United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R02-87/046
September 1987
$EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Haviland Complex, NY
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Pleat nod Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R02-87/046
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Haviland Complex, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
8. REPORT DATE
September 30. 1987
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION COOE
7. AUTMOR(S>
1. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, s.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OP REPORT ANO PERIOD COVERED
Final P(")T> Ponnrf
14. SPONSORING AGENCY COOE
800/00
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The Haviland Complex site consists of a planned development comprising 275 acres in
the town of Hyde Park, NY. This development contains an apartment complex, a junior
high school, an elementary school, a shopping center and a number of private homes.
Beginning in October 1981, a local resident filed a complaint with the Dutchess County
Health Department noting that his.well water was foaming. Other complaints of water
quality supply problems prompted a sampling program and sanitary survey of the Haviland
area. Results of these tests indicated failure in nearby car wash and laundromat septic
and sewage systems. In 1982, the laundromat installed a sand filter and a new tile
field to handle the laundry effluent. Due to increasing concern over potential ground
water contamination by volatile organic chemicals, the New York State Department of
Health (NYDOH) began sampling wells in December 1982. In January 1983, the laundromat
was ordered to disconnect the dry cleaning unit from the recently upgraded sewer
disposal system and dispose of all spent cleaning fluids offsite with a licensed
disposal firm. Continued evidence of contamination led to installation of two spray
aeration systems in Haviland Complex wells. The primary contaminants of concern
include: volatile organic chemicals (TCE, DCE, toluene, benzene, vinyl chloride and
1,1,1-trichloroethane) and heavy metals'(cadmium, chromium, mercury and lead).
(See Attached Sheet)
17.
KEY WORDS ANO DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lOBNTIPIERS/OPEN ENOEO TERMS
COSATI Field/Croup
Record of Decision
Haviland Complex, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Media: gw, sediments
Key contaminants: VOCs, heavy metals
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS t Tit is Rtport)
21. NO. Oi
iQES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Tlnspagti
50-
22. PRICE
SPA P«rat 2220.1 (*•». 4.77) PNCVIOU* COITION i* OMOLKTK
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
hunt (he EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
I LIAVIBLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMMM
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set suhiiilc. if used, in *malicr
type or otherwise subordiiute it to nuin title. When * report is prepared in more than one volume, repeal the primary ink. add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicatini at least month and year. Indicate the l»a»M on which it was fleeted (e.g.. Joir «•/ issue. Jan- of
appro**/, dot* of preparation, etc.).
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION COOI
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR<8>
Give name**) in conventional order (John R. Doe. J. Robert Doe. etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the per!of minjr ..teani-
xation.
S. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if pel forming organization wanes to assign inn number.
*. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, SUM. and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report wax prepared. Subordinate number* may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE Of REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dales covered.
14. SPONSORING AGkNCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such ax: Prepared in cooperation with. I run-Jainm ..!. I'rvM.-iiicU at voiiu-n-iuv- ui.
To be published in. Supersedes. Supplements, etc.
1S. ABSTRACT
include a brief (200 words or leaf factual summary of the most significant information contained in UK- report. II Hu- ri'|w>n i IHIUMIN a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS • Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper auihori/eJ terms ilui identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries tor caialottinit.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS • Use identifiers for project namo. code name*, equipment JcMitnaior*. etc. LV- (.pen-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI HELD GROUP • l-ield and group assignments art to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Oaicpory List. -Since the ma-
jority of documents are muludiscipiinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group aiuignmcnMst will be -.penhc discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application)*) will be cross-referenced with secondary I n-UI/(.rou|> axM|ininent« that will iollo«
the primary posiingts).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote reusability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release l.nliiniicd." (tie any avuikihihiy n>
the publk. with address and pncc.
19. ft 20. SECURITY CLASSIPICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OP PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, il any.
22. PRICK
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Pern 2220.1 (••». 4.77) (*•««*••>
-------
EPA/ROD/R02-87/046
Haviland Complex, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
16. ABSTRACT (continued)
The selected remedial action includes: connecting affected and
potentially affected Haviland Complex residences to the Harbound Hills water
distribution system; ground water extraction and treatment by air stripping,
with discharge to surface water; pumping and cleaning out contaminated
sediments from the local septic disposal system; and implemention of a
monitoring system to ensure effectiveness of the remedy. The estimated
capital cost of the remedial action is $1,257,500 with annual O&M of
$105,500.
-------
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
SITE NAME-AMD LOCATION
Haviland Complex, Town of Hyde Park, Dutchess County, New York
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
This decision document represents the selected remedial action
for the Haviland site/ developed in accordance with the Comprehen-
sive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986, and to the extent practicable, the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, 40 CFR
Part 300, November 20, 1985•
STATEMENT OF BASIS
This decision is based, upon the administrative record for the
Haviland Complex site. A copy of the record is available for
review at the information repository for the site and at the
regional office. The following documents, which are part of the
administrative record, were primarily relied upon in making this
decision:
- Remedial Investigation Report, Haviland Complex Site, prepared
by Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrell, P.C. June 1987
- Feasibility Study Report, Haviland Complex Site, prepared by
Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrell, P.C. July 1987
- The attached Summary of Remedial Alternative Selection for the
Haviland Complex Site
- The attached Responsiveness Summary for the site, which
incorporates public comments received
- Staff summaries and recommendations
DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED REMEDY
0 Connect affected and potentially affected residents using ground
water within the Haviland study area to the Harbourd Hills water
distribution system. Implementation of this alternative requires
a financial commitment on behalf of the Town of Hyde Park to up-
grade the Harbourd Hills system to a level in compliance with
New York State drinking water standards. The Town's contribution
will be approximately 60%, depending upon final design details.
0 Restore the aquifer to drinking water quality by extracting
and treating contaminated ground water and discharging the
effluent to surface water. Four strategically located
extraction wells within the area of the contaminant plume
will be required to offset the effects of ground-water
mounding caused by the cessation of commercial/residential
pumping and the addition of a public water supply. Local
ground-water restoration will be provided by the use of a
-------
packed tower air stripper for volatile organics removal and
a precipitation system for metals removal, if deemed necessary
Treated water will be discharged to the Fall Kill. It is
expected that this treatment system will restore the acruifer
to drinking water quality within a period of 5-10 years.
0 Implement source control measures consisting of pumping and
cleaning out contaminated sedime.nts from local septic disposal
systems in order to minimize the potential of additional
releases.
0 Implement a monitoring program to ensure the effectiveness of
the extraction/treatment alternative and the protection of
public health and the environment.
These methods were determined to provide the highest degree of
protection to public health and the environment from contami-
nated ground water.
DECLARATIONS
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the
environment, attains Federal and State requirements that are
applicable or relevant and appropriate, and is cost-effective.
This remedy satisfies the preference for treatment that reduces
the toxicity, mobility or volume of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants as a principal element. Finally, it
is determined that this remedy utilizes permanent solutions and
alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent
practicable.
The State of New York has been consulted and agrees with the
approved remedy (see attached letter).
The action will require future operation and maintenance
activities to ensure the continued effectiveness of the remedy.
The start-up activities, which will ensure the operational
effectiveness of the design, ,will be considered part of the
approved remedial action and eligible for Superfund monies for
a period of up to one year. Additionally, up to ten years of
aquifer remediation will also be considered remedial action
which is eligible for Superfund monies. The remainder of the
activities are considered operation and maintenance and are
therefore the responsibility of New York State.
I have also determined that the action being taken will be
appropriate when balanced against the future availability of
Trust Fund monies for use at other sites.
Date -^ Christopher
-------
SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION
HAVILAND COMPLEX
NEW YORK
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
New York
-------
TABLE' OF CONTENTS
Page
I. SITES LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION . 1
II. SITE HISTORY ..... 1
III. ENFORCEMENT 5
IV. COMMUNITY RELATIONS 5
V. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
A-Alternative No. 1 - No Action 6
B-Alternative No. 2 - Source Control 7
C-Alternative No. 4 - Ground-Water Extraction, Treatment
and Discharge to Surface Waters 8
D-Alternative No. 5 - Ground-Water Extraction, Treatment
and Discharge as a Public Water
Supply 11
E-Alternative No. 10- Provide Public Water Supply To All
Private Well Users Within the Study
Area 12
VI. SELECTED REMEDY
A-Description 15
B-Statutory Determinations . 17
ATTACHMENTS
A - NYSDEC Letter of Concurrence
B - Responsiveness Summary
-------
FIGURES
PAGE
1 - Site Location Map 18
2 - RI/FS Study Area . 19
3 - Phase I Well Locations ( Piezometers) 20
4 - Phase II Well Locations (Monitoring Wells) 21
5 - Septic System Sampling Locations 22
6 - Inferred Area Impacted by Plume 23
7 - Contaminated Residential Wells, February 1987 24
8 - Contaminant Migration Time 25
9 - Flow Lines of Extraction Wells 26
10 - Proposed Extension of Harbourd Hills
Distribution System 27
11 - Modeled Ground-Water Contours 28
12 - Modeled Ground-Water Flow Directions 29
-------
TABLES
: PAGE
1 - Inorganic Water Quality Results For Rounds
One and Two, Shallow Wells . . 30
2- Inorganic Water Quality Results For Rounds
One and Two/ Deep and Bedrock Wells 31
3 - Significant Volatile Organic Water Quality Results For
Rounds One and Two/ Shallow Wells 32
4 - Significant Volatile Organic Water Quality
Results for Rounds .One and Two/ Deep and Bedrock Wells. . 33
5 - Inorganic Water Quality Results For Rounds One and
Two-Fall Kill 34
6 - Organic Analysis For Septic System Sampling . . 35
7 - Inorganic Analysis For Septic System Sampling . 37
8 - Estimated Costs for Remedial Action Alternatives . . . . 39
9 - Summary of Selected Remedy and Costs 40
-------
-1-
I. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The study area for this Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (RI/FS) covers 275 acres (0.43 square miles) in the Town
of Hyde Park, New York (Figure 1) and includes an apartment
complex, a junior high school, an elementary school, a shopping
center and a number of private homes. The Haviland Complex site
includes areas along Haviland Road, Wright Avenue and Route 9G,
and is situated east of the FDR National Historic Site. The
site area includes residential and non-residential wells.
The Town of Hyde Park is located within the northern extension
of the Great Appalachian Valley within the Valley and Ridge
province. Drainage systems are not well developed in the area
which lead to numerous swampy conditions. The prinicipal
aquifer underlying the site is composed of stratified sand and
gravel outwash which is recharged directly by precipitation.
These stratified deposits are generally the most productive
sources of ground-water in the area but are of limited extent.
Unconsolidated deposits are composed primarily of fractured
slate and shale, lesser amounts of sandstone, limestone, and
conglomerate. Most residents rely on shallow wells in the
surficial sand and gravel aquifer. The majority of businesses
and institutions utilize the unconsolidated, bedrock aquifer.
Ground-water flow in the area is generally in a southeast
direction towards the Fall Kill.
II. SITE HISTORY
The Haviland Apartments were constructed in the middle 1960's,
with the adjacent shopping center and most of the local residences
already existing (Figure 2). The local laundromat and dry cleaner,
situated in the middle of the shopping center, have been in
operation since the late 1960,'s.
Dutchess County Health Department documents note complaints
concerning area ground-water quality beginning in October 1981.
At this time, a local resident had registered a complaint that
his well water was foaming and suggested that the Haviland
Laundromat's sewage disposal system was failing. Shortly
thereafter, concerns were voiced regarding water quality supply
problems at the Haviland Apartments.
-------
-2-
A sampling program and sanitary survey of the Haviland area,
focusing on detergent and bacteriological parameters, began on
December 2> 1981. During this month, the Haviland Laundromat
sewage disposal system and two residential sewage disposal
systems were tested by introducing dye into the systems and
sampling for any residue in local wells. The results of these
tests showed no direct contamination of area wells. Dye testing
of the laundromat sewage system continued through January 1982
with negative results. However, the laundromat effluent was
found to exceed ground-water standards set by the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Continued testing of the laundromat sewage system confirmed
that it was failing, when positive dye test results were obtained
on February 1, 1982. This prompted additional testing of
commercial sewage disposal systems within the Haviland Complex.
On March 26, 1982, the Dutchess County Department of Health
found that the Haviland Car Wash septic system was failing .
The Car Wash was also exceeding New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation ground-water standards for effluent
discharge. Subsequently, the old septic tank was replaced
with a new one.
Additional study of the sanitary and water supply system at the
Haviland Complex by the Dutchess County Department of Health
continued through the Spring of 1982. On April-27, 1982,
notice was given to disconnect a shallow (221) well located at
the southeast corner of the apartment complex, from the Haviland
Complex community water supply system. This well was installed
during the previous winter, with the intention of using it
solely to supply the laundromat. This added water source was
planned to help the apartment complex eliminate the need to
truck in water to supplement the potable well water supply.
The Haviland Laundromat was also advised to implement a biological
or pretreatment system (a sand filter) designed for the laundromat
wastewater discharge.
Construction of a sand filter and tile field pad to handle the
laundromat effluent was proposed and completed by December
1982. Concurrently, plans were made by the Dutchess County
Department of Health to increase the scope of ground-water
monitoring around the Haviland Complex. In particular, analyses
of water samples were proposed to determine the presence of
volatile organics.
-------
-3-
Due to increasing concern over potential ground-water conta-
mination by volatile organic chemicals in the Haviland Complex
area the New York State Department of Health began sampling in
December 1982* Subsequently,on January 19, 1983 the Haviland
Laundromat was informed by the Dutchess County Department of
Health that it should physically disconnect the dry cleaning
unit from the recently upgraded sewage disposal system. All
spent dry cleaning fluid was then to be barreled and removed from
the site by a licensed carter.
In 1984, as a result of concentrations of trans-dichloroethene
in the 20-60 ppb range, a spray aeration system was installed at
one of the Haviland Apartment Complex wells. In 1985, a similar
treatment system was installed for the contaminated well supply
of the Haviland Laundromat. This well is located on the
apartment complex property. Both treatment units are monitored
by both the Dutchess County and New York State Departments of
Health.
On June 14, 1985, the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) requested that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) perform an immediate removal action to
provide potable water to all affected residences within the
study area. On September 3, 1985, EPA submitted a reply to
NYSDEC indicating that the Haviland Complex Site did not meet
the criteria established under the National Contingency Plan
(NCP) for an immediate removal action, since the contamination
levels were below EPA's 10-day Health Advisory levels for drink-
ing water.
The Haviland Complex site was placed on the National Priorities
List (NPL) in October 1984. The hydrogeologic investigation,
the first step in the RI/FS process, began in August 1986 when
a seismic survey was performed to provide insight into the
bedrock locations and characteristics. Soil gas probing via HNu
photoionization analyzer and an Organic Vapor Analyzer
indicated high VOC readings and hot spots in the area of the tile
fields. This was followed by the installation of 12 PVC piezometers
to determine ground-water flow direction and 21 stainless steel
monitoring wells (Figures 3 and 4) designed to obtain water
quality and geologic information (i.e., depth to bedrock,
hydraulic conductivity, etc.) in the study area. Geophysical
logging investigations were also performed to evaluate the
integrity of the bedrock. These investigations indicated that
the bedrock yields little water and is not extensively fractured,
and that ground water generally flows in a southeast direction
toward the Fall Kill Creek.
-------
-4-
After ground-water flow directions were established, 21 stainless
steel monitoring wells were installed to sample for water '
quality parameters. ,These wells were located upstream of
suspected sources of contamination/ immediately downstream of
the suspected sources and across the suspected flow of the
contaminant plume. In addition, two bedrock wells were installed
to evaluate the water quality and the hydraulic connection
between the bedrock and overlying unconsolidated material. In
some instances, contaminant levels were above the Safe Drinking
Water Act's (SDWA) maximum contaminant levels (MCL) for drinking
water.
Analysis of ground water at the Haviland Site indicated the
metal contaminants- cadmium, chromium, mercury, selenium, silver,
lead and arsenic, and volatile organics- benzene, styrene, tol-
uene, 1,1-dichloroethene, trans-1,2-dichloroethene, acetone, methylene
chloride, chlorobenzene, vinyl chloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
xylene, dichlorobenzene, trichloroethene and tetrachloro-
ethene at concentrations ranging from trace quantities to excess
of Federal and/or State drinking water standards (Tables 1,2,3,4).
Further ground-water sampling would be conducted during the
initial stage of the design phase in order to verify the presence
of any metals.
The primary environmental exposure route of chemical contam-
inants at the Haviland Complex site is from drinking ground water
and inhalation of volatile organic vapors while showering.
Surface-water exposure via ingestion of fish from the Fall Kill
and from soil was determined to be very low. Water quality
analyses of the Fall Kill appear in Table 5.
The total cancer risk for each organic chemical ranged from 10~3
to 10~6 in order of magnitude. Vinyl chloride represented the
highest potential risk (10*3 or 1 in 1000), while trichloroethylene
the least (10~6 or 1 in 1,000,000) in the receptor area. These
values are indicative of a worst case total lifetime exposure to
maximum organic concentrations at an assumed constant rate. All
noncarcinogenic contaminants were within acceptable intake
levels, based on their respective subchronic and chronic intakes.
Therefore, there are no health hazards based on these data at
this point in time.
The source of contamination appears to be a number of septic
systems in the area. These septic systems are connected to the
Haviland Shopping Center, the Haviland Complex Apartments, and
the Haviland Junior High School (Figure 5). The plume of con-
tamination extends downstream of the sources, flowing south-
southeast to near Haviland Road, traveling along Haviland Road,
crossing Sunset Road between Haviland Road and Wright Avenue and
eventually discharging to the Fall Kill (Figure 6). Water
quality samples were taken of the Fall Kill and indicated that
there was no significant impact by the plume.
-------
-5-
Fourteen samples were collected from several commercial and insti-
tutional septic disposal systems at the Haviland Complex and adjacent
junior high school facilities on June 12 and 13/ 1987. Detectable
levels of volatile organics were found in ten of the fourteen
samples (Table 6)* With the exception of five samples, inorganic
compounds were detected at concentrations above their respective New
York State Class GA Ground-water Discharge Standards (Table 7).
Based on potential toxic effects from the consumption of heavy
metals, contaminants of concern include cadmium, chromium,
lead, and mercury. These metals were detected at concentrations
up to 97 ppb for cadmium, 328 ppb for chromium, 1840 ppb for
lead, and 330 ppb for mercury.
III. ENFORCEMENT
No negotiations with potentially responsible parties (PRP's) have
been conducted up to the present. Data in the RI/FS indicates
that the most likely locations where contamination entered the
ground water were the septic systems connected to the Haviland
Shopping Center, the Haviland Apartments, and Haviland Junior
High School.
Prior to the initiation of the remedial design, notice letters
will be sent to the potentially responsible parties. Should
the PRP's decline to conduct future remedial activities, EPA
will provide funding for such activities, but will retain its
right to seek cost recovery for all EPA-funded response actions
from said PRP's.
IV. COMMUNITY RELATIONS
The primary concern of the community at the Haviland Complex
site is for a safe domestic water supply. Although most residents
no longer drink or cook with their water, they are concerned about
the long-term effects of the contaminated water they may have
consumed for an undetermined period prior to learning that a
water problem existed. Several residents expressed the belief
that their community is experiencing a higher-than-average
incidence of certain types of cancers.
Interest in this site is relatively high, and some individuals
have been extremely active in focusing attention on the site.
Although residents have held meetings in their homes and
-------
-6-
attended regular meetings of the town council/ no groups have
been formed as a result of the Haviland Complex site. A public
meeting waa held on August 17, 1987 at the Hyde Park Town Hall
to discusa the RI/FS. The attached responsiveness summary
outlines the numerous concerns of the public and the responses
given by EPA and State officials* A transcript of the meeting
is also available at the information repository and at the re-
gional office.
The community generally agrees that the extension of the Harbourd
Hills water supply to affected residents would be the best
method for providing potable water.
V. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
The objective of the Feasibility Study was to evaluate and
recommend a cost effective remedial action alternative which
would minimize the risk to public health and the environment
resulting from ground-water contamination at the site.
Remedial action alternatives were subjected to a qualitative,
preliminary screening based on technical feasibility, environ-
mental, public health and order of magnitude cost criteria.
Originally, eleven alternatives were evaluated; the screening
process left only five for final consideration.
These remaining five were evaluated on the same basis but in a
more detailed quantitative and qualitative manner. The following
is a summary of the detailed evaluation presented in the Feasibili.
Study report dated July 17, 1987. The numbering system below is
taken directly from the Feasibility Study.
A - Alternative No. 1 - No Action
This alternative does not provide for any remedial action for
cleanup of the site. Ground-water contaminants identified during
the RI which pose a threat to the public and the environment, include
arsenic, cadmium, chromium,, lead, mercury, selenium, silver and
a variety of organic compounds including benzene, 1,1-dichloro-
ethene, dichlorobenzene, styrene, tetrachloroethylene, toluene,
1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and xylenes.
While not all of the private wells which supply the approxi-
mately one hundred (100) residential units in the study area
show contaminant levels which exceed ground-water standards, it
is not safe to assume that no further spreading of the plume
will occur. Variations in contaminant source concentrations,
seasonal-rainfall and ground-water withdrawal patterns can
alter the extent of the plume, thereby affecting private wells
which are clean at this time. Although contaminant concentrations
show a decreasing concentration over time, the most recent
residential well sampling data (DCDOH, February 1987) indicate
that five private well samples (14 Haviland Road, 20 Haviland
-------
-7-
Road, 22 Haviland Road, 24 Haviland Road, and 21 Wright Avenue)
contain contamination in excess of acceptable NYSDOH water
quality standards (Figure 7). All five of these samples exceeded
the State's-guidelines of 50 ppb for a single volatile organic
compound and/or 100 ppb for total volatile organics. An additional
three residential well samples (6 Haviland Road, 8 Haviland
Road, and 26 Haviland Road) showed detectable levels of volatile
organics.
Wells which are now impacted are very likely to remain contaminated
until the plume is naturally flushed out. Based on ground-
water modeling, contaminant transport time between the source
and the Fall Kill is estimated between 4 and 100 years (Figure 8),
although most of the contamination is expected to naturally
attenuate within 20 years. Users of well water from the Haviland
area will continue to experience a potential public health risk
from exposure to contaminated ground water.
This alternative does not satisfy the remedial action objectives.
Adverse impacts to the environment which will result from
taking no action include continued contamination to the glacial
aquifer, with a long term possibility of drawing the plume into
the bedrock aquifer. Contamination of the bedrock is uncertain
as the location of deep bedrock recharge is unknown. Due to
dilution and aeration no significant environmental impact is
expected in the Fall Kill, users of well water from the
Haviland area will continue to experience a potential public
health risk from exposure to contaminated ground water which
exceeds State and Federal drinking water standards due to the
presence of volatile organics and possibly metals.
Adoption of this alternative would require continuation of an
ongoing sampling and analysis program by the Dutchess County
Health Department. This would include monitoring of well
water and ground-water quality as well as sampling from dry
wells and septic systems which are suspected contaminant sources.
There is no cost associated with the no action alternative
(Table 8).
B - Alternative No. 2 - Source Control
Source control remedial action consists of cleaning out
contaminated dry wells, septic disposal systems and tile fields
located within the Haviland study area which may be contributing
to the contaminated ground-water plume and evaluating waste
management practices. Liquid and sediment samples were collected
from seve-ral commercial and institutional septic disposal
systems at the Haviland Complex and adjacent junior high school
facilities for volatile organic and inorganic priority pollutant
compounds. Locations of the samples are illustrated in Figure 5.
Sampling was conducted on June 12th and 13th, 1987 to
determine the extent of contamination in the sediments within
-------
-8-
the above structures. Detectable levels of volatile organics
were found in ten of fourteen samples (Table 6). New York
State Ground-Water Discharge Standards were used as the criteria
for cleaning out the septic sludges since these standards are
considered as applicable or relevant and appropriate. Elevated
levels of cadmium/ chromium/ copper, lead/ mercury and silver
were detected at concentrations above their respective New York
Class GA Ground-Water Discharge Standards (Table 7).
Septic disposal systems with sediments containing unacceptable
levels of volatile organic and/or heavy metals contamination
would be excavated and .replaced with clean sand. Contaminated
disposal systems with elevated levels of metals and/or volatile
organics would be pumped out. Materials excavated or pumped
from these structures would be disposed at a permitted haz-
ardous waste disposal facility. The septic disposal systems
would be resampled and analyzed to verify that contaminated
sediments had been removed. The disposal system would then be
reconstructed or backfilled with clean sand. In addition/ the
sediments excavated from these disposal systems would be sampled
to insure that the material is properly disposed.
This alternative does not present any adverse public health
impacts/ rather it indirectly offers some protection to the public
against continued contaminated ground-water exposure. It does not
provide for aquifer remediation or provide a safe drinking water
supply but/ serves only as a partial remedy. Excavating and
cleaning out of septic disposal systems would minimize
future releases of contaminants/ assuming no additional contam-
inants are being released into the septic systems. It is also
recommended that the County and/or State utilize all available
authority to ensure that future septic system contamination
does not occur.
Ground water (private wells) and surface water (Fall Kill) are
the primary receptors to the contaminant plume. Based on the
surface-water samples collected from the Fall Kill during the RI,
contaminants detected were at concentrations which would not
impact a Class C surface-water body (Table 5). Assuming that
contaminant concentrations are released from the disposal sources
(i.e./ dry wells/ septic systems) at past concentrations/ the Fall
Kill would continue not to be impacted by the release. However/
the cleaning out of disposal systems of any contaminated
sediments would offer additional protection for the Fall Kill
should the concentrations of contaminants being released to the
ground-water increase significantly over time. The present
worth cost for source control is estimated at $98/000 (Table 8).
C - Alternative No. 4 - Ground-Water Extraction/ Treatment and
Discharge to Surface Waters
-------
-9-
This alternative includes aquifer restoration through containment
and interception of the identified contaminant plume. Inter-
ception o£ contaminant-laden ground water would be accomplished
through the use of 4 small diameter stainless steel wells which
would supply water to a treatment facility. Proper sizing and
location of these wells would result in containment of the
plume through modification of the ground-water gradient caused
by the cones of depression around each well.
Ground-water modeling was used to evaluate the effectivenees of
several different pumping configurations. An efficient pumping
strategy indicated placement of three wells roughly along the
centerline of the inferred plume with an additional well on the
south side of the plume. Figure 9 shows the locations of these
wells. Each well would have a capacity of 20 gpm. The effect-
iveness of this configuration would depend upon implementation of
source controls to prevent new contaminants from reaching the
aquifer.
The identified plume would be removed through flushing of the
contaminated ground water toward the four treatment wells.
Small areas of the plume which are already near the Fall Kill
will continue to migrate until they enter the creek.
Two treatment alternatives were evaluated for ground water
contaminated with volatile organic compounds; packed tower air
stripping and granular activated carbon adsorption. Both
technologies are considered reliable and proven in the removal
of volatile organics to low effluent concentrations. Worst
case emmisions were calculated to be insignificant in compar-
ison to New York State Standards.
Treatment technology for metals removal consists of pH adjustment
and precipitation which is widely used in industrial wastewater
treatment. However, this technology may not achieve a reduction
in metals concentrations to the range of 10 ppb to 50 ppb (equiv-
alent to drinking water standards) because of the variety of
metals found. Therefore, there is a chance that the system
could fail resulting in community consumption of water below
drinking water standards. Removal efficiencies and effluent
concentrations would depend largely on results determined from
pilot studies. After metals treatment, the ground water would
be treated through an air stripper and then would be disposed
of via direct discharge to the Fall Kill. . The design would be
based on SPDES requirements which would be the more stringent of
the effluent limitation for a Class C water body or the water
quality limitation for the Fall Kill. Recent tap-water samples
taken from site residents by the New York State Department of
Health indicate that metals are not a problem at the tap at this
time; however, further aquifer sampling would be conducted to
determine the need of metals treatment prior to discharge.
-------
-10-
Ground-water extraction and treatment offers long range public
health protection against contaminated ground-water consumption.
Based on site hydrogeologic conditions, the time required to
rehabilitate the aquifer to acceptable limits is estimated to
be withia "5" to 10 years, assuming no continued contaminated
discharges* During the aquifer cleanup period, however, re-
sidents within the study area using private wells would continue
to be exposed to contaminated ground water. Although the
contaminant concentrations would continue to decrease over
time, it would take at least 5 to 10 years before aquifer water
quality is within acceptable drinking water levels. In the
meantime, residents could utilize bottled water as their primary
source of potable water for the duration of the cleanup. This,
however, would pose a potential health threat through continued
exposure to volatile organic compounds via inhalation, as well
as the inconvenience to the public of using bottled water.
Aquifer rehabilitation would be accompanied by an annual ground-
water monitoring program. The sampling and analysis would be
conducted by the Dutchess County Department of Health and would
utilize selected RI/FS monitoring wells, and private wells
located on the west side of Route 9G and in the area south of
Wright Avenue. Analytical data obtained from these wells
would serve to demonstrate the progress of the aquifer remediation
as well as monitor water quality in areas which were not
previously impacted. Ground-water samples would be analyzed
for priority pollutant metals and volatile organic parameters.
This alternative does not pose any significant long term adverse
environmental impacts through its implementation. Pumping
ground water from the aquifer for treatment should result in
long range aquifer rehabilitation, subsequently reducing the
extent of ground-water contamination. Four stainless steel
extraction wells, screened in the surficial aquifer, each
pumping continuously at 20 gpm, would be sufficient to contain
and capture the contaminant plume. The contamination encountered
in the bedrock aquifer will be cleaned up by natural dispersion
which will occur upon cleanup of the upper aquifer and vertical
gradients producing advective flow from the bedrock aquifer to
the upper aquifer. If either the metals or volatile organics
removal treatment system should fail temporarily, the water
being discharged into the creek would have minimal anticipated
impact on both surface-water quality and to segments of the
public which may come into contact with the creek through
recreational activities. This is primarily true as a result of
turbulent stream flow conditions and dilution effects, even
during low flow conditions. The present worth cost for this
alternative is estimated at $802,200 with metals removal and
air stripping and $289,800 with air stripping only.
-------
-11-
D - Alternative No. 5 - Ground-Water Extraction/ Treatment and
Discharge As A Public Water Supply
This alternative is similar to Alternative No. 4, with the excep-
tion that the treated ground water would be used as a community
potable water supply together with the existing Harbourd Hills
water system. In addition to metals and volatile organics
removal to meet Federal and State drinking water standards,
treatment would include chlorine injection as a bacteriacide.
Four extraction wells would be located throughout the study
area to capture the contaminant plume as discussed in Alternative
No. 4. The wells would be screened in the glacial sand and
gravel aquifer and would yield a minimum of 20 gallons per minute
(gpm) each. A total of SO gpm or 115/200 gallons per day (gpd)
would be extracted from these wells with the additional water
not consumed to be treated and wasted to the Fall Kill prior to
chlorination.
Air stripping or carbon adsorption would be the technologies
used to produce acceptable levels of volatile organics in the
effluent. At a minimum, the ground water would be treated to
an effluent concentration of 2 ug/1 for vinyl chloride, 5 ug/1
for benzene and trichloroethene, 7 ug/1 for 1,1,-dichloroethene
and 10 ug/1 for any other single volatile organic constituent.
Extensive pilot testing for metals removal must be conducted
prior to actual implementation to determine optimal conditions
for the process. Due to the presence of many metals in vary-
ing concentrations, removal efficiency to a concentration in
the order of magnitude of 10 to 50 ppb may hot be achievable.
Therefore, if a breakdown in the system occurred, consumers
would be drinking water that did not meet drinking water stand-
ards. However, recent testing of residential tap-water quality
by the New York State Department of Health has indicated that
metal contamination is not currently a problem and does not pose
a health risk. Further design sampling and pilot testing will
determine the need for metals treatment.
»
Upon treatment, the water would be discharged to the Harbourd
Hills water system to supplement their existing supply. Up-
grading of the Harbourd Hills treatment system to NYSDOH guide-
lines would be the responsibility of the owner of the water
system at the time of implementation, although partial funding
of said upgrading is included as part of this alternative to
account for the increased capacity in need of treatment.
The pumping, treatment and discharge as a community water sup-
ly option would provide a high degree of protection to the
public against exposure of contaminated ground water and, at
the same time, reduce the extent of contamination in the aquifer.
-------
-12-
Metal concentrations in the ground water may pose some risk to
public health. The ground water would be treated for metals
removal prior to distribution. Effluent design concentrations
were determined based on Federal primary drinking water regulations.
MCLs for cadmium, chromium, lead and arsenic are 10 ug/1, 50
ug/1, 50 ug/1, and 50 ug/1, respectively. The presence of many
inorganic constituents in varying concentrations may have an
adverse affect on removal efficiency. Federal MCLs may therefore
not be achievable on a consistent basis.
This alternative would provide adequate protection against hazards
to public health when both volatile organics and metals removal
technologies are operating at the design removal efficiencies.
However, failure of either of these systems, especially an
unexpected breakthrough of VOC and/or toxic metals, would
result in public exposure of contaminated ground water via inges-
tion. Proper management, operation and maintenance of the
treatment system and frequent sampling and analysis of the
water would help mitigate this risk. However, due to the
uncertainties associated with the use of metals removal treatment
technologies, safe levels of metals in the drinking water can
not be assured. There are no anticipated adverse environmental
impacts associated with this remedial action alternative.
Pumping and treating the contaminated ground-water plume is a
viable form of aquifer rehabilitation, assuming no additional
contamination is being released. The present worth cost for this
alternative is $1,558,100 and 1,045,700 with and without metals
treatment, respectively.
E - Alternative No. 10 - Provide Public Water Supply To All Private
Well Users Within The Study Area
Under this alternative, public water supply would be provided
to current private well users within the Haviland study area by
extending a water service ma,in from the Harbourd Hills water
system. An estimated 100 residences, which includes a 65-unit
apartment complex, approximately 20 commercial businesses and a
public school, would be connected to the community water system.
A new six-inch (6") main would be constructed along the existing
easement, across the Fall Kill and onto Haviland Road to provide
water service to the study area. The service extension would
tie into the Harbourd Hills water system's existing 6-inch main
on Lawrence Road. The existing 3-inch main servicing the Cedar
Gardens -apartment complex would be replaced with 1,300 feet of
6-inch main from the existing 6-inch main on Lawrence Road to
the intersection of Haviland Road and Sunset Drive. The proposed
service extension would provide public water to approximately
35 residential lots, a 65-unit apartment complex, a car wash,
approximately 20 commercial businesses, and a public school
(figure 10).
-------
-13-
The existing Harbourd Hills Water Company supplies community
water to * total of 214 residences and a 24-unit apartment
complex irtfthe Harbourd Hills section of the Town of Hyde park.
Current demands on water supply servicing these 238 units is
101,000 gpd. The new calculated average daily demand for both
the existing Harbourd Hills Water Company plus the extended
service to the Haviland study area totals 160/000 gpd.
Water for the Harbourd Hills water system is obtained from two
production wells located on a two-acre parcel of land on
Lawrence Road, east of the Fall Kill. As indicated in the RI,
the Fall Kill acts as a hydrogeologic boundary for ground-water
flow from the Haviland study area and therefore intercepts the
contaminated ground-water plume before impacting the supply wells.
The quality of water obtained from the two Harbourd Hills supply
wells does not meet current New York State Health Department
regulations for iron, manganese and turbidity. The total
maximum allowable concentration of iron and manganese collectively
must not exceed 0.5 mg/1 and the turbidity of the water must
not exceed a value of 5 turbidity units throughout the distribu-
tion system. The combined iron and manganese concentrations,
and the turbidity values detected in the Harbourd Hills distribu-
tion system currently exceed the allowable New York State
Department of Health water quality criteria for community
ground-water systems.
Another noted deficiency in the existing community water
distribution system is inadequate storage capacity. The existing
storage in the Harbourd Hills water system, with a capacity of
32,000 gallons, does not meet the minimum storage equal to the
design average daily consumption, as required under state
regulations. With the extension of the water company to include
the Haviland area, the total average daily demand would equal
approximately 160,000 gpd. An increase in storage capacity of
at least eighty percent (80%) is needed to upgrade the system
to conform with state requirements.
This alternative employs proven technologies for extending
public water service to the Haviland study area. Based on
maximum safe yields obtainable, the existing Harbourd Hills
water system is capable of providing sufficient water capacity
to meet the demands of both the existing water company and the
extended service to the Haviland area. The estimated total
average daily demand (160,000 gpd) represents approximately
forty percent (40%) of the maximum safe yield obtainable
(439,000 gpd) from the two Harbourd Hills water production wells.
The facilities to extend the Harbourd Hills community water
system into the Haviland study area would require approximately
5,500 feet of six-inch (6") diameter ductile iron pipe, six (6)
gate valves, approximately sixty (60) service connections and
six (6) six?-inch hydrants.
-------
-14-
The existing water treatment and distribution system must be
upgraded and expanded to meet New York State Department of
Health community ground-water requirements. Deficiencies in
the existing treatment and distribution system will be
corrected using proven effective technologies to meet State
design criteria. Proposed technologies for upgrading and
expanding the existing Harbourd Hills water supply treatment,
storage and distribution system are discussed in detail in the
Morris & Andros Feasibility Report (1985), conducted for the
Town of Hyde Park. As discussed in the Feasibility Study, the
cost of upgrading the Harbourd Hills system will be shared by
the Town and EPA/New York State under this action. The con-
tribution by the Town will be approximately 60%, depending
upon final design details, under this action, EPA and New
York State are only responsible for that portion of the up-
grading allocable to the volume associated with this study area.
This alternative provides a high degree of protection to the
public against exposure to contaminated ground water by providing
all private well users within the Haviland study area with an
alternate community water supply. Residents would no longer be
using water from the contaminated plume as a potable or domestic
water source.
Impacts to the environment resulting from the implementation of
this alternative would consist of fluctuations in the
elevation of the water table and local disturbances due to
construction and installation of the new service mains. In add-
ition, it would not provide for aquifer restoration.
The fluctuations to the water table elevation are predicted due
to the proposed cessation of ground-water withdrawal for resi-
dential and commercial use, coincident with the continuation
of ground-water recharge through the existing septic systems.
The land west of the study area now drains into the Maritje
Kill, while the study area and land to the south and east drain
into the Fall Kill. Modeled ground-water contours and flow
directions (Figures 10 and 11) predict the formation of a
local ground water "mound" south of the Haviland Complex leaching
fields. This predicted local increase in water table elevation
could cause a shift in the ground-water divide toward the east
which would result in contaminant migration west of Route 9G
and south to the area of Woodfield Avenue. The existing gradients
causing contaminant transport south toward Roosevelt Road would
be increased, thereby hastening the advance of the contaminant
plume. Therefore, this alternative is not considered adequate
without aquifer remediation to ensure protection of potentially
affected 'residences to the south and the southwest.
Residents to the south and southwest using private wells
along and between Route 9G and Sunset Avenue should be monitored
semi-annually for potential volatile organic and metals contami-
nation from the Haviland Complex Wells site contamination plume
-------
-15-
as a result of localized ground-water mounding. No significant
long-terra impacts are anticipated to either the topography or
the Fall Kill.
Upon correcting the deficiencies in the existing treatment and
distribution system, as recommended in the Morris & Andros
Feasibility Report (1985), the Harbourd Hills water supply
system would be within Federal and State requirements for a
community ground-water distribution system.
Monitoring of private residential wells to the south and
southwest of the study area for volatile organic and metal
contaminants should be implemented by the Dutchess County
Department of Health. Sampling and analysis of well water
should be conducted on a semi-annual basis. The present worth
cost for this alternative is $1,133,600.
VI. SELECTED REMEDY
A - Description
The selected remedial action for the Haviland Complex site, as
presented in Table 9, consists of Alternative No.2 - Source
Control, Alternative No. 4 - Aquifer Restoration and Alternative
No. 10 - Alternate Water Supply. All three remedial actions must
be implemented in order for the overall remediation plan to be
effective. During the design phase of Alternate No. 4 the degree
of treatment will be resolved based upon additional ground-water
sampling and pilot testing i.e. whether or not metals treatment
is necessary.
To reduce the risk of exposure to the public from contaminated
ground water, an alternate potable water supply will be imple-
mented by extending service from the neighboring Harbourd Hills
water distribution system. Residents will no longer be using
water drawn from the contaminant plume as a potable or domestic
water source. It must be noted that this alternative requires a
financial commitment on behalf of the Town to upgrade the
Harbourd Hills system to a level in compliance with New York
State drinking water standards. The costs depicted on Table 9
represent only the EPA/New York State share of the total up-
grading costs. Approximately $500,000 in capital costs is
required from the Town to implement this option.
*
Connection to public water service, however, may result in
creating local ground-water mounds, causing migration of the
existing contaminant plume into previously unaffected areas to
the south and southwest of the site. In order to alleviate the
potential of further spreading of contaminants and to provide a
means for aquifer restoration,.ground-water extraction wells
will be installed to pump the contaminated ground water for
treatment and ultimate discharge of the treated ground water to
-------
-16-
the Fall Kill.
The use of four ground-water extraction wells, three placed
roughly along the center line of the inferred plume, and the
fourth placed to the south-southwest of the study area will be
utilized to capture altered contaminant flow caused by ground-water
mounding. The calculated pumping rate of 20 gpm for each well
should be sufficient for containing the contaminant plume.
Treatment of the contaminated ground water will require volatile
organics and possibly inorganic contaminants removal. Use of a
packed tower air stripper was chosen for volatile organics
removal based on a present worth calculation of capital and O&M
costs, as compared to use of granular activated carbon. Metals
removal, if deemed necessary, will utilize a precipitation
system. Additional ground-water quality samples will be analyzed
during the design phase pilot study to Identify and better
quantify the presence of inorganics, in order to determine the
need and extent of a metals removal system.
Aquifer restoration through pumping and treating will meet
all Federal and State ARARs and is expected to be accomplished
in 5 to 10 years. Aquifer remediation alone will not provide
the private well users within the study area with acceptable
potable water during the time period above; therefore, it is
necessary to extend the Harbourd Hills water supply system to
all impacted water users to provide protection to human health
during this time frame.
In order for the ground-water pumping and treatment to effectively
remediate the aquifer, source controls will need to be
implemented from the outset. Source control measures consist of
pumping and cleaning out contaminated sediments from local
septic disposal systems in order to minimize the potential of
additional releases. In addition, it is recommended that the
County and/or State utilize all available authority to prevent
a recurrence of such a problem through a septic tank monitoring
and cleanup program.
A combination of Alternatives No. 2, 4, and 10 meets feasibility
study objectives by providing an alternate acceptable source of
potable water for private well users within the study area, and
a cost-effective means of aquifer rehabilitation. The total
cost of the remedial action plan is estimated at $2,033,800
expressed in terms of present worth over a JO-year project
period for ground-water treatment and a 30- year project for
public water service. Estimated capital costs are $1,257,500
and annual.operating and maintenance costs are $105,500 for
this remedial action plan.
-------
-17-
B - Statutory Determinations
The selected remedy meets statutory requirements by:
1. Reducing public exposure to contaminated ground water by
providing an alternate water supply.
2. Rehabilitating the aquifer by pumping and treating ground
water to drinking water standards, source control, and
preventing surface-water contamination by the discharge
of contaminated ground water to the Fall Kill.
The remedy will meet all Federal and State ARARS by utilizing
standards from the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) which include
the MCLs (maximum contaminant levels), New York Class GA Ground
Water Standards and New York State Surface Water Quality Standards,
and the Clean Water Act (CWA) which include ambient water quality
criteria for surface and ground-water discharges and the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
References for the list of contaminant-specific ARARs can be
found in the Feasibility Study.
The principal environmental threats posed at the site are various
volatile organic compounds and inorganic constituents (metals)
in ground water. The threat of metal contamination to the pub-
lic is not expected to be significant based upon results from recent
tap-water samples. The remedy will utilize a combination of permanent
solutions and treatment technologies to the maximum extent
practicable which include source control (cleaning septic systems),
alternate potable water supply (extending municipal water
distribution system), extraction and treatment of contaminants
in ground water by a metals precipitation method and/or air
stripping for volatile organic compounds. This remedy represents
the best combination of factors to achieve the preference for
treatment to the maximum extent practicable. The selected
remedy is also cost-effective and utilizes treatment technologies
to the maximum extent practicable.
-------
• tWfeRKJ*-ar,O*-OU*CAi_ ftUNvK* WA»N*»alON.0 C-t*7l
SCALE 1:24000
0
jROAD CLASSIF^PDN
Light-duty
-------
-19-
FIGURE 2
RI/FS STUDY AREA
LEGEND
o-H«vll»nd Complex/Supply Walls
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS, ARCHITECTS «nd PLANNERS
wii.vn.iL N.V.
P«MMINOO«L(. M.T.
NlVtAMCAO. N.T.
. NJ.
-------
PHASE I WELL LOCATIONS
HAVILANO
SHOPPING COMPLEX
SCALE: 1=300
NUMBER OF WELL /DEPTH OF WELL (FEET)
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON « MURRELL, P.C
-------
PHASE II WELL LOCATIONS
HAVH.ANO SHOPPWO COMPLEX
SCALE: 1=300
NUMBER OF WELL / DEPTH OF WELL (FEET)
s • SHALLOW WELL
D - DEEP WELL •«
DO- DEEPEST WELL
• B- BEDROCK WELL
0- MONITORING WELL
HOLZMACHER, McLENQON « MURRELL, P.C
-------
SEPTIC SYSTEMS SAMPLING LOCATIONS
KEY TO FIGURE 1-6
- Aparuwnts
-•Ice Crea» Shop
- Bird Cage t Pet Shop
- Discount Beer t Soda
- Thrift Bakery
- Haviland Laundromat
- Haviland Cafe
- Frank* Barber Shop
- Mr. Lewis Hair Stylist
- Contort lone Heating i Cooling
10 - PrlM Meats t Dell
• The Craft Hut
12 - East Prk Pharmacy
13 - Kavlland Liquors
14 - Marine Midland Bank
IS - Charles Grey Dentist
16 - Office of Havlland Properties
17 - A. Sarayno, M.D.
II - Car Hash
SCALE: 1-120'
HAVU.ANO J.M.S.
HAVILAND J.H.S.
RECOMMENDED
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON ft MURRELL, P.C.
CflNmiMOiMCmf [RS ENVtfONUtNIAlSCKNiaiS ARCHIirCIS>«dn-*NN(RS
-------
INFERRED AREA IMPACTED BY PLUME
I In MMd MM or*wl Mulf«f I
mramiEo ixTCNt or CONTAMWATIOH
COM 99 CONTAMINANT
I.I.IJJ.L.E
(r=j/
CO
I
OQ
H
10
1*. 250'
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON 4 MURRELL, P.C.
-------
-24-
Figure 7
CONTAMINATED RESIDENTIAL WELLS
DUTCHESS COUNTY. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, FEBRUARY 1987 DATA
HAVILANO APARTMENTS
HAVILANO
SHOPPING
COMPLEX
HAVILANO RO.
JATH.
•tOP
IDELJO
11
17
19
21
WRIGHT AV€.
132.
N
ill
i\
2
4
$
8
to
12 1 14
>6
• >SO ppb for alngla -
volatile organic
compound or
>100 ppb for total
volatile organic*
^10 ppb for alnglo voc
Traca voe
LEGEND
VOC
SCALE: r-25tf-
ROOSEVELT
FIRE HOUSE
ROOSEVELT HP
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.O.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENV1RONU6VTAL SCIENTISTS, ARCHITECTS «nd PLANNERS
KIlYMt H.T.
MMUINOOAlt. NT.
MV(KM|AO. M.T.
Hl*HtLD. M J.
-------
-25-
Figure 8
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION TIME
(YEARS)
•1S;
III!
ASSUMPTIONS:
• NO FLOW SOUNOAHV CONDITIONS BUT
Sfl1:' 0 »LAC£0 IN >Hi COSfiga TO
MOUNTAIN MOFCN OIMCTION Of
now
SMITH
SCHOOL
• CONTINUOUt AVMAOt NIT HICHAKOf
(OUAL TO >(% Or ACPORTIO ANNUAL
fMIClFITATION
• •ACKaHOUNO MYOHAULIC CONOUCTIVITV
or i « io-» rT/»ic
• MOHOCK CONOUCTIVITT IS ZIHO
• AD«O«TIVITT/Oi»OH»TIVITY OF OMOANIC
COMFOUNO* IN «ANO AND OMAVtL <*'.*
HAVILAND
APARTMENT
COMPLEX
HAVILAND
3HOPPINO
COMPLEX
MOUNOWATIN FLOW f»TH iS
-------
HOLZMACHEH. McLENDON A MURRELL. P.C
-------
Apartments
Ice Crean Shop
Bird Cage « Pat Shop
Discount Beer ( Soda
Thrift Bakery
Haviland LaundroMt
Haviland Cafe
Franks Barber Shop
Mr. Lewis Hair Stylist
Contort Zone Heating I Cooling
Prlne Meats t Deli
The Craft Hut
East Prk Pharnacy
Haviland Liquors
Marine Midland Bank
Charles Grey Dentist
Office of Haviland Properties
A. Sarayno, M.D.
Car Mash
OATC VALVI
O riNI NVOHANT
--- MISTING WATCH rtrt
• SfDVICf COMHtCTIOMS
V VACANT IOTS
I—;
O
PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO EXTEND HARBOURED HILLS
COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY TO THE HAVILAND COMPLEX WELLS SITE
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON « MURRELL, P.C.
,IA4SClfNIISre.A«tl >UltCIS«n>l>VAHN{:R5
-------
Figure 11
MODELED GROUNDWATER CONTOURS
Flotation* ore srrroxinmiaiy above
"OVti
-------
-29-
Figure 12
MODELED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTIONS
Jl QROUNOWATER DIVIDE_
HAVILANO
SHOPPING
COMPLEX
-------
SAMPI INO
IprV.TirW
OfTERISENT
I MB AS)
CHLORIDE
(»q/l)
PHENOLS
lU'l'l I
NO? 8. NO2
Ing/I 1
CYANIDE
(uq/l >
ANTIMONY
HERCircV
luq/l >
N1CICL
(uu/l >
nrtrNiifM
SILVER
Ul>J/l >
THAI IUM
liul/l 1
7llir
limi/l )
pH
INORGANIC HATER QUALITY RESULTS FOR
29-»
ND
ND
45
»95
1.2
1.2
ND
O.3
ND
ND
ND
77
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NE 12
6O
62
. 43O
NE 270
350
250
I.I
NT O.6
180
102
N ND
»E 410
NP
NF ND
N ND
HI- ND
6 In
NC 4 It,
t-.r.
'""'
26- *
ND
NO
S3
56
ND
NO
5.7
6.9
ND
ND
NO
68
NS 47.7
B 56
ND
ND
ND
17
7O
164
22O
268
170
1BO
O.4
O.8
N 80
182
N ND
NO
ND
NT ND
N ND
NT ND
N 7.6O
456
7.6
7.T,
27-»
0. IB
NO
71
320
ND
ND
O.I
NO
. ND
ND
NO
563
NO
ND
NO
17
ND
NE 182
140
563
51O
NE 1130
500
670
1
NE 1.8
200
547
N ND
NO
ND
NE ND
N NO
NE ND
OBO
NC 2200
6.2
fc.2
28-»
NO
ND
119
230
ND
ND
ND
O.2
ND
ND
ND
246
N 11.8
72.5
ND
ND
NO
86
I3O
328
380
614
450
350
1.4
1.2
N I4O
216
N*E 73.5
»E 47.. 5
ND
NE ND
N ND
NE ND
N 52O
II 'Xi
I..!}
6.3
25-s
O.O6
ND
162
134
ND
2
2.4
0.2
ND
ND
ND
104
ND
8NE 21.7
20
ND
10
NE 22
110
487
310
154.
320
ISO
1.4
ND
180
NE 97
24
»E ND
ND
NE ND
N NO
NE ND
5OO
NE 25::
7
7
24-»
NO
NO
72
72
1.2
ND
19
10.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
IB. 8
ND
ND
MO
ND
ND
30
22
80
31
27. B
IB
NO
ND
ND
NO
* 4
ND
ND
NE ND
N ND
NE ND
120
93
7.1
'/. 1
ROUNDS ONE AND TWO SHALLOW HELl * . ;.;
N - •••PIKE RECOVERY LESS THAN 7SX
8 - ALTERNATE MCA PROCEDURE HAS USED
*e - SUSPECTED imri.-r ERNCES
* - INTERFERNCrn DUE TO PARTICIPATES
ND - LESS THAN DETECTION
ie-»
NO
ND
232
• 248
ND
3.2
12.7
11.6
25
NO
ND
218
NE 500
NE ND
ND
ND
30
NE 97
N 330
369
6OO
420
47O
350
1.6
1.2
3SO
NE 197
N ND
ND
N ND
N ND
N ND
ND
NE I39O
B44
6.6
6.r,
»-•
ND
ND
132
82
ND
NO
2.7
3.3
ND
ND
NO
NE 90
30
26. S
NO
NO
NO
NE 18
40
384
80
NE 63
110
100
ND
Nl)
so
87
ND
NE NO
Ml)
NF. NU
N ND
NE NO
1 4li
NE I4O
7.1
6.9
19-u 2O- fc 73— .1
O.OS 1.3 O.66
NO 0.23 0.25
17* . 3OO 195
192 340 2«X«
3.6 21 Nl)
ND 20 2. ft
0. 2 " ND ND
O.8 ND 0.7
ND ND ND
NO ND ND
ND NO NO
NE 28.4 NC 122 NE VB
NS 42.2 N 23.5 NE 23.5
135 28 S 29.."
ND NO ND
13 NO ND
ND 9 ND
NE 130 NE 22 NE 2H
N 60 N 110 N 1"
340 34 7-7
ICO 2BO !*.<:•
NE 725 NT 93 NT ITC3
ruo ::oo iso
69O I2O I4O
0. 4 O.7 O.'.
i.r • o.a . o.?
/.O I6O A»
311 ND Nl)
N ND N Nil N Nil
NT Nl) Ni: ND NT ND
N NP N Nl> 14 Nr>
Nl. Nl) NC .IU l«: NO
N Nil N Nl) N Nl>
NT Nl) Ni: Kin NT NP
ti>O •">'!>' 2SO
NF. inro NI: ir.o MI: 291
i..-.' 7.2 r. i
<>.7 7.2 .7
71 -o
ND
ND
28
34
ND
ND
10.6
10.7
ND
ND
ND
72
NE 21. B
•3 88
ND
ND
ND
37
N 5O
81
ISO
302
130
2OO
0.3
O.4
120
138
N NP
n n. i
N NI)
NU ND
N ND
HT. ND
rio
r>7/>
/.r.
7.:;
16- «
ND
ND
85
36
ND
ND
3
*-9
ND
NO
ND
NE 357
110
• 148
N ND
18
12
NE 172
450
398
12IO
NE 1140
820
BIO
2.3
** *
690
610
N ND
Mi ND
Hl>
NE Nl)
N Ml)
NF Nl)
74(11
NT 201"
.'.:*
7.,i
lor < ;*«'^^W^^^^M
^^^^^_
Hotinfl I In the fli-
ts tin' second Itcv
st line;
«
•— ^^^— ^WOMH***^
Hound II
*f±.
^Kt4~~HOLZMACHER. McLENDON & MURRELl, P.C= z£?£^B
t ^55K1/»S CON!UIMG(NGMtCRS.EMVint>NMtNI«lSCIiHirMS.AflC>«l[eiS<*d''t*NAlRS Itminit.mi^^^
I
u>
s?
or
-------
1
SAMPLING
INORGANIC HATER QUALITY RESULTS FOR ROUNDS
ONE AND TWO Kill' /iND DEDROCK NELLS
N - DPIKE RECOVERY LESS THAN 7SX
8 - ALTERNATE MSA PROCEDURE MAS USED
«E - SUSPECTED INTERFERNCCD
* - 1NTERKCKNCES DUE TO PARTICULATCS
LOCATION 29-D.
DETERGENT
IMDAS)
ran. OR IDE
(mq/l)
PHENOLS
lug/1)
N03 «. NO2
l-g/ll
C VAN IDE
(ug/l)
ANTIMONY
lug/1 >
ND
ND
38
36
ND
ND
3.2
3.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ARSENIC 13. B
lug/1 >
BERVLIUM
lug/1)
CADMIUM
• lug/I > NE
CHROMIUM
lug/1 >
COPPER
lug/1 > NE
LEAD
lug/1 >
MERCURY
luq/l> NE*
NICKEL
luu/l >
SELENIUM N
luu/l >
•5ILWTR
luu/l > NT
HUM IUM N
(.i.i/ll NT
/INI
(«,.,/! i NT
I'll
For each water quality parameter!
ribund 1 In tin- flrpt line; Round II
IE the r.econd llnp.
ND
21
ND
ND
ND
2O
ND
60
119
14
ND
ND
3.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Nl)
ND
UO
69
7.4
7.6
29-DD
ND
ND
65
6U
ND
ND
1
3.2
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NE NO
ND
ND
ND
NE ND
NP
ND
Nl)
NT NP
ND
Nl)
N ND
ND
NH
NT Nl>
N Nl*
NT Nl)
30
Nt- Nil
7.6
7.6
26 • H
ND
ND
14
16
ND
ND
O. 1
0.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
N 10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
I'O
14
ND
ND
ND
V.5
ND
1
N ND
NO
N ND
NO
i||>
nr. NI>
N Illl
Nl ND
N 3O
43
8. 1
8. 1
•
27-B
ND
Nl)
.'.9
41
ND
ND
4.r-
4.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
N 11
ND
ND
ND
ND
NE Nl)
20
13
40
NE ND
13
S
0.3
Nf. O.3
N Nl)
NO
N Nl)
HI)
III)
NE NI?
H Nil
111' Nl)
N SO
in 44
7.6
7.7
ND - LESS
27-B
0.09.
ND
41?
4O
1.2
-t
I.B
0.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NE ND
ND
21
ND
NE ND
ND
fj
O.I
. NE ND
ND
ND
N MP
Nl)
Nil
IF. NP
N Nil
NF Nl)
1 V« i
Hi: 65
9. a
9.9
THAN DETECTION
2B--D
ND
ND
33
37
ND
ND
ND
O.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
N IOO
16. R
ND
NO
ND
NE ND
IOO
18
ND
NE 81
120
IOO
ND
NE 0.2
N 90
ND
N NO
Nl)
ND
HE NO
N Nl)
NT Nl)
270
Nl 148
7. I
7.1
2S-U DRV HELL
ND
ND
14.'.
I jfl
ND
2.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
HE 7
ND
ND
ND
NC 7
ND
56
IOO
ND
ND
7
ND
1.3
ND
NE ND
II
ND
Nil
NE ND
N Nil
Nf . Nl>
Nl>
NT 51
9.7
9
I I-KJM HOLZMACHCR, McLENDON
1. IS
O.46
3350
r/7o*
Nil
4.1
0.3
Nil
N.)
M1
371
9*
248. 3
NE Nl)
HO
Nl)
*7
NE 17
130
2»i
3SO
132
1 ?1?I*
300
0.4
hO
230
NT Nl>
NP
Nl.
Nl.'
NT* HI'
II NP
Nfi Nl)
3450
NT 332
7.5
7.*
A MURRELL. P.C. ISHrlv*'
| • Ufjvm COMSlUIMGCNGMl(RS.rNvmONUCNIAlSCI(NIISIlA«CHmCIS«inAMH{RS I«»«»lo.nj
u>
I—•
I
H
(a
o-
M
n
Is)
-------
SIGNiriCAHT VOLATILE ORGANIC WATER QUALITY RESULTS FOR ROUNDS ONE AND TWO
SHALLOW. WELLS
SAMPLING
LOCATION
s;sss=s=s=s=s;ssss=s
l.l-DICHLORO
ETHENE (ug/1)
TRANS - 1 . 2 - DICHLORO
ETHENE (ug/1 )
1.1.1-TRICHLORO
ETHANE (ug/1)
ACETONE
(ug/1)
CHLOROHETHANE
(ug/1)
TOLUENE
(ug/1 )
NETHYLENE
CHLORIDE (ug/1
BENZENE
(ug/1)
CARBON DISULFIDE
(ug/1)
TOTAL XYLENES
(ug/1)
CHLORO BENZENE
(ug/1)
2-BUTANONE
(ug/1)
TETRACHLORO
ETHENE (ug/1)
29-s
= = = £££ = :
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 7
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
26-.
;— ;— — S^SS
ND
11
ND
ND
ND
B 21
ND
ND
B 6
B 12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
27-«
sssss
B
B
B
B
B
B
::*•:
1?
.11
ND
ND
28
104
16
ND
ND
5
ND
ND
5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
ND
ND
28 -•
3SS-SS5S*
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 6
B 10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
25-.
:S35SSS5r;
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
24 -•
Esssssssj
ND
ND
JB 23
B 25
ND
B 9
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
22-*
B - CORRECTED FOR BLANK
CONTAMINATION
ND - LESS THAN DETECTION
20-» 23-» 21-a 16-a
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
IS
ND
HO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
HO
ND
ND
NO
29
KO
KO
ND
ND
11
NJ
KO
KO
ND
KD
Kl>
NT/
til)
KD
ND
ND
ND
13
8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
17
12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
tor each water quality parameter!
Rtilind I In the first line! Round II
In the -.econd lire.
I
HOLZMACHER. McLENOON * MURRELl. P.O.
-------
SAMPLING
LOCATION
» W W -V V W «• A V
lB«»^^«B«B«BaB«
1.1-DICHLORO
ETHENE
TRANS-1,2
ETHENE
1,1,1-TRI
ETHANE
ACETONE
(ug/1)
CHLOROMETHANE
(ug/1)
TOLUENE
(ug/1)
METHYLENE
CHLORI
BENZENE
(ug/1)
CARBON DIS
(ug/1)
TOTAL XYLENES
(ug/1)
CHLORO BENZENE
(ug/1)
2-BUTANONE
(ug/1)
TETRACHLORO
ETHENE
SIGNIFICANT VOLATILE ORGANIC GROUND WATER QUALITY RESULTS FOR ROUNDS ONE AND TWO
DEEP AND BEDROCK WELLS
B - CORRECTED FOR BLANK
CONTAMINATION
ND - LESS THAN DETECTION
29-D
29-DD
26-D
27-D
27-B
28-D
25-B DRY WELL
O
ug/1)
I CHLORO
(ug/1)
LORO
(ug/1)
NE
E (ug/1
LFIDE
ES
ENE
i
(ug/1)
ND
ND
6
9
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 13
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 7
ND
ND
ND
B 27
ND
ND
ND
B 5
ND
ND
,ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 46
ND
22
ND
B 52
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
B 5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
35
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
17
ND
19
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
For each water quality parameter:
Hound I is the first line; Hound II 1R the second line
HOLZMACHER, McLENDOH & MURRELL, P.C.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS, ARCHITECTS *nd PLANNERS
MUVItlf.N.V.
r ARMINC.DAIE. N.V.
(OVERHfAD.H.V.
rAMFIElD.NJ.
-------
-34-
TABLE 5
INORGANIC WATER DUALITY RESULTS FOR
ROUNDS ONE AND TWO -FALL KILL
SAMPLING
LOCATION
DETERGENT
(NBAS)
CHLORIDE
(mg/1)
PHENOLS
(ug/1)
N03 & N02
(ma/1)
CYANIDE
(ug/1)
ANTIMONY
(ua/1)
ARSENIC
(ug/1)
BERYL I UM
; (uq/1 )
! CADMIUM
(ua/1)
CHROMIUM
(ua/1)
COPPER
(ua/1)
LEAD
(uq/1)
MERCURY
(ua/1 )
NICKEL
(uo/1)
SFLENIUM
(uo/1)
RJLVER
THALIUM
fuo/1 )
ZINC
< mn / 1 )
PH
PT-1
ND
ND
30
19
ND
ND
0.7
0.7
ND
ND
ND
78
ND
ND
N ND
ND
ND
6
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
N ND
ND
ND
NE 10
N ND
NE 10
ND
ND
7.4
7.2
__
N - SPIKE RECOVERY LESS THAN 757.
S - ALTERNATE MSrt PROCEDURE WAS USED
+E - SUSPECTED INTERFERNCES
* - INTERFERNCES DUE TO PARTICULATES
ND - LESS THAN DETECTION
PT-2 PT-3 PT -3A PT-4 PT-5
•ft ••. ~ rsrssi -i;s.; ; ;£-..: UT- .. '.TV? -•;:..-. T .. JT irs:^S'i=*sss:ssu; - • . rur: ss TS -^s -^ ^ a ^s
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
44 43 30 32
20 23 21 21
1.2 ND ND ND
2 ' ND 2.4 0.5
0.6 0.6 0.7 O.7
0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
N ND N ND N ND N ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND 7 ND 5
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND 30 ND 25
7 NP ND ND
ND 15.6 ND ND
ND . • ' ND ND ND
ND ML" ND 0.4
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
N ND N ND N ND N ND
ND NE- NO ND
ND ND ND ND
NE 10 NE 1*' NG tO NE ND
N ND N N!' fj NP N ND
NE 10 NE ND N.E .'•!" NE ND
40 5O ND ND
ND 56 NT. ND
7»3 7.3 7.1 7.3
7.1 7 7.1 . 7.1
For each water quality parameter:
Round I is the first line; Round II |
Is the second lire. "
1
•
J
fl
1
KK2A4 HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.O. HBS&Si,,, 1
• **J~m CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIEffPSTS. ARCHITECTS trxj PLANNERS «.vg9Mr.r>*» I
CAiVrieLl). "i J. \
-------
-35-
Cor
Chlorone thane
Vinyl Chloride
Chloroe thane
Methylene Chloride
Acetone
Cazbon Disulfate
1, 1-Oichloioethene
1,1-Dichloroethane
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloxoethene
CnlOTOxoxxR
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
2-Butanone
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Carton Tetrachloride
Vinyl Acetate
Brotodichloronethane
1,2-Dichlorcpropane
Trans-1 , 3 -Oichloropropene
Trichloroethene
Dfbrarochlorone thane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Benzene
Cis— 1 , 3 "Dichloropropene
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Brciiofonn
4-Methyl-2-Pentancne
2-Hexancne
Tetrachloroethene
1,1,2, 2-Te trachlotoethane
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Styrene
Total Xylenes
.Dichlorobenzene
TABLE °
ORGANIC ANALYSIS (ug/1)
SEPTIC SYSTEM
SAMPLING
HAVHAND COMPLEX WELLS SITE
S-l
100
10 0
100
10 0
4 JB
73
6
5 0
50
50
5 0
5 0
100
50
50
100
50
5 0
50
5 0
5 O
5 0
50
5 0
100
50
10 O
10 0
5 0
.50
41 B
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
20 U
S-2
100
10 0
10 0
10 O
6B
10 0
2 JB
5 0
50
1 J
50
5 0
100
50
50
100
50
50
5 0
5 0
5 0
50
50
50
10 0
50
10 0
10 O
50
50
44 B
1 JB
5 0
5 0
5 0
10 U
S-3
100
10 U
10 0
100
1 JB
26
13 B
50
50
50
5 0
50
100
5 0
50
100
5 0
5 0
50
50
50
5 0
50
5 0
100
5 0
100
10 0
5 0
5 0
170 B
23 B
5 0
5 0
50
11
S-4
10 0
10 0
10 0
10 0
2 B
72
2 B
5 O
50
5 0
50
5 0
100
5 O
5 O
10 O
50
5 0
50
50
5 0
5 0
50
5 0
100
50
10 0
10 0
50
5 0
340 B
2 JB
•5 0
5 0
5 0
20 0
S-5
10 0
10 0
10 0
10 0
4 JB
9 J
14
5 0
50
50
5 0
5 0
100
50
50
10 O
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 O
5 0
5 0
100
5 0
100
10 0
5 0
5 0
92 B
1 JB
5 0
5 0
5 0
20 0.
S-6
10 0
10 0
10 0
10 0
3 JB
14
15
50
50
5 0
5 0
50
100
50
50
10 0
5 0
5 0
50
5 0
5 O
5 0
50
5 0
100
5 0
10 0
10 0
5 0
5 0
340 B
1 JB
5 0
5 U
3
50 U
S-7
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 0
3 JB
11
12
5 0
5 0
50
5 0
5 0
10 0
50
5 0
10 0
5 0
50
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
5 0
10 0
5 0
10 U
10 U
5 U
5 U
270 B
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
10 U
O - undetected
j - incomplete recovery
B - found in blank
-------
-36-
Oc
Chloromethane
Braitmethane
Vinyl Chloride
Chlozoethane
Methylene Chloride
Acetone
Cazbon Disulfate
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,1-Oichloroethane
Trans-1,2-Oichloroethene
Chlorocc
1,2-Oichlotoethane
2-Butanone
1,1* 1-Trichloroethane
Cazbon Tetraehlozide
Vinyl Acetate
Brocnbdichloranethane
1,2-Dichlorcprppane
- Trans-1,3 -Dichlorcpropene
Trlchloroethene
Dibrottcchlorane thane
1,1.2-Trichloroe thane
Benzene
CLs-1 , 3 -Oichlorop:
2-Ghloroethylvinylether
4 -Methyl -2-Pentanone
2-Hexanone
Tetrachloroethene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Toluene
Cnlordbenzene
Ethylbenzene
Styrene
Total Xylenes
Dichlorcbenzene
TABLE 6 CONT'D
OHGANIC ANALYSTS (ug/1) (COOT
SEPTIC SYSTEM SAMSUNG
'D.)
HAVTLAM5 CCMPLEX WHIS SITE
S-8 S-9 S-10
10 0 500 U 10 0
10 o 500 u 10 u
10 0 500 U 10 U
10 U 500 O 10 U
4 JB 130 JB 2 JB
38 900 B 13 B
11 200 JB 2 JB
5 U 250 U 5 U
5 U 250 U 5 U
25 250 U 50
U 250 U 5 U
5 U 250 U 50
10 U 500 U 10 TJ
5 U 250 U 5 U
5U 250 U 5U
10 U 250 U 10 U
5 U 250 U 5 U
5 U 250 U 5 U
5 U 250 U 5 U
250 n 5 n
50 250 0 50
SO 250 0 SO
50 510 B 11 B
50 250 0 50
10 0 250 0 10 0
5 0 250 O 50
10 0 250 0 10 0
10 0 250 0 10 0
6 250 0 50
'50 250 0 50
120 B 77 JB 3 JB
50 250 0 2 J
6 250 0 50
50 250 0 50
63 250 0 2 B
400 0 20 0 20 0
S-ll
5 J
10 0
10 O
10 O
3 JB
97 B
26 B
SO
SO
5 0
2 J
50
100
50
50
100
50
5 0
5 O
50
50
50
11 B
50
10 O
50
100
100
5 0
5 0
46 B
.15 B
5 0
5 0
4 B
31
S-12 S-13
5 J 5 J
10 O 10 O
10 O 10 0
10 O 10 O
2 JB 2 JB
14 B 610 B
20 B 38 B
50 50
50 50
50 50
50 50
50 50
10 O 460
50 50
50 50
10 O 9 J
SO 50
50 50
50 SO
5 O 5 O
50 50
50 50
8 B 9 B
5 O SO
10 O 10 O
SO 50
10 0 6 JB
10 0 810
50 50
50 50
2 JB
50
50
5 O
5 O
20 O
S-14
- undetected
J - incotplete recovery
B - found in blank
-------
TABLE '
INORGANIC ANALYSIS (uq/1)
SEPTIC SYSTEM SAMPLING
HAVILAND OCMFLEX WELLS SITE
Parameter
Detergent (MBAS)
Chloride
Phenols
N02-N •»• N03-N
Cyanide
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chronium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
S-l
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-5
S-6
S-7
1ft
2208
21
<0.18
27
<60
<10 NE
<5
20
24
2570
110
330 NE
71
<5 NE
102
<10 NE
2550
0.73ft
230»
16
-------
TAELE
(CONT'D)
INOHGMIIC ANALYSIS (ug/1) (OONT'D.)
SEPilC SYSTEM SAMPLING
HAVILAND OCMPLEX WELLS SITE
Federal
Parameter
Detergent (MBAS)
Chloride
Phenols
N02-W + N03-N
Cyanide
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
S-8
1.6ft
230ft
20
<0.1ft
70
172
<200 NB
<5
66
328
10600
1840
38 NB
198
<100 NB
12
<10 NB
12700
S-9
0.38ft
210tt
15
1.9ft
173
64
<10 NB
<5
<5
21
80
270
0.6 NB
<40
<5 NE
16
<100 NB
281
S-10
<0.04ft
<2ft
<1
1.9ft
<10
<60
<10 NB
<5
<5
11
1410
270
<0.2 NB
<40
<5 NB
<10
<10 NB
356
S-ll
0.34ft
108ft
59
<0.1ft
27
<60
<10 NB
<5
<5
<10
62
<50
0.2 NB
<40
<5 NB
<10
<100 NB
99
S-12
<0.04ft
15ft
4
<0.1ft
<10
<60
<10 NB
<5
<5
<10
69
<50
0.6 NB
<40
<5 NB
<10
<10 NB
120
S-13
2.24ft
99ft
74
<0.1ft
20
<60
<10 NB
<5
5
25
434
140
1.0 NB
50
<5 NB
12
<10 NB
985
S-14
<0.04ft
1180ft
<1
<0.1ft
<10
130
<200 NB
<5
97
216
723
1400
0.6 NB
299
<100 NB
<10
<10 NB
3710
MCLi
«MN»
—
—
—
—
—
50
' —
10
—
50
—
50
2
__
10
50
—
WS Class GA
Groundwater
Discharge
Standards
2
10
50
20
100
1000
50
4
40
100
5000
CO
00
All results are in ug/1 except when denoted by "ft" (mg/1)
N - Spike recovery not within control limits
B - Estimated value due to interference
-------
-39-
TABLE 8
• vilP?-' ;• • '
' .••^Jsiife^''' *
"
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
OF HAVILANO COMPLEX *EUS SITE
REMEDIAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
TOTAL NO.
OF YEARS OF REMEDIAL
ALTEBWTJplJfiv CAPITAL COST ANNUAL OU PRESENT NORTH ACTION IMPLEMENTATION ""
N0.1 - NO ACTION - 0 -
N0.2 - SOURCE CONTROL 98,000
N0.4 - 6R9UNDHATER
EXTRACTION, TREATMENT AND
DISCHAR6E TO SURFACE HATERS
A - RETALS REMOVAL 277,000
ONLY
1 - AIR STRIPPINS 170,000
ONLY
C - 6RANULAR ACTIVATED 175,000
CARBON ONLY
M - METALS REMOVAL 393,600
« AND AIR STRIPPINS
A+C - RETALS REMOVAL 400,600
M AJID6AC
N0.5 - 6ROUNDHATER
EXTRACTION, TREATMENT AND
DISBURSE AS A PUBLIC
HATER SUPPLY
A - METALS REMOVAL 661,200
ONLY
B - AIR STRIPPINS 558,200
ONLY
C - SAC ONLY 563,200
A+D - METALS REMOVAL 781,800
«* AND AIR STRIPPINS
A+C - HETALS REMOVAL 788,800
» ANO SAC
NO. 10 - PROVIDE PUBLIC 765,900
H
HATER SUPPLY TO ALL PRIVATE
HELL USERS HITHIN THE
STUDY AREA "
-0- - 0-
• 0 - 98,000
•
47,000. 561,800
19,500 289,800
44,000 445,400
66,500 802,200
91,000 959,800
.
10 YRS. FOR
30 YRS. FOR
86,000 1,317,700
58,500 1,045,700
83,008 1,201,300
105,000 1,558,100
*
130,000 1,715,700
39,000 1,133,600
ft - INCLUDE. MISC. AND CONTIN6EKY COSTS
m-\n*jLA HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.O.
• UC/VM CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTALSCIENTISTS,ARCHITECTSand PLANNERS
N/A
0
10
10
10
10
10
TREATMENT/
PUBLIC HATER SERVICE —
10/30
10/30
10/30
10/30
10/30
30
MCLvn.il. N.T.
MBMINOOAlt N.T.
FAIRFICLO. N J.
-------
-40-
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF SELECTED REMEDY AND COSTS
Recommended Operation & Number of
Remedial Action Capital Maintenance Years of Present
Plan No. IV Cost f$) Costs fg/vrl Implementation Worth f$1i
No. 2
Source Control $ 98,000 $ -0- - $ 98/000
No. 4
A Groundwater
Extraction, Treatment
(metals removal
and air stripping) 393,600 66,500 .10 802,2
and discharge to
Surface Water
No. 10
Provide Public
Water Supply to
all private well 765,900 39,000 30 1,133,600
users within the
study area
TOTAL $1,257,500 $105,500 $2,033,800
-------
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-
. t?A-?.EG!QM II
uFFiCE Of cHERG£KCT
i~-7 '^2 l^ D" 19- ?n Thomas C, Jorlino
!:u7 OCr 10 •:•, \L- iU Commission*
&^j-—
SEP 11 1987
Mr. Stephen D. Luftig
Director
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Dear
Re: Haviland Complex Wells Site
Hyde Park (T), Dutchess County
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has
recently completed a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the
Haviland. Complex Wells Site, Town of Hyde Park, Dutchess County, New York.
This RI/FS work recommended that the following remedial measures be
implemented at this site: 1) source control [Alternative No. 2]; 2) groundwater
extraction, treatment and discharge to the Fall Kill Creek [Alternative Nos.
4A&B]; and 3) providing public water [Alternative No. 10] by extending the
Harbourd Hills Water System to all private well users within the study area.
This Department endorses these recommendations.
We understand.that: 1) the remedial costs for this project, including the,_
operation and maintenance costs for Alternative Nos. 4A&B for a ten-year period,
will be divided 90% federal and 10* State of New York; and 2) that the State
of New York will be responsible for assuring the operation and maintenance of
Alternative No. 10. We understand that the first year operation and maintenance
costs will be eligible for federal funding.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please contact
Mr. Robert Foltin or Mr. Joseph lannotti, of my staff, at (518) 457-1708.
Sincerely,
Norman H. Nosenchuck, P.E.
Director
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
cc: G. Pavlou, USEPA Region II
W. McCabe, USEPA Region II
A. Posner, USEPA Region II
-------
Responsiveness Summary
Haviland Complex Wells Site
Q: Whicip direct ion is the ground-water flow in the Haviland
area?" Will ground water flow in a southwest direction
towards Woodfield Avenue once the preferred alternatives
are implemented?
A: Ground water is basically flowing in a southeast direction
from the Haviland Complex towards the Fall Kill Creek. The
ground-water flow pattern could change should an alternate
water supply be used./ Connection to public water may result
in creating local ground-water mounds and migration of the
existing contaminant plume into previously unaffected areas
to the south and southwest of the site. In order to allevi-
ate the potential of further spreading of contaminants and
to provide a means for aquifer rehabilitation, ground-water
extraction wells would be installed to pump the contaminated
ground water to a treatment system.
Q: Is the water from the Harbourd Hills wells drinkable?
A: The Harbourd Hills water is drinkable but does contain iron
and manganese levels slightly above the State Health Depart-
ment standards. The planned remedial action includes up-
grading of the Harbourd Hills treatment system to reduce
the iron and manganese levels to a point that would meet
the requirements of the State Health Department.
Q: Where are the homeowner sampling results from the August
1986 sampling episode performed by the EPA?
A: The results are contained in the Feasibility Study document
and they can also be .obtained from the Dutchess County
Health Department and/or the USEPA.
Q: Why can't the Hyde Park Village Water System be extended to
the Haviland area?
A: The implementation of this district to serve the entire town
is at least two to three years in the future according to
local officials. If this district is established in the
future, then the system at Harbourd Hills could serve as
back-up. Upgrading and extension of the Harbourd Hills
water system appears to be a more cost-effective alternative
than the establishment of the Hyde Park Water District.
-------
Q: Why n^ren't the homeowner septic tanks tested to find out if
thesg|Sijj|» contaminating the ground water in the area?
A: Because of the relatively insignificant quantity of flow associ-
ated with private homeowners, the residential septic tanks
were not tested during the study. Due to the insignificant
flows associated with the residential septic tanks, in the
unlikely event of their failure, the resulting contamination
would be captured by the extraction and treatment system
seiected for implementation. Based on pre-RI/FS testing
and the flow volumes involved, the study concentrated on the
septic tanks of the Haviland apartment complex, Haviland
shopping center and Haviland Junior High School. Therefore,
monitoring wells were placed immediately downgradient of
those septic systems and samples were taken from those
septic tanks. Sampling results, both from the monitoring
wells and from the septic tanks, indicate volatile organic
and metal contamination.
Q: After reviewing the data generated from the study at this site,
is it probable that a determination would be made that the
pollution was caused by one or more polluters and that legal
remedies would be sought against those people?
A: The data in the remedial investigation and feasibility study
documents indicate that contamination has emanated from
certain point sources. If the government attorneys and tech-
nical people decide that enough evidence exists to identify
specific polluters responsible for the contamination at this
site, then notice letters will be sent to those individuals
requesting action on their part.
Q: How long will it take before construction of the preferred
alternatives is initiated?
i
A: The plan is for the design to be funded in the second quarter
of federal fiscal year 1988 which would be January through
March 1988. Generally, a year would be allocated to complete
the design phase since pilot testing of the proposed ground-
water treatment system and further ground-water sampling
will need to be done during this phase,. If this schedule is
adhered to, then the start of construction would be in the
beginning of calendar year 1989.
Q: Soap is appearing in my well water and I believe it's coming
from the Haviland laundromat. Why can't something be done
about it?
A: As a follow-up to the septic tank sampling performed in
this study, the Dutchess County Health Department and the
-------
New 3tirrkf State Department of Environmental Conservation will
investigate and determine what facilities are violating the
New York State ground-water discharge standards. Action
will be taken accordingly.
------- |