLo ro cu•a cn rrrr vjH. CO 03 O3 ro cn

CLcu £03 cu cu

3 -aro

cr i-n cjro o toft cj 3to a.C rr cn.cn rr cuft) cu CJ

03 CJocn o cu

T3 03rr rr3- cu OQro o cj

3 roc-« toO rrC ro

Cj

£ 3 3CL o toCJ 3 rtcj i ro

ft cjy o curo 3 wrr c- «CL tocu 3 c**cn c" 03cn 3i— to CLft rr roc ro rocJ CL 3rr » roa.

£ 3 OQto o o03 3 curr I 3ro 3" OQ

tol—> N rrto to o3 cja. a. toCh OC" Ct— 03*--•

O 71 00cn ro rren 3 cj03 O CH- < ftrr to rrro M c

r-ja S fDCU M. 0303 rr1 3"

1-3 033- curo 3

CUcn CJrr toto 1rrH" rrcn orrCU >ft CJto rrCJ •

t_**

3* OQ roto O cjN l-u Cuto 3 toc) OQ CJCuO rr toc o ncn ftto H*£ CLto 3 rocn O 3rr 3 rrro i M

ro to to< ftro co ft3 c ro

"& T3cu ro rrcn cj

cn £rr C toJ 3 03ro CL rrro

03c* enCT ^ro o- 3

3 O toto cn 3rr CLro ftn O rtcu 3 cjto rr toi-J B 303 3 03. i— -a3 0to nrr rrf& toCu rr

cuO3

rr to -o3T cr CM. o crcn e c-<

rr *-u3 ftto cnrt O 3ro 3 rci-j ro ro"* rrto o cu— ' -n 3

OQ

CO LUc .CJ HCL tocu 33 7?OQ 03cn -to3CL

cn Hro _rto rocncu rrcr rocu ftCJ 3*cu 3rr cu•< ntoc1* i-Jcn

O 1-3o =r3 0)rrto cjcu cn3 7T-torr Oro cnCL3torr1

rr oH- ro0 rr3 rrc-> 3to OQ3Cu tocncu CLc-i ro^ 3ort CJO H-

1

cn COO cuci 3rr CJ3" toro itCu rr033 >to cJ3 rrrr .;_ii-u c—3OQ

O 1-3O 3"3 roft 1ro roi-j3 Stoto cnrr

03rr O_r sro ro

u>•*x>ooa"—^

Tl 73 2 rt Oto c*"5 to to rnft 53 rr 3c* > ro cu 2;CJ cj 3 oCU > cu to 3rr -a to rr 1^ -0 cj ro O• cj CL ro

0 M. ft< 3 Oro 3CL to 1

Oi ro rr 1-3 cn 3"cn 3* >-u cu to

3 rr M. 3 ro No H. cn ro cj »33 CL cjrr to O rr . Cu3" rr T3 O O03 ro rr C.. Cu H- M- 03

0 3rt 3 T3 SO I-1 tocu ro cnrr cn 3 rr» ro ro7? 3ro rr

cn -a >^ cj03 ro i—1rr cn Oro w g3 c

cj <S ro ocj s ccJ to 3

rr rocr ro -ro cj 3-C i-u03 OQro 3*Cu•

03 COcu torr c-ro <

toO CTQi". ro03 .•o0 Ocn cnto cnCJ 1

3 35ro rorr CJ3" CJOcu ro03 03

rrcu to3 crc-irr curr wro s*ro

Cu

3 rrro rorr cj3" 3O cuCu 3

ro0cn rt

3"CL rocucn cr•o roO 03cn rttou- *•

3to133*rr>CJto33ro.

CO O ftrr m o1 3C S rrft TO tort rt 3C to c>.c« CJ 3ro to03 rt

P-4«

cn oO 3cj

13 C3i-i roO ftft 0ro 3ro rrcu toC 3CJ CUro scn a

rtto H.ro 3

to ft ch3 0 1 —to 3 Ci — ' rr cu^ to CuN curo 3 sCL ro o

Cu Crr CJo a CL3a. cu crro roI

-B rr M-03-3rr ro toro rr3 < i—rr o OCU HJ 3to tocJ rr cr^ ro0 cJ ftcn cu to

N Ccr to cnro rr rorr c-to o o1 3 cn

5O CO 5C NJro rt c •3 CJ M.O C c- 1-3< ft CL toto rr cu 3CJ S 3 ?r. cj OQ 03ro cn -O cnro to1 3

Cu

— cn 13 O. CU 1^ M-

3 O 03cu ft 3c- ro toto ro 3cj Cu rr

C, — -*rr cj i-uo ro 3

OQ> cucj enrt.

a 3 c/3ro to cuft rr 3O — cu3 < CJrt ro toto cj3 *— *M. . rr3 0torr >O rt3 ro

-!1

rr toHU W

< 3ro ro—— QJ

cn>i — <rrroCj3to1

C CO COcn rr curo ro 3Cu to cu

3 c-cn to0 S. n

(-J rrCu H- oroO 3 >O O M3 rr rrrr .to rr3 ro —i

rr g 13 Z3- ro c ocu cj o-03 ro CJ 03

HU H tO 1 0 OQ13 ro 3rr ft ft -uH. ~ O "no ro 3 —3 < 3 ft» ro ro toa. 3 3

rt rtO 0)3

"£V1 — ..£*uo"_—

•fl VG T3to o Oft 50 M

1 — ' . — iM. >

•<: 13 rt. r^

O to<roCu

g ro rr i— 5 t o r o e n gO033"H. 3 r o r r r o3 rr cu g Cu cj Q; rtrr -u cn ro cu 3 j3"3 T3 3 0. 003 to O rr cj OQ to Cu. rr 13 o to cj cn

ro rr ft rr CuCu cu cu rr ro cj.

O 3 >— ft ro 3to 3 13 ft 3* 3 <rr CJ ro 3 OQ O

cu fr> • O cu cJc^ 03 3 c-* 3 ^ro o i H-

3 OQ 3rr ••< OQ

O CU jyj

-n 3 O3

£ rr roto cs03 to cjrt 3 curo in cn03 13 7f

O cnO Cjch rr cucn to 3cn rt <cu -u Orr O I--ro 3 <ro

Cu

to o £ >T3 r C-CJ t-u f— i03 £< CT toro to ro 03Cu rr» -L ro-n O "•to w cn gft > 13 toi-- O r-r^ 03 rocu C cjrr CL — u•< to• c-

c n 3 3 " S r r f t h J c - . nt o ^ - t o O t o O S ^ S r ocn 3 N cj 3- 3 »-u j i — ifD cu Jo 7^ c J r r 0 3 3 f trr g i | ro cj rr to^ cu Cu cj o n cn cn

N 03 ro cJ CJ >J. fo13 ro ' — ' — '• i — * cn ^*c J C u g t o s r o p c s o3 CT C ro rr ft o.•-<cJCu c n r r t o n

Cu . O 3 rr Oto cn cr 3cr to to a* ro rrcn ro ti ft ro tocu ro ft to 3rr rt ro * iro < -3 cj

1 •

C »r-ri O

cn 3cu <rr toro cjC EHU HU

03 rri 3-

£ CfD rrI—— 1 1— U

f— I h- >i— t-

fD Ncn orr coQ;cr n

r* 33* Oro 3CL -

H-03

3CU

3d*3toCJ.

to tort 3cu cuO rn3 rocn cn* rr

p-u3OQrjroOQ31

rr to3- 3

•3 £rt t—ro cjrrto 3

rj'-n roo to

ro

o13rr

03.

co to -rf C »

3 c- Hft Cu torr cu 3

cj OQ 03ro cn -Oi

to3Cu

cn to 3rr 3 3"c;ft cj Cu(-p fl) cuC 3 cncj 0 3ro < Mcn to 3

cJ rrO cJcn TI 3H- OQrrro

cj ro 1-5ro 3 31n < roro cu13 c< -arr o OO 3 rr*" 3 roro 3ro 3 rrX rr c*»"O to toO CJ i-J03C cncj 0ro i

r?l tfto 03 torr rr 3ro 013 -acn ro o3- ro <-tcu rr rr13TD C O3 HOQ £

to toto 3 cn3 Cu rrCL ro

cf 0cu ro M.i — . g y;c- 0 3< toOQ to 3ro >— rr3 C-1

to rr OQrr '-'*ro < tocJ. 3a. rr CuC 03rr

cj ft Zro o oft Scu g cnro ro M.< 3 OQro rr 3o 03 cu

cnC £ c"3 ro ft

cj torr ro 33* rth-.en

<2vcr*['•J"

rt JSQs

.j,i — 'rrrocj3tortM*<ro

t-x%ro Hto rocn ftcr 3CJ ftCU fljrr i — '*s

n3

O <O i—3 cjft 0ro 3C! 33 rocn 3

rrtoi — i

c- 1303

i— 1 rr03 c--cn rrC cro rrcn —O3to—i

"dm c<: crB i-"^ c*.C fttort 3;O to3 c-cn rr

13CcrCI.

ft0o33ro3

cn

C n0 rtM Krt C3- 3

r*

1 i 1

k

•-

cnCU

rrfD.

•

T3 £!0 0o een cjCU CLcrcj rod* 3rr to^ Cu• 3

to

•-

rrcjrocn•atocncno3rrOrrrrro

rrcutoi-jrrcjrocn-ato0303rorjcn

OCfCufDi-j

rtO13cjro<ro3rr

rrcrCfrotorrcncjO3TJ0rrro31

rrOcrro

§X)CJOroCLl-u3

OCUCjroftrrftO3rrtoftrr

ftO3rrC|OCJ03

Sto3roroCL

'ncCJrrcrfDcf

X)crcncufttoi — i

CU cu3' 3

OQrr3* 3-fD C3to to

cf 3roto 13• o

"OcCJtorrCUO3

rt cn3" cjfD C

cnft rrO cj3 to3 rr3 0| • M

rr<•< -*. 3

0 3cj CU

OQCh cjCJ to0 rrO cuCL 03^CUtoct>CUCJro

O d- Cj

en 3 rorr 3n o o

3* <fD 13 tocr M•a to -cj cno ro 13( _ i. r^ft CH 0ft CH crrr CH tocr

i — i^

X) en ftO d. Orr cj 3ro ro rr3 torr o 3CU I-J CU

to 3cj en to^ • ) ••-' £2

^ O rrO cnto a.

Ch <cn to d-fD 3 toft CLrr1

3 CTXJc ro oft CU3-33ro rtto rr3 d.OQ £ rrro d-M rr £

3" Oto c3 t-JCu CL

OcnencncurrroftO3rrto3cu3to3rr

Oeno-CcuCJCLcu3JQ

3OQcjtorrcuOa0ch

rrCTro

CLroftcucnruO3torrrr=Tcu03

••

2J0^

ortM*o3

ZOrr

to1313cufttocr(— *ro

rr s;•3" Oro ct — icj Cucu03 3?r o

rr0en cj

roCuCftro

d- S3 Oro c^ CJcu CLrrto CLcr rol-u CJCJ toi-u v<;rt<-< rrcrro

rr S3- 0ro c

i-Jcj CuCuen 37T O

rrOen cjro0 Cuch Ccn ftcn rocurrro

£ CHto encn3

rr Oro toftPO rrO d.O 03

-COC_ 3

rt t> O Zi — 7C COcr cu o ro M. ro rrro i-j. 3 £ 03 3 cj

C3 0) 13 O CCO ft rr r1 C < fti-u ro cj to cn to rrrt 3 C 3 to t-J Cro rr O Cu CJ i-j• rr en £ ro

rr ro d- cu cu cnO Cu CJ 3 rri-" cr

to

f D £ c r - a c r r r r o o S> rr rr Cu. c\ t—u ro ^ to 3* 3 O CJ 3* — T* d«C r t t o 0 3 f D O Q 3 r r r o r o c nc u _ r i 3 f t r o d-cn ro 3T 3 O r o r r c u C J 3 r t c j c n c T t og C M - u t o r o c j 3 t o C 3r o r r c h f t O 3 r t > C t o 3 d - r r3 O r o s C u c j f t rt ro c- ' CJr r c n c j c n chd-rf cu cud.• 133 f t > - u 3 i - u < j c n c u 3

rD fD Oi O H~* OQ O (^ O H3 OQf t C u 3 3 C J 3 CJCTQd- Cu g en H- 03 Oto o to o M > enCJ ft 3 cj i-i 3 cu

to ro Cu cn3

c J c r t o x i f D c J C H T 3 0 r t 3O f D r r O c J t o O c j o c r r t )to rr d. rr d. 3 ft O 3 f D 3C u £ O r o 3 C L t o 130) rr

ro 3 3 d* ch rr ro rr CJ tot o r t r r 3 d - - u r j c j t o c J3 3 O C U J U C J O i-"C3Cu r-r, to rr c- '3 v - f t a . r o

rt i — l ro . rr en cnEO3-rr 0 3 < O rod.cnO r o 3 " C i-ucn CucJfDC ro rr to c! cj ftrr cj cu g rr rr rt

cu to cu to ro cnNJ CJ 3 N >-J H-S3 1 0. | i- mO •-<•

CuchCJ0 toT3cni3S £ 0 c n ? d c !cu cu to ro ci cj cj cJ ct. 03 en o o roc n c J 3 C u r o O O t o C J 03 cjpajacnc-Cucu to '— '• O 3 CJ rtto £>Cc u f t . r o c L s r o n c uf t £ c n M ft rocu c r o t o c jC O O r r r r n C L 3 i — > t o 3 3 r oi - J C M c u o 13 t o N 0 3 C L 3I-TCJ o - J - S C t o S t o r r ro

CL to 3 3 rt co ft CL cj *-j pt 3rr cjOrr cnC L C C T r rO cr c- ' O r r o o c u Q f t r o c o

r o t o c n 3"cJrrirr C J C r rOQ 3 ro c r c J M M - c o or o < C L r r r o « O r r i - nrr ro 1 3" 3 to« n ro rr

v; ro

3 - O r r £ r o > c J c r c j j j a s c H c-tocjt o O r o t o < t o r o d - o r r c h . c n c - .r r c n n c n r o r - o 3 t o c n c c j e nr o c n r t 3 * 3 O CLI— 'TTr^ClS cu^rcjcucu rrO cnrr CLftcj 303d - c r < O 1 d. 3- rr rrot o c J f D C g ^ CJ O C T f D X ) S*tot— ' < r r o r o c-p-n roa.ro i-Ji-jen a. CM - 1 - 1 1 3 » cj rrroft ". pf cj if oe3 cj roCLto!V3'CL gcTd-rr^: i-jrrO c j r o r D cn CJ331 33*ffcj CJCJ r r c u c u n i n tort)cn 3 c t 7 r o ro t o r o 3 rucnrr Cu O ro CL cj | < QJcj i cj ro 3CD *•< rotos

O £ £ f t O r r c u Q TO to c- ' cn rtXJ cu o 3* j 3* rr 3 O 3 O cj rjT j r t C O r r t o d . r o < C L f t O f OO — T* I — ' cn cu rr ft ro to 3 3i— g 3 a i - u t o O 33- crrrcun- cn3ft g r o f t O f ti - u - j r o r r £ to ro d. PT cjOd. J j J J p f l - j i — — l 3P_.rT-J-^.

3 r t r - n t o 0 3 3 ' r o r r O c u rr• M O r r cug-g • n N rr cu

3 C 0 3 t o O a r o c r f trrOQcu cjr-i ,_i 3 ip cucr rr TT i cn cnrr ro 3

Cu

Cn J>C *C1'1 — t-3Cu tod- 33 7TOQ 0303 -

to3fa-

ro >-3< _rto roCJC rrto rorr ftO D

ften toO cJcj

to ZCu 0

ro cjcf 0cn 3ro OQro rr3 ro< cjcu g

O31

3' HC 3"03 CUrr 033 toro cjro rrrr ro

r-jto 3cj tol™ rr

>-»*<fD

01 >TJO Ort nr_u< CuC". c"rr cn.j, js

ro tocn 3rr

rr cJl-T* c».fD 3

OQ

3 Hro _rrr cu03

cu 0rr X)CT rr

I-U

ro oX 31£to03

wN3OCs;^2

3>i — 'rrrocj3torrCU

<ro

•nro Hto ro0) ftcu 3*cr 3cu ct.CJ ftCU Q)rt CJ^

r i3O <0 d.3 Mft Oro 3cj 33 ro03 3

rrtoi— '

CH303

CH rr03 i-u03 rrC Cro rtcn cuo3toi — i

13M C«s crto c-CJ M-C fttorr CCd- roO to3 M

rrsr

T3Crrt— 'CUftOO3gro3rr

S c|o roi-i 03rr (Z=r .3

rr

acjto7? >ro cj" Ho ro to3- cj crro 3 cjg » n>

cu rrft CU v£)

to <cj ro /-vcn o

/-N Ocd 2 33" to rrto rr .03 cj v_xro i—

ORIGINAL(Red)