Texas Electric Superfund Site

3617 Baer Street

The images below are displayed on the fence surrounding the former Texas Electric Steel Casting Foundry and were created by teachers and students of an elementary school which sits beside the site.  Information about the site from the EPA is located below the pictures.

Site Aerial Photo Map

The site occupies a 36-acre tract of land at 3617 Baer Street in Houston. The abandoned, former foundry site, is located two miles east of downtown Houston and one block south of Interstate Highway 10. This part of Houston is referred to as the Fifth Ward.

• The urban population near the site is approximately 50,000.
• The MDI property is bounded by Hare Street to the north, National Vinegar Company and Press Street to the east, the former Texas & New Orleans railroad right-of-way beyond the easement to the south, and Bringhurst Street to the west.
• Residential areas are adjacent to the east, west, and north sides of the site.
• Blanche Kelso Bruce Elementary School is located adjacent to the west side of the site across Bringhurst Street.
• Industrial areas are adjacent to the south side of the site.
• Structures currently on the site include concrete foundations from several demolished foundry buildings, a laboratory and administration building, a railroad boxcar used as a former storage building, a large melt transformer in the northwest corner of the site, and several concrete structures formerly used as vats.
• The foundry buildings were demolished in 1995 under order of a U.S. bankruptcy court.
• Remnants at the site include numerous piles of demolition debris, consisting mainly of brick, wood, refractory brick, and miscellaneous debris.
• Other current significant site features include two ponds, two former drum storage areas, a pattern vault, and a landfill.

Wastes and Volumes
 

• The chemicals of concern that were being investigated during the remedial investigation and feasibility study for operable unit 1 include metals, such as lead, volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls, and asbestos. The chemical of concern for operable unit 2 is lead.
• The volumes of wastes currently present at the site have not been determined. This information will be obtained during the remedial investigation and feasibility study and remedial action for the site.

Site Assessment and Ranking

NPL LISTING HISTORY
Site HRS Score:  37.08
Proposed Date: September 29, 1998
Final Date:  January 15, 1999

• The National Priorities List is a list of national priorities among the known or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States. The list is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation to assess the nature and extent of public health and environmental risks associated with a release of hazardous substances.
• The notice that the site was being proposed to the National Priorities List was published in the Federal Register on September 29, 1998.
• The notice that the listing of the site on the National Priorities List had been finalized, was published in the Federal Register on January 15, 1999.

The Remediation Process

Site History:

• In 1926, the Texas Electric Steel Casting Company began operations as a metal casting foundry. The foundry initially occupied the former Houston Brick Works facility. The foundry expanded operations north of Baer Street and south of Gillespie during World War 2. A second foundry was built on the eastern portion of the site during the latter half of 1970.
• The company primarily manufactured specialty molded parts, such as large wheels, tracks, and mining equipment. The process area consisted of the two casting plants. Plant 1 produced large castings, while Plant 2 produced smaller castings. Both plants maintained separate sand systems, core ovens, mold makers, electric arc furnaces, pouring facilities, and cleaning, annealing, and heat treating process areas.
• Various grades of steel, including high carbon, chrome, molybdenum, high nickel, and stainless steel were cast at the facility. Scrap metal and iron were melted in the carbon arc furnace, tested, corrected for the elements needed for the different grades of steel, and poured into molds. Molds and cores were constructed by mixing sand with flour binders. Some cores were made by mixing iron oxide with an oil-based material, and then hardened in core ovens. Cores and molds were treated with a water-based zircon flour and dye mixture to prevent the molten metal from eroding them.
• Castings were cleaned (by mechanical grinding, shot blasting, or sandblasting) and heat-treated. Heat treating consisted of annealing, followed by water or oil quenching. Final machining was performed either on-site or at the customer's shop, if needed. Some parts required x-ray inspection or certification.
• During the mid-1980s, the southern portion of the site was leased to Can-Am Resource Group. Can-Am conducted a spent catalyst recycling operation using an experimental process. Can-Am reportedly obtained between 2,000 and 4,000 drums of spent catalyst from chemical plants and refineries along the Houston Ship Channel. By 1988, Can-Am ceased operations and the stored drums of spent catalyst were abandoned on the site.
• In 1990, MDI bought the Texas Electric Steel Casting Company note from Texas Commerce Bank. The steel company ceased operations in February 1991, and MDI foreclosed on the property. MDI re-opened as the San Jacinto Foundry on March 1, 1991. The San Jacinto Foundry continued operations until June 1, 1992. MDI filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas on May 20, 1992. The on-site facilities were demolished between March 1995 and January 1996, as a salvage operation under order of the bankruptcy court.
• The EPA joined efforts with the National Institute of Environmental Health and Sciences and the South Central Laborers AGC, and provided an environmental training program called the Superfund Job Training Initiative for Fifth Ward community residents. The training initiative, in partnership with stakeholders; state/local governments; and community leaders, such as Make Ready, Search, and Houston Works; provided training to 27 citizens living in the community impacted by the site. The focus of the training was basic construction, lead abatement, asbestos abatement, and hazardous materials. This training was completed on April 1, 1999. The names of the graduates were sent to various hazardous waste/Superfund/brownfields environmental contractors within the Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas and New Mexico areas (served by the EPA's Region 6 office). This was done to let these contractors know about the availability of these trained and certified people in the Houston area. Two graduates of the training program were recently hired to participate in the ongoing remedial investigation and feasibility study for the site.
• In 1998 and 1999, the potentially responsible parties performed an extensive drum removal action, with the EPA's oversight. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission conducted a removal and restoration of 89 residential yards to the west of the site. The removal action was conducted to remove surface soil with concentrations of lead that equaled or exceeded 500 milligrams per kilogram to reduce the exposure of adults and children to lead.
• In September 1999, the mayor's Office of Environmental Policy (City of Houston) received a Superfund redevelopment initiative grant. The city of Houston was selected to receive one of 10 pilot grants being awarded nationwide under the EPA's innovative Superfund redevelopment initiative. The city received $100,000 to conduct a re-use assessment and public outreach to determine how best to redevelop the former MDI property in the Fifth Ward. A reuse assessment report has been drafted.
• In April 2003, the EPA began a removal action that addressed 57 residential areas to the east and north of the site, including the Blanche Kelso Bruce Elementary School and the Fifth Ward Multi-Service Center. This removal action was conducted to remove surface soil with concentrations of lead that equaled or exceeded the 500 mg/kg action level to a maximum depth of 1.5 feet below the ground surface. The purpose of this removal action was to reduce the exposure of adults and children to lead. The removal action was completed in November 2003.
• The EPA has identified the community surrounding the site as an environmental justice community.

Health Considerations:

• A human health and ecological risk assessment is an integral part of the remedial investigation and feasibility study process.
• A human health risk assessment estimates the current and possible future risks if no actions were taken to clean up a site. The EPA's Superfund risk assessors determine how threatening a hazard is to human health and the environment. They seek to determine a safe level for each potentially dangerous contaminant present, for example, a level at which ill health effects are unlikely and the probability of cancer is very small. Living near a Superfund site doesn't automatically place a person at risk. It depends on the chemicals present and the ways people are exposed to them.
• An ecological risk assessment is defined as a process that evaluates the likelihood that adverse ecological effects are occurring or may occur as a result of exposure to one or more stressors. A stressor is any physical, chemical, or biological entity that can induce an adverse ecological response. Adverse responses can range from sublethal chronic effects in individual organisms to a loss of ecosystems functions. Only chemical or physical stressors are subject to risk management decisions at Superfund sites.
• Human health and ecological risk assessments are being performed during the current remedial investigation and feasibility study for the site.

Record of Decision

• The final remedy (cleanup alternative) for a site is published in a record of decision. The record of decision is the official documentation of how the EPA considered the remedial alternatives and why the EPA selected the final remedy.
• Before a record of decision can be finalized, the EPA must provide a proposed plan for public review and comment. This plan summarizes the remedial alternatives presented in the analysis of the remedial investigation and feasibility study, and identifies the preferred alternative, the rationale for that preferred alternative, and documents that support the EPA's decision.
• The EPA issued a record of decision for operable unit #1 on July 30, 2004.
  • Excavation and treatment or solidification and stabilization if necessary) of approximately 13,600 cubic yards of soils with lead concentrations equal to or greater than 500 milligrams per kilogram, to a maximum depth of 1.5 feet below ground surface and approximately 3,000 cubic yards of soils stockpiled at the site from a previous removal action, will also be treated, if necessary. Transportation and disposal at a permitted off-site waste disposal facility of the treated and untreated soils.
  • Transportation and disposal at a permitted off-site waste disposal facility of approximately 31,621 cubic yards of debris (non-hazardous debris, foundry sand and slag), the asbestos-containing material in the on-site building and scattered throughout the site, and an underground storage tank in the vicinity of monitoring well #20.
  • Excavation and disposal at a permitted off-site waste disposal facility, of approximately 2,100 cubic yards of soils contaminated with benzo(a)pyrene, or other organics, at the monitor well #3 location; light non-aqueous-phase liquids at the monitor well #11 location; and total petroleum hydrocarbons at the monitor well #20 location. Soil cleanup levels for these isolated source areas will be determined during the remedial design and remedial action for the selected remedy.
  • Implementation of monitored natural attenuation for the ground water, which includes source removal and long term monitoring for the ground water to ensure that constituents above cleanup goals are naturally attenuating.
  • Implementation of institutional controls for both the soils and ground water to prevent exposure to soil contamination above acceptable cleanup levels and to prevent exposure to contaminated ground water in the shallow water-bearing zone.
• A record of decision for operable unit #2 is expected to be issued in 2005.

Community Involvement

• Community involvement is the name the EPA uses to identify its process for engaging in dialogue and collaboration with communities affected by Superfund sites. The mission of the Superfund community involvement program is to advocate and strengthen early and meaningful community participation during the EPA's remedial activities at a site. The EPA's community involvement program is founded on the belief that people have a right to know what the EPA is doing in their community and to have a say in it. The purpose is to give people the opportunity to become involved in the EPA's activities and to help shape the decisions that are made at a site.

Community Involvement Plan

• The community involvement plan specifies the community involvement activities that the EPA expects to undertake during the remedial activities planned for the site. A community involvement plan, based on community interviews and other relevant information about the site, will be prepared during the early phases of the remedial investigation and feasibility study. The community involvement plan, prepared in November 1999, will be updated based on community interviews and other relevant information about the site.

Community meetings

• June 10-13, 2002, the EPA and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission met with the community through door-to-door interviews and an open house to learn more about the site.
• November 19, 2002, a public meetings was held at the Blanche Kelso Bruce Elementary School gymnasium. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the EPA's activities during the planned remedial investigation and feasibility study for the site.
• June 24, 2003, a community meeting was held at the Fifth Ward Multi-Purpose Community Center. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the planned removal and remedial actions. The EPA coordinated participation by the City of Houston Health and Human Services Department, the Texas Department of Health, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to address the community's health concerns. The city's health department conducted child blood lead screening during the meeting. Over 30 residents attended the meeting, not including the local, state and federal officials.
• February 26, 2004, a public meeting was held at the Fifth Ward Multi Service Center to present the proposed plan for operable unit #1 (on-site soils and ground water). Oral and written comments were accepted at the meeting.
• August 19, 2004, a community meeting was held at the Fifth Ward Multi Service Center to discuss the selected remedy for operable unit #1 with the community.

Fact sheets

• Fact sheets will be prepared as necessary during the planning and implementations of the remedial investigation and feasibility study. These fact sheets will be filed at the site's repository and distributed to people on the mailing list. Anyone who wishes to be placed on the mailing list to receive current information about the site is encouraged to call 1-800-533-3508.

Site repository

The purpose of the site repository is to provide the public a location near their community to review and copy background and current information about the site. The site's repository is located at:
Fifth Ward Multi-Service Center/Library
4014 Market Street
Houston, TX 77020
Phone: 1-713-238-2248

Technical Assistance Grant

A technical assistance grant is for local citizens' groups to secure the services of a technical adviser to increase citizen understanding of information that will be developed about the site during the Superfund process. By law, only one grant for up to $50,000 may be awarded to a citizens' group for this site. To be eligible for a grant, a group must incorporate. Also, the applicant must meet a 20 percent matching requirement, which may be in cash or donated services. If you have any questions concerning a technical assistance grant, please call Ms. Beverly Negri, coordinator at 1-214-665-8157 or toll free at 1-800-533-3508.

Availability notice

Availability notices for the technical assistance grant were published in local newspapers on May 5, 1999 and October 31, 2000.

Letters of Intent

• The technical assistance grant application process begins when a group of individuals affected by the site submits a letter of intent to the EPA. Letters of intent for the technical assistance grant were received from:
  • Philip J. Smith on April 13, 1999
  • Sarah Rowles on April 13, 1999
  • Rita Love on May 11, 1999
  • Jane L. Laping on September 12, 2000
    Mothers for Clean Air
    3015 Richmond, Suite 270
    Houston TX 77098

Final Application Received

A final technical assistance grant application was received on May 18, 2001 from Mothers for Clean Air

Grant Award

The technical assistance grant was awarded to Mothers for Clean Air on September 2, 2001.
Budget/project dates: August 7, 2001 thru August 6, 2004.
No cost time extension made August 6, 2007.

Current Status

The recipient of the technical assistance grant hired Sound Environmental Solutions as the technical advisor.

Contacts at EPA, TCEQ

EPA remedial
project manager

Rafael Abrego Casanova
Environmental scientist
Bi-lingual-Spanish/English
Phone: 1-214-665-6729 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: casanova.rafael@epa.gov

TCEQ contact

Alan Etheredge
Phone: 1-512-239-2139 or 1-800-633-9363
e-mail: aethered@tceq.state.tx.us

Toxicologist

Ghassan Khoury
Phone: 1-214-665-8515 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: khoury.ghassan@epa.gov

Ecological risk assessor

Susan Roddy
Phone: 1-214-665-8518 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: roddy.susan@epa.gov

Community involvement coordinator

Donn Walters
Phone: 1-214-665-6483 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: walters.donn@epa.gov

Attorney

Barbara Nann
Phone: 1-214-665-2157 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: nann.barbara@epa.gov

Enforcement
officer, cost
recovery

Connie Suttice
Phone: 1-214-665-8515 or 1-800-533-3508
e-mail: suttice.connie@epa.gov

State Coordinator

Karen Bond
Phone: 1-214-665-6682
e-mail: bond.karen@epa.gov

Public Liaison
(EPA Region 6)

Arnold Ondarza
Phone: 1-303-312-6777
e-mail:  ondarza.arnold@epa.gov

Enforcement Action

Present Status and Issues

• The Superfund enforcement program seeks to maximize the involvement of potentially responsible parties in the cleanup of Superfund sites. Statutes provide the EPA with the authority to order potentially responsible parties to investigate and clean up sites, negotiate settlements with potentially responsible parties to fund and/or perform site cleanups, and commence legal action if the potentially responsible parties do not perform and/or pay for cleanup.
  A primary goal of the enforcement program is to obtain consensual settlement, or, if necessary, compel potentially responsible parties to implement site cleanups. The primary tool used to achieve this goal is the administrative order on consent.
  When EPA takes response or enforcement action at a site, the enforcement program's goal is to recover the costs of those actions from the potentially responsible parties. Once a potentially responsible party has agreed to take response action at a site, the goal of the enforcement program is to ensure that the studies or cleanup activities are performed correctly and in accordance with the administrative order of consent and relevant EPA guidance.
• The EPA issued 104(e) information request letters to various past/current owners, operators, and/or generators associated with the site to learn more about the site.
• The EPA issued general notice letters to various past/current owners, operators, and/or generators, informing them that EPA has sufficient information linking them to the site, considers them to be potentially responsible parties for the cleanup of the site, and encouraging them to enter into an administrative order on consent to voluntarily participate in the removal of the more than 5,300 drums of wastes that were abandoned on the site. No potentially responsible parties volunteered to participate in such a removal action.
• On May 18, 1999, the EPA issued unilateral administrative orders directing the potentially responsible parties to conduct a removal action at the site. In response to the unilateral administrative order, the potentially responsible parties formed a potentially responsible party group to address the drummed wastes present at the site.
• On June 8, 1999, the EPA sent the first amended unilateral administrative order to 10 additional potentially responsible parties associated with the site. These additional potentially responsible parties were added to the unilateral administrative order in response to information made available to the EPA by other potentially responsible parties. This first amended unilateral administrative order encouraged the recipients wishing to comply with the unilateral administrative order to coordinate with the potentially responsible party group addressing the drum removal action.
• On June 23, 1999, in accordance with the unilateral administrative order, the potentially responsible party group submitted to EPA, for review and approval, a removal action work plan and a health and safety plan for the removal action to address the drummed waste abandoned on the site. The EPA completed its review and the plans were approved. All physical handling of the drummed waste onsite has been completed. The result was the bulk containerizing, sampling/analysis, and transport for off-site disposal of all 5,300 drums and associated debris, and visually contaminated soils.
• Effective November 23, 1999, the removal of all the drums of waste, visually contaminated soils, and associated debris was achieved.
• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently performing a remedial investigation and feasibility study at the site. The purpose of the remedial investigation and feasibility study is to determine the nature and extent of contamination, and to gather sufficient information about the site to support an informed risk management decision regarding which remedy is the most appropriate for the site.
• The EPA has divided the site into Operable Unit 1 (on-site soils and ground water), and Operable Unit 2 (off-site residential areas), The term operable unit means a discrete action that comprises an incremental step toward comprehensively addressing problems at a site. This discrete portion of a remedial response manages migration or eliminates a release, threat of release, or pathways of exposure. The cleanup of a site can be divided into a number of operable units, depending on the complexity of the problems associated with a site. Operable units may address geographical portions of a site, specific site problems, or initial phases of an action, or may consist of any set of actions performed over time or any actions that are concurrent but located in different parts of a site. Operable units will not impede implementation of subsequent actions, including final action at a site.
• Operable Unit 1 consists of the on site soils (within the fenced boundaries of the site) and ground water. The EPA is reviewing preliminary remedial investigation data on the on-site soils and ground water and is continuing to prepare a record of decision.
• Operable Unit 2 consists of the off-site residential areas of the site. The EPA is currrently reviewing preliminary remedial investigation data for the off-site areas of the site and expects to issue a record of decision in December 2004. The EPA has recently performed a soil removal action to address lead contamination discovered in the residential off-site areas of the site.

Benefits of Action
 

• The cleanup of 146 residential properties prevents those children and adults from being exposed to lead. Other specific cleanup benefits will be identified in the current operable unit #2 remedial investigation and feasibility study for the site.
• The 36 acres within the site's fenced boundaries are expected to be returned to beneficial use once the remedial action for operable unit #1 is implemented.

Emergency & Hot Line Phone Numbers