•A Halliburton Company FIELD INVESTIGATION TEAM ACTIVITIES AT UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES FACILITIES - ZONE I NUS CORPORATION SUPERFUND DIVISION 0215 *64414* 64414 02-8902-40-PA REV. NO. 0 FINAL DRAFT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT TUTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS PREPARED UNDER TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE DOCUMENT NO. 02-8902-40 CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7346 FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY MARCH 31,1989 NUS CORPORATION SUPERFUND DIVISION SUBMITTED BY: DIANE TRUBE PROJECT MANAGER JOSEPH MAYO SITE MANAGER REVIEWED/APPROVED BY: RONALD M. NAMAN FIT OFFICE MANAGER 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT PART I: SITE INFORMATION 1. Site Name/Alias Tutu Texaco_________ 2. 3 4. Street Route 38 and Route 384 City St. Thomas (Tutu District) County N/A State U.S. Virgin Islands Zip 08002 County Code N/A Cong. Dist. N/A ERA ID No. New Site Latitude 18°20'34"N. Longitude 64" 53' 18"W. USGS Quad. Eastern St. Thomas. U.S. Virgin Islands Owner Texaco Caribbean Tel. No. 809-774-1931 Street P.O. Box 3740 City Charlotte Amalie Operator Unknown Street________ City_________ State U.S. Viroin Island Zip 00801 Tel. No._________________ State Z'P_ Type of Ownership [x] Private Q Federal Q State n County Q Municipal Q Unknown [Other Owner/Operator Notification on File Q RCRA 3001 Date [xj None QCERCLA103C Date Q Unknown 9. Permit Information Permit None Permit No. Date Issued Expiration Date Comments 10. Site Status [x] Active D Inactive 11. Years of Operation Unknown O Unknown to Present 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 12. Identify the types of waste units (e.g., landfill, surface impoundment, piles, stained soil, above- or below-ground tanks or containers, land treatment, etc.) on site. Initiate as many waste unit numbers as needed to identify all waste sources on site. (a) Waste Management Areas Waste Unit No. Waste Unit Type Facility Name for Unit 1 _______Drums________ Waste Oil Drums____________ 2 Underground Storage Tanks Waste Oil Underground Storage Tanks (b) Other Areas of Concern Identify any miscellaneous spills, dumping, etc. on site; describe the materials and identify their locations on site. No other spills, incidents of dumping, etc, were observed on the site during the NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT on-site reconnaissance on 2/15/89.___________________________ 13. Information available from Contact Amy Brochu______ Agency U.S. ERA_______ Tel. No. (201)906-6802 Preparer Joseph Mayo_____ Agency NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT Date 03/31/89_____ 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 PART II: WASTE SOURCE INFORMATION For each of the waste units identified in Part I. complete the following six items. Waste Unit 1 - ____Drums______, Waste Oil Drums___ 1. Identify the RCRA status and permit history, if applicable, and the age of the waste unit. There are no known RCRA permits for this waste unit. The age of this waste unit is unknown. Until June 1986, the Water and Power Authority (WAPA) accepted waste oil and used it for fuel. A batch of waste oil was found to contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and WAPA stopped accepting waste oil. Currently, there is no acceptable method for disposal of waste oil on St. Thomas. Waste oil generators must store all their oil. 2. Describe the location of the waste unit and identify clearly on the site map. The waste unit is located in the northern corner of the Tutu Texaco property. 3. Identify the size or quantity of the waste unit (e.g., area or volume of a landfill or surface ; impoundment, number and capacity of drums or tanks). Specify the quantity of hazardous substances in the waste unit. There are twenty seven 55-gallon drums in the waste unit. Twenty-five of these drums contain waste oil generated from automotive repair and servicing operations. The remaining two drums reportedly contain dirt. There are also three 20-gallon drums and a few 5-gallon pails containing waste oil on site. The total quantity of waste in this unit is approximately 1420 gallons. 4. Identify the physical state(s) of the waste type(s) as disposed of in the waste unit. The physical state(s) should be categorized as follows: solid, powder or fines, sludge, slurry, liquid, or gas. Twenty-five of the drums contain liquid waste oil. Two of the drums reportedly contain dirt which is a solid. 5. Identify specific hazardous substance(s) known or suspected to be present in the waste unit. Twenty-five of the drums on site contain liquid waste oil from automotive repair and servicing operations. This oil may contain small quantities of gasoline, kerosene, or degreasing solvents. Sample analyses of waste oil from the Tutu Texaco station reportedly detected the , presence of trichloroethene (TCE). 6. Describe the containment of the waste unit as it relates to contaminant migration via groundwater, surface water, and air. The waste in the unit is contained in drums that are stored on a concete surface. There are no berms or curbing to contain the oil in the event of a spill. There is evidence of spills in the storage area, and the bung on one of the drums was open. A reading of 20 ppm was obtained from the open drum using an OVA flame ionization detector. There were no readings above background in the ambient air in the drum storage area. The containment of the waste unit provides the potential for release to surface water by runoff from spills and for release to groundwater by runoff and subsequent percolation through soil. Ref. No 1.21.22 02-8902-40-PA Rev No. 0 PART II: WASTE SOURCE INFORMATION For each of the waste units identified in Part I, complete the following six items. Waste Unit 2 - Underground Storage Tanks . Waste Oil Underground Storage Tanks 1. Identify the RCRA status and permit history, if applicable, and the age of the waste unit. There are no known RCRA permits for this waste unit. The age of this waste unit is unknown. Until June 1986, the Water and Power Authority (WAPA) accepted waste oil and used it for fuel. A batch of waste oil was found to contain PCBs, and WAPA stopped accepting waste oil. Currently, there is no acceptable method for disposal of waste oil on St. Thomas. Waste oil generators must store all their oil. 2. Describe the location of the waste unit and identify clearly on the site map. The exact location of the waste unit is unknown as the tanks were not observed during the on- site reconnaissance conducted by NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT on 2/15/89. A preliminary investigation conducted by the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) on 8/5/87 indicated the presence of two underground storage tanks. One tank had a concrete top and a concrete partition and the second tank was covered with a square steel plate. The volume and composition of the tanks, were not determined. The material in the tanks is reported to be waste oil. 3. Identify the size or quantity of the waste unit (e.g.. area or volume of a landfill or surface impoundment, number and capacity of drums or tanks). Specify the quantity of hazardous substances in the waste unit. The capacity of the tanks and the quantity of waste in the unit is unknown. 4. Identify the physical state(s) of the waste type(s) as disposed of in the waste unit. The physical state(s) should be categorized as follows: solid, powder or fines, sludge, slurry, liquid, or gas. The physical state of the waste is liquid. 5. Identify specific hazardous substance(s) known or suspected to be present in the waste unit. The waste unit contains automotive waste oil. Substances such as gasoline, kerosene, and degreasing solvents may be present in the oil. Samples of Tutu Texaco waste oil were reported ,£fr contain ,TCE. i-- / 6. Describe the containment of the waste unit as it relates to contaminant migration via ground water, surface water, and air. The containment of the waste unit is unknown. The tanks are covered, but no other information concerning the tanks' waste containment properties is available. Ref. No. 1.21.22______________ 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 PART III: HAZARD ASSESSMENT GROUNDWATER ROUTE 1. Describe the likelihood of a release of contaminant(s) to the groundwater as follows: observed, alleged, potential, or none. Identify the contaminant(s) detected or suspected, and provide a rationale for attributing the contaminant(s) to the facility. The potential exists for wastes on the Tutu Texaco site to be released to groundwater. There is evidence (photo No. R3-P10) that spilled oil is staining soil and may be transported to groundwater. There are no berms or curbs to contain the waste from the drums in the event of a spill. One of the drums was open. The drums on site contain automotive waste oil. Air monitoring instrument readings indicate that organic vapors are present in one of the drums. It is reported that samples of waste oil collected from the site contained TCE. There is insufficient information available to evaluate a release from the underground storage tank for waste oil as the construction and integrity of this tank are unknown. There are no reports of spills or leaks from this tank; however, waste oil in the tank is being stored in violation of U.S. Virgin Islands laws. Ref. No. 1,22 2. Describe the aquifer of concern; include information such as depth, thickness, geologic composition, permeability, overlying strata, confining layers, interconnections, discontinuities, depth to water table, groundwater flow direction. The rock units of St. Thomas and St. John are divided into three major groups. The Water Island Formation, which is late lower Cretaceous in age, consists of keratophyre and spiHates. The Virgin Island Group, which is probably early Cretaceous or Albian in age, consists of andesitic-pyroclastic rocks and sedimentary formations. The Virgin Island Group is divided into four formations: the Louisenhoj Formation, which consists of augite-andesite breccia, tuff, and conglomerate; the Outer Brass Limestone which consists of partially silicified- tuffaceous-radiolarian-limestone; the Tutu Formation, which consists of tuffaceous wacke, including mega breccia near the base and limestone near the top; the Hans Lollik Formation which may be Eocene in age consists of augite-andesite breccia and tuff. The final group is made up of one or more dioritic plutons These unamed dikes and plugs of quartz - andesine- hornblende porphory are Upper Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary in age. Alluvium deposits are quaternary in age. The Water Island Formation which consists of 95 percent volcanic flow breccias was probably extruded on a relatively level ocean floor. The absence of terrigenous sediments from this formation indicates that there were no emergent islands present in the area at the time of extrusion. Emergent islands would have served as a source of weather sediments or detritus, which is not present in this formation. There is evidence that sea floor subsidence occurred during the greater part of the accumulation of this formation. However, the subsidence was not rapid enough to maintain a constant water level thereby causing explosive erruptions near the top of the formation. Regional uplift occurred near the end of Water Island time. The Louisenhoj Formation of the Virgin Island Group unconformably overlies the Water Island Formation and crops out on about half of the land area on St. Thomas. Pillsbury sound between St. Thomas and St. John was the origin of this formation. Evidence of this center is based upon the coarseness of volcanic ejecta in the formation in nearby eastern St. Thomas and western St. John. Material is less coarse and tuffs are more predominant further east and west away from the pluton. This augite-andesite formation ranges in thickness from 4,000 to 13,000 feet. In certain areas of St. Thomas and St. John conglomerates are interbedded with andesitic rocks at the base of this formation. The depositional environment of this conglomerate varies from location to location throughout the formation. TUT 02-8902-40-PA Rev No. 0 The Outer Brass Formation of the Virgin Island Group is mostly siliceous limestone which overlie the Louisenhoj, Formation. This limestone formation is an offshore deposit formed by radiolarian and foraminiferal remains including a minor amount of tuff. Thicknesses are known to be up to at least 600 feet. Overlying the Outer Brass Formation is the Tutu Formation. The Tutu Formation is fine to coarse-grained volcanic wackes, which is termed flysch. This formation is derived from eroding sediments from the Louisenhoj andesites. Exposed thicknesses are known to be as much as 6000 feet. Within this formation, a megabreccia lithofacies with an average thickness of 30 feet and a limestone member with thickness up to 300 feet is worth mentioning. The Hans Lollik Formation which consists of at least 10,000 feet of augite-andesite pyroclastic rocks, crops out on Little Hans Lollik Island. Dioritic plutons are located in Pillsbury Sound between St. Thomas and St. John; the narrows, between St. John and the British Virgin Islands; and south of St. Thomas. The exact delination of these plutons are uncertain. Throughout the islands isolated dikes of quartz-andesine porphyries, andesine - hornblendes porphyries, lamprophyres, breccias and pegmatites appear. Folding occured after the deposition of the Virgin Island Group. Rocks were tilted to form a northward-dipping homocline, which is cut by sets of faults trending N 45°W, N 55°E and north. Well defined joint sets parallel each of the major fault trends. Dips range from 15° to 90° with the average being 40°. Strike-slip faults have horizontal offsets of less than 1 mile. Two major strike-slip graben structures or fault systems exist. The first passes through Redhook, St. Thomas and the eastern tip of Lovango Cay. The second crosses St. John, from Contact Point on the southwest to Brown's Bay on the northeast. Most recently Pleistocene to Holocene alluvial deposits occurred primarily in coastal embayments. However, a narrow bank of alluvium extends up to Turpentine Run on the east end of the island. Most of these deposits are composed of silt, clay, and thin, discontinuous beds of sand and gravel. Maximum thickness of these is 50 feet. Ground water movement is limited to openings and joints along fault zones. Regional geologic information is insufficient to determine whether these fractures and fault zones are present in all of the above-described formations; however, for this report it is assumed that the fractures and fault zones are present in all of these formations. The valleys on the island are the result of weak zones caused by faulting and jointing and are primary recharge areas for groundwater. Alluvial deposits have a high porosity but low permeability, making this aquifer unfavorable for groundwater production. In coastal embankments throughout the island, saltwater intrusion is widespread in alluvial deposits. In most areas, alluvial deposits are interconnected with bedrock and act to recharge precipitation to the underlying bedrock. The direction of groundwater flow in the Turpentine Run Basin Aquifer is south-southeast which is generally along the direction of flow of Turpentine Run. Depth to groundwater in the aquifer ranges from 5 to 60 feet, and the altitude of the water levels ranges from 1 to 209 feet above mean sea level. Ref. Nos. 9,11,16 3. Is a designated sole source aquifer within 3 miles of the site? No sole source aquifer, as designated in the Federal Register, is located within 3 miles of the site. Ref. No. 8 4. What is the depth from the lowest point of waste disposal/storage to the highest seasonal level of the saturated zone of the aquifer of concern? Drums are stored on a cement floor at ground level. The lowest point of the waste oil underground storage tank is unknown but is assumed to be at least 6 feet. Depth to groundwater in Virgin Island Housing Authority (VIHA) well Nos. 1 and 2, which are located approximately 500 feet northeast of the site, is reported to be 56 and £n faa* racnartiuaiw 02-8902-40-PA Rev No. 0 Therefore, the depth from the lowest point of storage to the highest seasonal level of the saturated zone of the aquifer of concern is approximately 50 feet. Ref.Nos. 1,2,9 5. What is the permeability value of the least permeable continuous intervening stratum between the ground surface and the aquifer of concern? There are no continuous intervening strata between the ground surface and the bedrock aquifer. Soils are generally thin in the area around the site. The water-bearing formations in the Turpentine Run Basin Aquifer are composed primarily of fractured and jointed volcanic rocks. The range of hydraulic conductivities associated with these formations is 10-3 to 10-5 cm/sec. Ref. Nos. 10, 11, 16 6. What is the net precipitation for the area? Net precipitation is usually calculated by subtracting mean annual lake evaporation (a surrogate measure for evapotranspiration) from normal annual total precipitation. Mean annual lake evaporation information was not available for St. Thomas; however, evapotranspiration data were available. These data indicate that 95.8 percent of the incident precipitation on St. Thomas is lost through evapotranspiration. The normal annual total precipitation for St. Thomas is 43.74 inches, but because of orographic effects on the island, normal annual total precipitation can range from 35 inches to 50 inches over short distances. In the Turpentine Run Basin, normal annual precipitation is 40 inches. Calculations for net precipitation are provided below: 40 inches precipitation x 95.8 percent lost to evapotranspiration = 38.32 inches lost to evapotranspi rati on 40 inches precipitation - 38.32 inches lost to evapotranspiration = 1.68 inches net precipitation. Ref. No. 3, 5, 12, 13 7. Identify uses of groundwater within 3 miles of the site (i.e., private drinking source, municipal source, commercial, industrial, irrigation, unusable). Groundwater within 3 miles of the site is used as a source of private and municipal drinking water, and for commerical purposes. There are at least 41 wells within 2 miles of the site. Thirty-four of these wells are within 1 mile of the site. Sixteen of these wells have been closed because they are contaminated with volatile organic compounds. Ref. No. 6,9 8. What is the distance to and depth of the nearest well that is currently used for drinking or irrigation purposes? Distance 500 feet_________ Depth 150 feet___________ Nearest well is the VIHA well No. 2, which is located approximately 500 feet northeast of Texaco. This well is believed to be used for drinking. A nearby well, VIHA No. 1, was ordered closed because of contamination with volatile organic compounds. VIHA well No. 2 is not listed as being closed for contamination, and its designated use is for domestic purposes. Ref. Nos. 6, 9 9. Identify the population served by the aquifer of concern within a 3-mile radius of the site. It is difficult to estimate the population served by groundwater on St. Thomas as there are few records available on groundwater withdrawal, sale, and transport. The locations of some wells in St. Thomas are unknown, and there are reports of illegal drilling on the island. It is estimated that there are 500 to 600 private wells on St. Thomas. Most of these are used for nondrinking domestic purposes such as washing and flushing, alth^""u -—— ~~" u~ ••—' *~' 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 drinking. There are a number of wells that are used for commercial purposes. Water from these wells is trucked to private houses and pumped into cisterns to augment the rainwater collected from roofs. Groundwater is also bottled and sold in supermarkets. There are at least 41 wells in the Turpentine Run Basin. Recently 16 of these wells have been ordered closed because they were found to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds. One of these wells was a major supplier of water to the eastern end of the island. Estimates of the population using groundwater as a source of drinking water range from none to approximately 11,000--the population of the Turpentine Run Basin which is not served by water from the desalinization plant. The actual population served by groundwater is probably less than 11,000 as desalinated water and water from wells outside the three mile radius is trucked into the area. Ref. Nos.9, 13,15,18,19 SURFACE WATER ROUTE 10. Describe the likelihood of a release of contaminant(s) to surface water as follows: observed, alleged, potential, or none. Identify the contaminants) detected or suspected, and provide a rationale for attributing the contaminants to the facility. A potential exists for contaminants to be transported to surface water. There were some spills in the drum storage area and there were no containment structures around the drums to prevent migration of the spills. The drums contain waste oil generated from automotive repair and maintenance activities. Air monitoring instruments indicated the presence of organic vapors in an open drum on site. Samples of waste oil from the Tutu Texaco Site were reported to contain TCE. The waste oil may also contain small quantities of substances such as gasoline, kerosene, and degreasing solvents. Ref. Nos. 1,22 11. Identify and locate the nearest downslope surface water. If possible, include a description of possible surface drainage patterns from the site. The nearest downslope surface water is the Mangrove Lagoon, which is hydraulically connected to the Caribbean Sea. The distance from the site to the nearest surface water along the course of Turpentine Run - an intermittent stream that drains the Turpentine Run Basin, is 2.5 miles. There are a number of storm sewers near the site and it is possible that these sewers may intercept much of the runoff from the site. It is unknown where the storm sewers discharge, but it is suspected that they discharge to Turpentine Run as it is the only drainage pathway from the basin. Ref. Nos. 2,4, 5 12. What is the facility slope in percent? (Facility slope is measured from the highest point of deposited hazardous waste to the most downhill point of the waste area or to where contamination is detected.) The facility slope is relatively flat with a slight slope toward the south-southwest. Facility slope is estimated to be 0 to 3 percent. Ref. Nos. 1,2 TUT 002 02/4 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 13. What is the slope of the intervening terrain in percent? (Intervening terrain slope is measured from the most downhill point of the waste area to the probable point of entry to surface water.) The slope of the intervening terrain can not be calculated as runoff may discharge to storm sewers and the path of these sewers is unknown. If runoff follows an overland route, the slope of the intervening terrain could be as follows: • Elevation of waste area - 200 ft • Elevation at point of entry 0 -ft • Path length-1300ft 200ft-0ft x 100 = 1.5 percent 13,000 Ref. Nos. 1,2 14. What is the 1-year 24-hour rainfall? One-year 24-hour rainfall data was not available for the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, it is known that rains exceeding 1 inch in 24 hours occur six or seven times a year on St. Thomas. It has also been reported that it is not uncommon for 24-hour rainfalls to be 2 to 3 inches. Ref. Nos. 4, 6 15. What is the distance to the nearest downslope surface water? Measure the distance along a course that runoff can be expected to follow. The nearest downslope surface water is the Mangrove Lagoon which is hydraulically connected to the Caribbean Sea. The distance from the site to the lagoon is 2.5 miles. It appears that most runoff from the site enters storm drains near the site. Since the point of discharge and the route of these storm drains is unknown, the distance to the nearest downslope surface water along the pathway is unknown. Ref. No. 2 16. Identify uses of surface waters within 3 miles downstream of the site (i.e., drinking, irrigation, recreation, commercial, industrial, not used). Surface water within 3 miles downstream of the site is used for recreation including swimming, fishing, and boating. The DPNR has designated the area of the Mangrove Lagoon for preservation and conservation recreation. Ref. Nos. 2.14 17. Describe any wetlands, greater than 5 acres in area, within 2 miles downstream of the site. Include whether it is a freshwater or coastal wetland. There are no wetlands greater than 5 acres within 2 miles downstream of the site. However, there is a coastal Mangrove wetland approximately 2.5 miles downstream. The Mangrove Swamp is designated as a preservation area in the Coastal Zone Management Program of the DPNR. Ref. Nos. 2, 14 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 18. Describe any critical habitats of federally listed endangered species within 2 miles of the site along the migration path. There are no known critical habitats of federally endangered species within 2 miles of the site. The Virgin Islands Tree Boa (Epicrates monensis qranti) is an endangered species in the U.S. Virgin Islands; however, no critical habitat has been identified for this species. Ref. No. 7 19. What is the distance to the nearest sensitive environment along or contiguous to the migration path (if any exist within 2 miles)? There are no sensitive environments within two miles of the site that lie along or contiguous to the migration pathway. Ref. Nos. 2, 7, 14 20. Identify the population served or acres of food crops irrigated by surface water intakes within 3 miles downstream of the site and the distance to the intake(s). There is no population served or food crops irrigated by surface water intakes within 3 miles downstream of the site. The nearest surface water is saline. There is a desalinization plant which uses sea water to supply drinking water, but the intake is greater than 3 miles from the site. Ref. Nos. 2, 13 21. What is the state water quality classification of the water body of concern? No water quality classification is known to exist for the Mangrove Lagoon or the Caribbean Sea, although the mangrove swamp surrounding the lagoon is designated as a preservation areabytheDPNR. Ref. No. 14 22. Describe any apparent biota contamination that is attributable to the site. No apparent biota contamination was observed during the on-site reconnaissance conducted by NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT on February 15, 1989. Ref. No. 1 AIR ROUTE 23. Describe the likelihood of a release of contaminant(s) to the air as follows: observed, alleged, potential, none. Identify the contaminants) detected or suspected, and provide a rationale for attributing the contaminant(s) to the facility. The potential for release of contaminants to the air is very small. Above-background concentrations of organic vapors were detected in a drum; however, no readings above background were detected in the ambient air in the drum storage area. The drums on site contain waste oil from automotive repair and servicing operations. The oil may contain small quantities of gasoline, kerosene, or degreasing solvents. Samples of waste oil from the facility were reported to contain TCE. Ref. Nos. 1,22 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 24. What is the population within a 4-mile radius of the site? Based on the 1980 census, the population within 4 miles of the site is approximately 36,000. Ref. No. 17 FIRE AND EXPLOSION 25. Describe the potential for a fire or explosion to occur with respect to the hazardous substances) known or suspected to be present on site. Identify the hazardous substance(s) and the method of storage or containment associated with each. No significant fire or explosion conditions are known or suspected to be present on the site. Ref. No. 1 26. What is the population within a 2-mile radius of the hazardous substance(s) at the facility? Based on the 1980 census, the population within 2 miles of the site is approximately 19,000. Ref. No. 17 DIRECT CONTACT/ON-SITE EXPOSURE 27. Describe the potential for direct contact with hazardous substance(s) stored in any of the waste units on site or deposited in on-site soils. Identify the hazardous substance(s) and the accessibility of the waste unit. There is little potential for direct contact with substances stored in the waste unit. Although the bungs are open on some of the drums and there are some spills, the drums are not located in an area that is frequented by customers. Access to the site is not controlled by a fence. There is potential for workers to come in contact with waste oil in the course of performing their jobs. Ref. No. 1 28. How many residents live on a property whose boundaries encompass any part of an area contaminated by the site? There is no evidence that any residential areas have been contaminated by the site. Ref. No. 1 29. What is the population within a 1-mile radius of the site? Based on the 1980 census data, the population within 1 mile of the site is approximately 11,000. Ref. No. 17 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 PART IV: SITE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Tutu Texaco is an automotive service station located in the Tutu area of St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. The primary activities at the site are gasoline sales and automotive repair and maintenance. The area within approximately 1 mile of the site is densely populated and contains some commercial properties. There are large housing developments northwest, north, and east of the site. Beyond 1 mile, there are scattered smaller villages and towns. The densely populated and highly commercial town of Charlotte Amalie is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the site. On February 15, 1989, NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT conducted an on-site reconnaissance of the Tutu Texaco Site. A total of 31 55-gallon drums were observed on the site. Twenty-five of the drums contain waste oil, two contain dirt, and four contain water pumped from a tank excavation. There are three 20-gallon drums and a few 5-gallon pails containing waste oil on site. In addition to the drums, there are a number of underground storage tanks below the site. An unknown number of these tank contain gasoline and two of the tanks contain waste oil. There is evidence that the gasoline tanks are "not tight" (i.e. may be leaking Ref. No. 23). The integrity of the waste oil storage tank is unknown. The underground gasoline tanks and the drums containing tank excavation water are not evaluated as they are not considered to be hazardous waste under the petroleum exclusion of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Samples of waste oil from the site were reported to contain TCE. The waste oil may also contain small quantities of gasoline, kerosene, and degreasing solvents. Until June 1986, the Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority (WAPA) accepted waste oil generated by marinas, airports, and auto maintenance facilities. The waste oil was blended with fuel and burned as a source of power. WAPA stopped accepting waste oil when a batch was found to contain PCBs. The source of the PCBs is unknown. Currently, there is no permitted method of waste oil disposal on St. Thomas. Generators must store their waste oil, but the facilities are not inspected or issued permits. These conditions combined with drum shortages and poor housekeeping has resulted in generally poor waste containment at many of the facilities. The waste oil drums on the Tutu Texaco site are not properly stored or contained. There are oil spills visible on the ground and oil-stained soil was observed on the Gassett Property adjacent to the drums. There are no berms to contain the oil in the event of a spill. Underground tanks for waste oil storage were described in a preliminary investigation completed by the DPNR in August of 1987. Waste oil was being stored in these tanks in violation of Virgin Islands Law. Based on the above TUT 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No 0 considerations, a recommendation of MEDIUM PRIORITY for further action is provided. Because of the spills, stained soil, and improper waste containment the potential exists for transport of the wastes to surface water and groundwater. The owner of the Tutu Texaco Site, Texaco Caribbean Inc., has been identified as one of nine potentially responsible parties in the contamination of groundwater in the Tutu area. In July and August 1987, EPA confirmed by sampling that volatile organic compounds were present in a number of wells in the Tutu area. DPNR has issued orders to close 16 wells in the area. EPA removal action activities in the Tutu area included sampling of wells and cisterns, removal of contaminated water from cisterns, and supplying clean water on a regular basis to affected residents. Locations for the collection of environmental samples at the Tutu Texaco site are limited. The only available soil near the drum storage area is on the adjacent Gassett Motors property. A number of the wells in the vicinity of the site are known to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds. As a consequence, there may be few wells available that are useful in determining whether hazardous substances have been released from the facility. Sampling of waste sources on the site is recommended to determine if the waste oil contains hazardous substances. Efforts should also be directed toward further definition of the population using groundwater for drinking and toward determining the volume, construction, and integrity of the underground oil storage tanks. Sampling is not recommended if ongoing or planned removal actions or enforcement actions result in the collection of samples from the site by EPA or DPNR, or by Texaco Caribbean for the aforementioned agencies. TUT ATTACHMENT A MAPS AND PHOTOS 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 TUTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS CONTENTS Figure 1: Site Location Map Figure 2: Site Map Exhibit A: Photograph Log TUT' 02 8902-40-PA - ^-x"V_* * xT-IT - - , • • • ) to VIRGIN ISLANDS (QUAD) EASTERN ST. THOMAS, V.I SITE LOCATION MAP TUTU TEXACO SERVICE STATION ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FIGURE 1 NUS SCALE: V- 2000' 02-8902 40-PA DIRT FILLED DRUMS 20 GLN. DRUM AREA SITE MAP FIGURE 2 TUTU TEXACO. ST. THOMAS. U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS L IMUS ( NOT TO SCALE ) TUT O02 0233 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 TUTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FEBRUARY 15, 1989 PHOTOGRAPH INDEX ALL PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY DIANE TRUBE Photo Number Description Time R3-P1 West side-Dirt pile 1300 R3-P2 Drums under overhang 1302 R3-P3 Tutu Texaco drum storage area. 1304 R3-P4 Tutu Texaco excavated dirt pile and pvc-pipe collection 1308 system. R3-P10 Tutu Texaco drums as seen from Gassett Motors. Note stained 1353 soil. IMUS CXDRPORATOM 02-8902-40-PA -ev. No. J TUTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS R3-P1 February 15, 1989 West side-Dirt pile. 1300 zon japun suiruQ 6861 '51 SQNV1SI NI9aiA 'S'n 'SVWOHi "1: i nini Vd-Or-zes-ZC IMUS CORPORATION ;2-8902--0-PA Rev. .'lo. C "UTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS R3-P3 February 15, 1989 Tutu Texaco drum storage area. 1304 IMUS CORPORATION J2-8902--0- -,ev. :io. " ~UTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. V I R G I N ISLANDS R3-P4 February 15, 1989 1308 Tutu Texaco excavated dirt pile and pvc-pipe collection system. NUS CORPORATION 02-8902-4Q-FA Rev. :,'o. .~ TUTU TEXACO ST. THOMAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS R3-P10 February 15, 1989 1353 Tutu Texaco drums as seen from Gassett Motors. Note stained soi1. ATTACHMENT B REFERENCES 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 REFERENCES 1. Field Notebook No. 0398, U.S. Virgin Islands Drum Reconnaissance, TDD No. 02-8902-29, NUS Corp. Region 2 FIT, Edison, New Jersey, February 14 to 17, 1989. 2. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey Topographic Maps, 7.5 minute series, "Central St. Thomas, Virgin Islands and Eastern St. Thomas, Virgin Islands Quadrangles" 1955, revised 1982. 3. Gomez - Gomez, F. and J.E. Heisel. Summary Appraisals of the Nation's Groundwater Resources-Caribbean Region. Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-4, 1980. 4. Stone, R.G. Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands, Volume XIX - Part 1, Meteorology of the Virgin Islands. 1942. 5. Climate of Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, Climatography of the United States No. 60, June 1982. 6. Tutu Well Site Potable Water Alternatives Report, Anna's Retreat, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Prepared for U.S. EPA Region 2 By Region 2 Technical Assistance Team, Weston/SPER Division, December, 1989. 7. Fish and Wildlife Service List of Endangered and Theatened Wildlife and Plants. 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12. February, 1985. 8. Telecon Note, Telephone conversation between Nancy Schlater, EPA and Diane Trube, NUS Re: Sole source aquifer in VI, March 3, 1989. 9. Graves, R.P. and R. Gonzalez. Potentiometric surface of the Turpentine Run Basin Aquifer in the Tutu Area, Eastern St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 11, 1987. U.S Geological Survey Water Resource Investigations Report 88-4131, 1988. 10. Uncontrolled hazardous waste site ranking system, A user's manual, 40 CFR, Part 300, Appendix A, 1986 11. Donnelly, T.W., Geology of St. Thomas and St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands, Caribbean Geological Investigations, Geological Society of America, Memoir 98. ed. H. H. Hess, 1966. 12. Climatological Data Annual Summary, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1987. 13. Torres - Sierra, H. and R. Dacasta, Estimated Water Use in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, July 1983 to June 1984. Caribbean Research Institute, Technical Report No. 21. 14. U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Coastal Zone Management Program, zoning districts and coastal land and water use plan map. 15. Memo to Stephen D. Luftig, EPA, from Carlos O'Neill, EPA. Authorization of CERCLA Removal Action Monies for the Tutu Well Site January 6, 1988. 16. Jordan, D.G. and O.J. Cosner, A Survey of the Water Resources of St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report, 1973 02-8902-40-PA Rev. No. 0 REFERENCES(CONT'D) 17. Water Management Plan for the Public Water System, Prepared for the Government of the Virgin Islands by CH2M HILL. July, 1983. 18. Telecon Note: Conversation between Fernando Gomez, USGS and Rich Feinberg, NUS Corp., on 3/11/89 at 1045 hours. RE: Hydrology and groundwater use in St. Thomas. 19. Telecon Note: Conversation between D. Goetz of Polycaribe and D. Trube, NUS Corp., on 3/14/89 at 1430 hours. RE: Wells and water use on St. Thomas. 20. Telecon Note: Conversation between L. Reed, DPNR, and D. Trube, NUS Corp., on 3/3/89 at 1640 hours. RE: Permits for site on St. Thomas. 21. Record of Communication, Telephone conversation between L. Reed, DPNR, and A. Brochu, U.S. EPA Region 2, on 1/30/89 at 1400 hours. 22. Memo from L. Reed, DPNR, to Texaco file, RE: Texaco Violations, August 5, 1987. 23. Records of Petro Site tests performed on Tutu Texaco Service Station underground tanks Nos. 1 and 3, by J.F. Martinex and Cia., Inc. on July 18 and July 11, 1987, respectively. REFERENCE NO. 1 NUS CORPORATION II 0398 Tin" n -10 TC<" >' j A A »\ • 2- na ^- 1 Tjvr' v ^-^TXl sr»u ^Pvn 15 2.S r VJ C O' U^e cL a\\ , 2. e^d) /back a-^s . •S'f . _ . Vsi . «^ "rt _ Orid. <3-O> O ^Si ^- d^" UmS , -| — LL_ W Q . OoA«»- / - JOUJTO^ ^jp^c^T ^ ~V"".;^-\ < ~T-/ \ > /^ (»^0i-->^-o^-* Rio Grande de RIoGrande Areciho to Rio •it Arecibo je La Plata hm'tyr Percent hmVvr Percent SouUl Province Rio de La Plata to Kio tspintu Santo hm'/vr Percent Patillas Talli to U Ponce Guai hm>'vr Percent hm*/yr f"* Laj« Percent hmj/yr Percent We»t Coaat province hm'fvr Percent Input Precipitation Slreamllow Diversions •V20 27(1 l.i|30 446 n70 .'vt 2 .VJO 468 410 120 80 :>o.6 -W.5 60 175 25.5 100 72.8 74 5 44 :l 2 __ 33 24.0 160 2D.O H80 71 0 Output rjvapulraspiralion Stream outflow liround-waler loss to wetlands or sea tirou rut-water withdrawals': Total Industry Irrigation Public supply ----- 1.410 61.3 104 34.8 ._ . *65 37 6 1 3HO :>8.» „ „ 15 7 *6 3.7 10 .4 HO 2.6 y 26 .-—— » _ __ 1 26 .100 23.8 •J20 73.0 20 1.6 20 1.6 .T __ __ 15 430 20 170 143 8 23.5 2.5 21 0 60 100 15 60 21 37 2 25.5 120 S73 42.6 1 1 H.u 64 63 Ih 2S.5 .1 1 270 21.8 !)20 74.2 40 32 10 .8 10 __ ' All icruund waur withdrawn was assumed to uv for ctmsumption smct- it IM not available for other uses. 1000 100 too 400 zoo Public Supply (Putrto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority) I9t9 1970 1979 I9W 19(9 1990 1999 2000 -400 - 29 20 5 " u >• 10 te Z 5 £ o ui r- kl §50i« <-> 40 s» 5. 30 MI" 2 zo ?i« 5 10 LI6HT INDUSTRY ,- -" DOMESTIC AND COMMERCIAL TOTAL WITHDRAWALS i««*ttry Mh* j---ji--« - ^VWIWWII ••««) I960 1969 1970 1979 I9M 1989 YEARS B 1990 1999 2000 FICI UK 17.-Water-use estimates. A. For Puerto Kico: public-supply data provided hy the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (mortified from Morris, li>7«). B. For the U.S. Virgin Islands. CARIBBEAN REGION U21 province) and its offshore islands (Vieques. Cvlebra, and Mono. Islands) and for the U.S. Virgin Islands, 1975 Puerto KiO'-Continuf! I S V irytn isi Huvrtn Kir<»M>rfshnrv islanu- Interior pnivmor Hurrto KK-" Island t.-ul V*quv!. M"tiii hm>'\ r Percent hmj.'vr 27B WO 12 10 hm-Vvr Percent Peirrnt Hem-nt hnr1 Input — Continued 43.3 54i.7 120 imi 100 4". um Output — Continued 31