United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R02-92/173
September 1992
PB93-963822
SEPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Facet Enterprises, NY
-------
NOTICE
The appendices listed in the index that are not found in this document have been removed at the request of
the issuing agency. They contain material which supplement but adds no further applicable information to
the content of the document All supplemental material is, however, contained in the administrative record
for this site.
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R02-92/173
2.
3. Recipient1* Acceeaion No.
4. THto and Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Facet Enterprises, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
5. Report Date
09/04/92
7. Aulhon»
8. Performing Organization Rapt No.
«. Performing Organization Nam* end AddiMB
10. ProJecl/Taek/Work UnH No.
11. Contr*ct(C) or Grant(Q) No.
(C)
(G)
12. Sponeorlng Organization Htm* and Addm*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. Typo of Report * Period Covered
800/000
14.
15. Supplementary Notee
PB93-963822
18. Ab*tmct(Umlt: 200 word*)
The 31-acre Facet Enterprises site is a manufacturing facility located in the Village
of Elmira Heights, Chemung County, New York. Land use in the area is primarily
residential and commercial. The site overlies a Class Ila aquifer, which is a
potential source of potable water. The facility, constructed in 1895,. was first used
by Eclipse, Inc. to manufacture bicycles. From 1900 to 1960, Eclipse manufactured
motorcycles, engine and airplane parts, military support parts, ammunition, and fuel
pumps. During that time, Bendix Aviation Corporation acquired control of Eclipse.
From 1960 to 1975, Eclipse, then a division of Bendix, manufactured electric clutches
and brakes. In 1974, Facet Enterprises was organized; then, in 1989, Purolator
Products Company became the corporate successor to Facet. Over 10 different areas were
used at the site for disposal of wastes, including plating wastes, oil sludge, metal
hydroxide sludge, chromic acid, PCBs, grinding chips, and miscellaneous liquid wastes.
These areas include an oil/water separator, ponds, lagoons, drainage ways, and several
dry wells for the disposal of liquid wastes. Since 1979, several site investigations
have been conducted by EPA and the state. A 1986 draft remedial investigation revealed
that VOCs, PCBs, and PAHs were present in site soil and sediment, and that VOCs,
(See Attached Page)
17. Document AnalyeJe a. Descriptor*
Record of Decision - Facet Enterprises, NY
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Media: soil, sediment, debris, gw
Key Contaminants: VOCs (benzene, PCE, TCE, toluene, xylenes), other organics (PAHs,
^ ~- *^, PCBs), metals '(arsenic, lead)
b. Uentifiera/Open-Ended Terme •
c. COSATI Reid/Group
18. Availability Statement
18. Security Cleee (Thie Report)
None
20. Security Cleee (Thie Page)
None
21. No. of Pagee
146
22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.1S)
See Instruction* on Ronne
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTO45)
Department of Commerce
-------
EPA/ROD/R02-92/173
Facet Enterprises, NY
Second Remedial Action - Final
Abstract (Continued)
organics, and inorganics were detected in ground water and surface water drainage streams
at concentrations above New York State standards. Remedial measures, which were
implemented at the site in 1979, included excavating surface water diversions, covering
past disposal areas with soil, and constructing a leachate collection system. In 1992,
Purolator excavated and removed 469 buried drums; excavated 2,250 tons of contaminated
soil; and removed and sent 30,000 gallons of contaminated liquids offsite to a RCRA
facility . This ROD addresses a final remedy for the onsite contaminated soil, sediment,
debris, and ground water. The primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil,
sediment, debris, and ground water are VOCs, including TCE, benzene, toluene, xylenes,
and PCE; other organics, including PCBs and PAHs; and metals, including arsenic, and
lead.
he selected remedial action for this site includes excavating contaminated soil and
sediment from the disposal areas; disposing of approximately 1,275 cubic yards of TSCA
waste with PCBs concentrations greater than 50 ppm offsite in a secure double-lined
landfill facility; stabilizing of all RCRA wastes to prevent leaching of metals and
disposing of 2,124 cubic yards of waste in a secure offsite RCRA-lined facility;
disposing of approximately 120 cubic yards of non-RCRA wastes in an offsite industrial
waste landfill; extracting and storing contaminated ground water in a central onsite
collection tank, followed by treatment using air stripping to remove VOCs, and filtration
and precipitation to remove metals, if necessary; discharging the treated effluent onsite
to the facility non-contact cooling system or to surface water; and implementing a
long-term ground water monitoring program and institutional controls including land use
restrictions. The estimated present worth cost for this remedial action is $4,850,656,
which includes an annual O&M cost of $1,305,596 for 20 years.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS:
Action levels for excavation of surface soil/sediment are health-based and include
benzo(a) anthracene 20 ppm/3 ppm; benzo(b)flouroanthene
20 ppm/3 ppm; benzo(k)flouranthene 43 ppm/7 ppm; benzo(a)pyrene-
3 ppm/1 ppm; indeno(l,2,3-cd) pyrene 12 ppm/2 ppm; dibenzo(a,h) anthracene 3 ppm/1 ppm;
PCBs 10 ppm/1 ppm; arsenic 19 ppm/7 ppm; and chromium 1110 ppm in sediment only. Action
levels for excavation of subsurface soil are also health-based and include
benzo(a)anthracene 54 ppm; benzo(b)fluoranthene 55 ppm; benzo(k)flouranthene 118 ppm;
benzo (a) pyrene 8 ppm; indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 33 ppm; PCBs 25 ppm; and arsenic 52 ppm.
Chemical-specific clean-up goals for soil and sediment are based on RCRA TCLP, Land Ban
regulations, and TSCA regulations. Chemical-specific ground water clean-up goals are
based on SDWA MCLs and state drinking water standards including TCE 5 ug/1; xylenes 5
ug/1; and lead 25 ug/1. Chemical-specific ARARs will be waived if it is determined by
EPA that certain portions of the ground water cannot be restored for beneficial use.
-------
ROD FACT SHEET
SITE
Site name: Facet Enterprises, Inc.
Site location: Village of Elmira Heights, Chemung County, New York
HRS score: 46.67
ROD
Date Signed: September 4, 1992
Selected remedy: Soil and Sediment - Off-site Shipment for Treatment and Disposal
Ground Water - Pump, filtration/precipitation, air stripping
Capital cost: $3,545,060
O & M cost: $1,305,596
Present-worth cost: $4,850,656
LEAD
United States Environmental Protection,Agency
Primary Contact: J. Jeffrey Josephson (212) 264-4183
Secondary Contact: Kevin Lynch (212) 264-6194
Main PRPs: Purolator Products Company
Allied-Signal Corporation
Waste type: VOCs, PAHs, PCBs, Metals
Waste origin: Industrial Disposal
Estimated waste quantity: At least 3,519 cubic yards sediment and soil and
4.7xl08 gallons contaminated ground water
Contaminated mediums: Soil, sediment, and Ground water
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
Facet Enterprises, Inc.
Village of Elmira Heights, Chemung County, New York
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
New York, New York
June 1992
-------
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
SITE NAME AND LOCA TION
Facet Enterprises, Inc.
Village of Elmira Heights
Chemung County, New York
STA TEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
This decision document presents the selected remedial action for the Facet Enterprises,
Inc. Site, which was chosen in accordance with the requirements of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA),
and to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This decision document explains the factual and legal basis for
selecting the remedy for this Site.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) concurs with
the selected remedy, per the letter attached as Appendix IV. The information supporting
this remedial action decision is contained in the administrative record for this site, the index
of which is attached as Appendix III.
ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from the site, if not addressed by
implementing the response actions selected in this Record of Decision, may present an
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare or the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY
The major components of the selected remedy for the treatment of soils, sediments, and
ground water at the Facet Enterprises, Inc. Site include the following: '
o Excavation of contaminated soils and sediments from the Disposal Areas as identified
in the Risk Assessment and in those areas where soils and sediment pose a risk to
ground water quality,
o Disposal of TSCA waste (PCBs > 50 ppm) in a secure TSCA double lined landfill
facility (estimated at approximately 1,275 cubic yards),
o Stabilization of RCRA waste to prevent leaching of metals and subsequent disposal
in a secure RCRA lined facility (approximate volume 2,124 cubic yards),
-------
o Disposal of non-RCRA wastes in an industrial waste landfill (approximate volume
120 cubic yards),
o Strategic placement of pumping wells to extract the contaminated ground water
from the aquifer,
o Storage of extracted ground water in a central collection tank for subsequent
treatment in an above-ground system,
o Treatment of the contaminated ground water to meet Federal and State Standards
for surface water discharge. Treated ground water would then be either discharged
as effluent to the facility non-contact cooling system, or to a surface water
discharge,
o Recommendation that local institutional controls, in the form of local zoning
ordinances, be implemented in an attempt to control any future site use that could
create an exposure pathway to subsurface soils,
o Recommendation that institutional controls be provided/maintained to restrict
access to those portions of the aquifer which remain contaminated above cleanup
levels, and
o Implementation of a long-term monitoring program to track the migration and
concentrations of the contaminants of concern.
DECLARA TION OF STA TUTORY DETERMINA TIONS
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, complies with
federal and state requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the
remedial action, and is cost effective. The selected remedy utilizes permanent solutions
and alternative treatment (or resource recovery) technologies to the maximum extent
practicable, and it satisfies the statutory preference for remedies that employ treatment that
reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume as their principal element.
Because this remedy will result in hazardous substances remaining on site above health-
based levels, a review will be conducted within five years after commencement of remedial
action, and every five years thereafter, to ensure that the remedy continues to provide
adequate protection of human health and the environment.
Constantine Sidamon-Eristoff
Regional Administrator
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
DECISION SUMMARY
Facet Enterprises, Inc.
Village of Elmira Heights, Chemung County, New York
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
New York, New York
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 3
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 4
SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT 4
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS 5
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 8
DESCRIPTION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES 13
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 20
SELECTED REMEDY 25
STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 27
DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 29
ATTACHMENTS
APPENDIX (.FIGURES
APPENDIX Il.TABLES
APPENDIX (((.ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
APPENDIX IV.STATE LETTER OF CONCURRENCE
APPENDIX V.RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-------
SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Facet Enterprises, Inc. site includes a 31-acre parcel of land in the Village of Elmira
Heights, Chemung County, New York. The Facet Enterprises facility property is bounded
to the north by a municipal golf course, to the east by State Route 14, to the south
by residential property along West 17th and West 18th Streets, and to the west by
residential property and Robinwood Avenue. The Village of Elmira Heights is a mixture of
residential, commercial, industrial, and wooded land, but the section in which the site is
located is zoned primarily for residential and commercial use. The closest residences are
within 60 feet of the present manufacturing facility to the south and west. (See Figure 1.)
Approximately one half of the facility property is currently developed. Between one third
and one quarter of the facility property is comprised of one manufacturing plant and the
foundation and cement slab of a former manufacturing plant, while the remainder of the
developed property is comprised of parking areas or other small production buildings
including a starter drive laboratory, a maintenance shop, a fuel pump test laboratory, a
boiler room, and several other small buildings. (See Figure 2.)
The facility is not located on or adjacent to a New York State regulated wetland. Any
existing Federally regulated wetlands at the Site will be delineated prior to conducting any
remediation activities. No Federal or State endangered species have been identified at the
site, and no critical habitats are present.
The Facet facility was constructed in 1895 and was used by the Eclipse Bicycle Company
(Eclipse) for the manufacture of bicycles. In the early 1900s, Eclipse began manufacturing
motorcycles and engine parts and changed its name to Eclipse Machine Company. During
World Wars I and II, Eclipse manufactured military support parts, ammunition, airplane
parts, and fuel pumps. In 1929, Bendix Aviation Corporation, later to become Bendix
Corporation (Bendix), acquired control of Eclipse. Although the Eclipse name remained,
Bendix controlled the company. From 1960 until 1975, Eclipse, as a division of Bendix,
manufactured electric clutches and brakes.
Facet Enterprises, Inc. was organized as a result of an antitrust action between Bendix and
the U.S. Federal Trade Commission in 1974. Purolator Products Company (Purolator)
became the corporate successor to Facet in 1989 and maintains the Purolator name to
date.
The following areas at the facility are known to have been used for disposal purposes
based on the site history.
Area 1 - Plating wastes, oil sludges, and grinding wastes were disposed of in this area
between 1960 and 1971. Liquid wastes may have also been disposed in this area; lime
was dumped here in an attempt to neutralize the waste prior to covering it with soil.
Area 2 - Plating waste was thought to have been disposed of at Area 2 between 1960 and
1971. Attempts were apparently made to neutralize the waste prior to covering it with soil.
-------
Area 3 - Plating waste, oil sludge, grinding waste and non-characterized liquids may have
been disposed of at Area 3 between 1940 and 1965. After 1965, miscellaneous'wastes
(cinder blocks, metal grindings) were disposed of at Area 3 until 1980. During use, the
area was periodically covered and graded. Leachate outbreaks have been noted at the
base of this disposal area.
Area 4 • Oils and unknown liquid wastes were disposed of in this currently inactive lagoon
between 1920 and 1971. Liquid from this area previously was discharged to the North
Drainage Way via a swale which is now filled. In 1981 a soil sample collected from Area
4 contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) at 320 parts per million (ppm).
Area 5 - Area 5 was previously used as a sludge disposal area containing wastewater
treatment units and sand filter beds; metal hydroxide sludge was disposed of in Area 5 until
1965. After 1965, sludge was spread over the surface. The area has been filled and
seeded. Sampling conducted by NYSDEC in 1981 detected the presence of cadmium and
chromium in excess of 100,000 ppm and copper in excess of 10,000 ppm.
Area 6 - This area, constructed in the early 1970s, is a small pond originally designed to
collect seepage and runoff from Areas 1 and 2. Chromic acid may have been treated near
this area.
Area 7 - Ash from the production facilities was stored at Area 7 from the early 1940s to
the mid 1950s.
Area 8 - Sediments and oily soil have drained over time from a drain pipe from Area 4 into
this area.
Area 9 - Ash from the production facilities was stored at Area 9 from the early 1940s to the
mid 1950s.
Area 10 • Heat treatment water, non-contact cooling water, and possibly oils were
disposed of in this lagoon. The lagoon is no longer active but a surface water impound-
ment remains in this area. This area is thought to have once been a filter bed.
Plant 2 Yard • Grinding chips, machinery oil, and drummed waste were stored in this area
from as early as 1940. The area has been graded and seeded.
Oil/Water Separator - This area was used to segregate oil and particulates from runoff
or treatment water at the facility. The oil/water separator is located at the southern
boundary of the property.
Dry Wells - Up to five dry wells used for the disposal of liquid wastes and/or water from
the facility are present at the facility. The dry wells are being closed pursuant to a consent
order with the New York State Department of Envrionmental Conservation (NYSDEC).
-------
Surface Water - In addition to the Area 10 lagoon and the Area 6 pond, Mays Creek, an
unnamed drainage way south of the Facet facility, and a drainage way which drains surface
water from the northern portion of the facility have all received industrial waste from
production activities by way of surface run-off and point source discharge.
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
Several investigations of the facility have been conducted by EPA or NYSDEC since 1979.
In 1979, an initial Facility inspection conducted by NYSDEC resulted in the implementation
of remedial measures which included excavation of surface water diversions, covering of
past disposal areas with soil, and construction of a leachate collection system. A facility
inspection and sampling was conducted by USEPA in 1980, and additional sampling and
investigation was conducted by NYSDEC during March and June 1981. These investiga-
tions indicated that volatile organics, inorganics, pesticides, and PCB compounds were
present in surface soils, in soils and sediments in the disposal areas, and "in surface water
drainage streams at the facility.
The Site was first proposed for the National Priorities List on October 1, 1981 and was
placed on the NPL on September 1, 1983. In 1983 a preliminary hydrogeologic
investigation was conducted at the facility by Facet Enterprises, Inc. under an EPA
Administrative Order pursuant to Section 3013 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). The investigation concluded that trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination in the
ground water exceeded NYSDEC standards. In 1986, Facet Enterprises, Inc. agreed to
conduct a Remedial Investigation /Feasibility Study (RI/FS) under a CERCLA Administrative
Order (Allied-Signal Corporation, the corporate successor to Bendix Corporation, was also
a signatory to this consent order). The 1986 draft Rl concluded that TCE, perchloro-
ethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethane, trans -1,2-dichloroethene, 1,2-
dichlorobenzene, trichlorofluoromethane, methylene chloride, acetone, PCBs, and
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were present in Site soils. In addition, 14 volatile
organic contaminants, pentachlorophenol, and 4 inorganics contaminants were detected
in ground water at concentrations above NYSDEC standards.
Based upon a review of the 1986 Rl, EPA concluded that additional Site characterization
was required before the Rl could be finalized. In 1990, Purolator began the necessary field
work required to complete the Rl. The findings of this field work are reported below.
Enforcement
Facet Enterprises, Inc. has conducted investigations under the following Administrative
orders with the EPA:
1) Administrative Order RCRA 11-3013-20201 -April 8,1983 - Hydrogeological Investigation
2) Administrative Order CERCLA II-60205 - May 1986 - (Allied-Signal is also a signatory this
Order). - Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
-------
Facet Enterprises, Inc. has conducted investigations under the following Administrative
order with the NYSDEC:
1) NYSDEC Consent Order under the Clean Water Act R8-0771-90-04 - Dry Well
Investigation
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
The Rl report, FS report, and the Proposed Plan for the Site were released to the public
for comment on May 27,1992. These documents were made available to the public in the
administrative record file at the EPA Docket Room in Region II, New York and the
information repositories at Village of Elmira Heights, Village Hall, 215 Elmwood Ave, Village
of Elmira Heights, New York. The notice of availability for the above-referenced documents
was published in the Elmira Star-Gazette on May 27, 1992. The public comment period
on these documents was held from May 27, 1992-until June 27, 1992.
On June 16, 1992, EPA, the NYSDEC, and the New York State Department of Health
conducted a public meeting at the Village of Elmira Heights Village Hall, to inform local
officials and interested citizens about the Superfund process, to review current and planned
remedial activities at the Site, and to respond to any questions from area residents and
other attenders.
Responses to the comments received at the public meeting and in writing during the public
comment period are included in the Responsiveness Summary (see Appendix V).
SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT
This Record of Decision outlines EPA's strategy to eliminate the threat to human health and
the environment posed by contaminated ground water and contaminated soils and
sediments present at the Site. Specifically, remediation of soil and sediment in disposal
areas in concentrations above site specific cleanup levels will be conducted. The proposed
remediation of ground water will treat contaminated ground water at the facility to meet
Federal and State drinking water standards. No further operable units are currently
planned for this site.
During the Spring of 1992, pursuant to the CERCLA Administrative Order, Purolator
excavated and removed 469 drums buried in Disposal Areas 1,2,3, and 4. In addition,
2,250 tons of contaminated soil was excavated and 30,000 gallons of contaminated liquids
were removed to be sent off-site for treatment and disposal at a permitted industrial waste
landfill. The drum and soil excavation activities were conducted with oversight by EPA.
Purolator and EPA collected confirmatory samples from the excavation floor in each of
these disposal areas. Based on the data obtained during the Summer 1992, EPA will
evaluate if further action is required.
-------
Once the excavation of the drums and the contaminated soil from Disposal Areas 1,2, and
3 is completed, the potential threat that these materials pose to ground water 'will be
removed. Final remediation of Disposal Area 4 is discussed in this ROD.
Dry well closure, which includes excavation of contaminated sediment and sludges, will be
addressed by Purolator Products Company under the consent agreement with the
NYSDEC.
The proposed actions to be undertaken at this Site, in conjunction with dry well cleanup
actions currently underway under the supervision of the NYSDEC, will address the sources
of ground water contamination and the principal threats posed by contaminated soils and
sediments.
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Site Geology and Hydrology
The Purolator facility lies along the western side of the Newtown Creek Valley. The
unconsolidated sediments which underlain the western portion of the facility consist of
sands, silts, and clays. In the eastern portion of the facility the unconsolidated sediments
consist of outwash sands and gravels and may contain silts and clays. The ground-water
flow direction, as determined by water level measurements taken at facility monitoring wells,
is south easterly. Figure 3 illustrates ground-water flow direction measured during the
summer of 1990. Figure 4 presents the estimated regional ground water flow direction
presented in the Kentucky Avenue Wellfield Remedial Investigation Report. Figure 5
illustrates surface water drainage at the facility.
B. Nature and Extent of Contamination
The following section summarizes the known contamination at and near the facility as
determined during the Remedial Investigation: This study consisted of the following: eighty-
five soil samples were collected from the surface soils or from subsurface borings in known
or suspected disposal areas; twenty-five sediment samples were collected from streams;
ponds or lagoons at the facility or .in streams adjacent to the facility; fourteen ground water
samples were collected from monitoring wells or production wells at or near the facility; and
8 surface water samples were collected from streams or lagoons at the facility or in
streams adjacent to the facility. Tables 1-11 present analytical data collected during
remedial investigation activities. More detailed descriptions of the work can be found in the
Rl report.
Area 1/Area 2 - A total of 27 samples from these areas were collected for chemical
analyses from depths ranging from 1 to 12 feet below ground level. Soil collected from one
boring in Area 2 had elevated levels of contaminants. The analytical results indicate the
-------
presence of cadmium (351 ppm), chromium (2410 ppm), and copper (1120 ppm). The
maximum TCE concentration in soil was 110 ppb. (Table 1)
Area 3 • A total of 12 samples were collected for chemical analyses from this area at
depths from 8 to 14 feet below ground surface. Elevated levels of chromium (2110 ppm),
cadmium (72.3 ppm), and copper (270 ppm) were found in soil samples. (Table 2)
Area 4 - A total of 13 samples from this area were collected for chemical analyses at
depths ranging from 8 to 20.5 feet below ground surface. The soil borings in this area
indicate that a layer of fill approximately 8 feet thick is saturated with oil product.
Numerous volatiles and semi-volatiles were detected in Area 4 including toluene (210 ppb),
PCB (Arochlor 1248) (35 ppm). (Table 3)
Area 5 • Three samples out of the 21 samples collected at depths ranging from 8 to 20 feet
below ground surface from Area 5 had elevated levels of chromium (13,000 ppm). TCE
was detected in 14 soil samples in concentrations up to 240 ppb. (Table 4)
Area 6 - Two surface soil samples collected from pond sediments had TCE in concentra-
tions up to 130 ppb. Elevated levels of arsenic (588 ppm), cadmium (79 ppm), and
chromium (1220 ppm) were also detected. Confirmatory sampling conducted during the
FS, completed in order to determine the presence of Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) hazardous waste, revealed that a sediment sample exhibited the characteristic
for cadmium waste. (Table 5)
Area 7 - Three surface soil samples were collected from this area. PCB compounds were
detected at concentrations ranging from 0.32 ppm to 5.3 ppm. Semi-volatile organics were
detected in the one surface sediment sample at concentrations up to 22 ppm. (Table 5)
Area 8 - Area 8 soils contained elevated concentrations of eighteen semi-volatile organic
compounds at concentrations up to 69 ppm (benzo(b)fluoranthene). PCBs were detected
in concentrations up to 11 ppm. (Table 5)
Area 9 - The one surface soil sample collected from Area 9 contained 1 ppm PCBs. (Table
5)
Area 10 - Two sediment samples and one duplicate sample was collected from Area 10.
PCBs were detected in sediments in concentrations up to 14 ppm: Cadmium (796 ppm),
chromium (10,100 ppm), and copper (1,110 ppm) were detected in-these surface sediment
samples. (Table 5)
Plant 2 Yard - Soil sampling (24 samples including duplicate samples in soil boring
samples collected from 0-8 feet below the ground surface.) conducted during the 1986 Rl
field work detected TCE in concentrations ranging from 3.4 ppb to 253 ppb. In addition
the analyses revealed tetrachloroethylene (150 ppb), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (48.1 ppb), and
1,1 dichloroethane (8.58 ppb). (Table 6)
-------
Oil/Water Separator - Twenty two semi-volatile compounds (8 of which were in
concentrations over 100,000 ppb) were detected in soil collected from near the oil/water
separator. Soil samples contained slightly elevated levels of cadmium (41.4 ppm), copper
(502 ppm), and zinc (675 ppm). 0"able 7)
Dry Wells • Sampling and analysis of dry well liquids, sludges, and sediment has been
conducted by Purolator as a part of a consent order with the NYSDEC. The sampling has
detected liquid with PCB concentrations up to 31 ppm. TCE was present in sludge material
in concentrations up to 60 ppm. Lead was present in concentrations up to 5500 ppm, and
chromium was present in concentrations of 450 ppm in dry well sludge. Benzene (1390
ppb), toluene (3050 ppb), chlorobenzene (9260 ppb), ethylbenzene (3330 ppb), p-xylene
(3780 ppb), o-xylene (3780 ppb), and 1,3-dichlorobenzene (4940 ppb) were also detected
in dry well sludges or liquids.
Unnamed Drainage Swale South of Facility (Also known as the Heights Drainage
Swale) - Twenty-one soil and sediment samples were collected from 0 - 6 feet below
ground surface from this area. Soil samples and boring data collected from the drainage
way south of the Facet facility contained the semi-volatiles benzo(a)anthracene (11 ppm),
benzo(a)pyrene (11 ppm), benzo(b)fluoranthene (30 ppm), benzo(k) fluoranthene (30 ppm),
and ideno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (6 ppm); PCB 1254 (6.8 ppm), and the inorganics arsenic (23
ppm) and chromium (3920 ppm) in elevated concentrations. (Table 8)
North Drainage Way - Arsenic (320 ppm) was detected in the North Drainage Ditch in a
surface sediment sample collected in July 1980. (Table 9)
Buried Drums - A magnetometry survey and interviews with employees indicated that
buried drums were present at the facility. Based on the magnetometry survey results,
Purolator Products Company, with oversight by EPA, removed 469 drums from Disposal
Areas 1,2,3 and 4. In addition, at least 2,250 tons of contaminated soil have been
excavated, and approximately 30,000 gallons of contaminated water have been contained
for off site treatment and disposal.
Surface Water Sampling -. Seven surface water samples were collected from surface
water bodies at the Site. TCE was detected at the oil/water separator effluent at up to 26
ppb, and chloromethane was present at 24 ppb. TCE was detected in Mays Creek surface
water at 11 ppb. Surface water samples collected from Area 10 contained elevated
concentration of cadmium (77.8 ppb), chromium (2190 ppb), and zinc (894 ppb). (Table
10) 1
Ground water - A total of 13 monitoring wells were installed at or near the facility in the
unconsolidated sediments below the Site. The wells vary in depth from 12.5 feet to 49.2
feet below ground surface. Fourteen organics: n-butylbenzene (13 ppb), 1,1-dichloro-
ethene (160 ppb), ethylbenzene (12 ppb), isopropylbenzene (8 ppb), 4-lsopropyltoluene
(12 ppb), methylene chloride (69 ppb), n-propylbenzene (22 ppb), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (13
ppb), trichloroethene (190 ppb), trichlorofluoromethane (19 ppb), 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
(18 ppb), 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (81 ppb), vinyl chloride (33 ppb Spring 1991 sampling),
-------
and xylenes (14 ppb), and six inorganic contaminants: cadmium (55.8 ppb), chromium
(1540 ppb), copper (1200 ppb), lead (146 ppb), mercury (5.6 ppb), zinc (1180 ppb) we're
detected in ground water at the facility at concentrations in excess of State and Federal
standards for potable drinking water sources. (Table 11)
In addition, the concentrations of antimony (45.8 ppb), beryllium (4.2 ppb), and nickel (602
ppb) exceeded either NYSDEC guidance values or EPA proposed Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCLs), the latter of which were promulgated under the Federal Safe Drinking Water
Act.
Figures 6 and 7, present respectively, the sampling results of facility groundwater
monitoring wells with volatile organic contaminants or inorganic contaminants present.
The ground water contamination flows in the direction consistent with the regional ground
water flow direction. The facility contamination contributes to the contamination within the
Newtown Creek Aquifer which is classified by EPA a Class-lla aquifer. See Figure 8.
Floating Product - EPA detected a fayer of pure product floating on top of the water table
(approximately 20 feet below the ground surface) at monitoring well D-5 located on the
facility property. (See Figure 2).
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
EPA conducted a baseline risk assessment to evaluate the potential risks to human health
and the environment associated with the Facet Enterprises, Inc. Site in its current state.
The Risk Assessment focused on contaminants in the soil, sediment, surface water, ground
water and air which are likely to pose significant risks to human health and the environ-
ment. The summary of the contaminants of concern (COG) in sampled matrices is listed
in Table 12.
The baseline risk assessment evaluated the health effects which could result from exposure
to contamination as a result of ingestion of ground water, inhalation of ground water
contaminants during showering, ingestion of sediments in the drainage swale south of the
facility, incidental ingestion of sediments while wading in the North Drainage way, ingestion
of on site soils, ingestion of sediments in Mays Creek, and incidental ingestion of
sediments in areas 6 and 10 lagoons. Both current and future land use at the facility was
considered to be industrial with exposure scenarios for on site workers and trespassers.
For Mays Creek and the unnamed drainage way south of the facility, exposure to small
children and adults was considered because these areas are generally more accessible to
the public. A total of 12 exposure pathways were evaluated under possible on site current
and future land-use conditions. The exposure pathways considered under current and
future uses are listed in Table 13. The reasonable maximum exposure was evaluated.
Under current EPA guidelines, the likelihood of carcinogenic (cancer-causing) and
noncarcinogenic effects as a result of exposure to site chemicals are considered
separately. It was assumed that the toxic effects of the site-related chemicals would be
8
-------
additive. Thus, carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic risks associated with exposures to
individual compounds of concern were summed to indicate the potential risks associated
with mixtures of potential carcinogens and noncarcinogens, respectively.
Noncarcinogenic risks were assessed using a hazard index (HI) approach, based on a
comparison of expected contaminant intakes and safe levels of intake (Reference Doses).
Reference doses (RfDs) have been developed by EPA for indicating the potential for
adverse health effects. RfDs, which are expressed in units of mg/kg-day, are estimates
of daily exposure levels for humans which are thought to be safe over a lifetime (including
sensitive individuals). Estimated intakes of chemicals from environmental media (e.g., the
amount of a chemical ingested from contaminated drinking water) are compared to the RfD
to derive the hazard quotient for the contaminant in the particular medium. The HI is
obtained by adding the hazard quotients for all compounds across all media that impact
a particular receptor population.
An HI greater than 1.0 indicates that the potential exists for noncarcinogenic health effects
to occur as a result of site-related exposures. The HI provides a useful reference point for
gauging the potential significance of multiple contaminant exposures within a single medium
or across media. The reference doses for the compounds of concern at the Site are
presented in Table 14. A summary of the noncarcinogenic risks associated with these
chemicals across various exposure pathways is found in Table 15.
It can be seen from Table 5 that the HI for noncarcinogenic effects from ingestion of
untreated ground water exceeded one (HI = 46) for reasonable maximum exposure for
children, therefore, noncarcinogenic effects may occur from the exposure routes evaluated
in the Risk Assessment. The noncarcinogenic risk was attributable to several compounds
including vinyl chloride, cis-1,2 dichloroethylene, TCE, antimony, arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, mercury, and nickel. Furthermore, it can be seen from Table 15 that the HI for
noncarcinogenic effects from ingestion of sediment in the unnamed drainage swale (also
known as the Heights drainage swale) exceeded one (HI = 3.5) for reasonable maximum
exposure for children, therefore, noncarcinogenic effects may occur from the exposure
routes evaluated in the Risk Assessment. The noncarcinogenic risk was attributable to
several compounds including chromium..
Potential carcinogenic risks were evaluated using the cancer slope factors (Sfs) developed
by EPA for the chemicals of potential concern. Sfs have been developed by EPA's
Carcinogenic Risk Assessment Verification Endeavor-(CRAVE) for estimating.excess lifetime
cancer risks associated with exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals. Sfs which are
expressed in units of (mg/kg-day)"1, are multiplied by the estimated intake of a potential
carcinogen, in mg/kg-day, to generate an upper-bound estimate of the excess lifetime
cancer risk associated with exposure to the compound at that intake level. The term
"upper bound" reflects the conservative estimate of the risks calculated from the SF. Use
of this approach makes the underestimation of the risk highly unlikely. The SF for each
indicator chemical is presented in Table 16.
-------
For known or suspected carcinogens, EPA considers excess upper bound individual
lifetime cancer risks of between 10"4 to 10"6 to be acceptable. This level indicates that an
individual has not greater than a one in ten thousand to one in a million chance of
developing cancer as a result of site-related exposure to a carcinogen over a 70-year
period under specific exposure conditions at the Site. The total cancer risks at the Facet
Enterprises, Inc. Site are outlined in Table 17. In addition, MCLs are currently exceeded
for several hazardous substances in ground water. Although the risks posed by the soils
are within EPA's acceptable risk criteria, contamination in the soils, if not addressed, will
likely continue to contribute to further contamination of the ground water at the Site.
Uncertainties
The procedures and inputs used to assess risks in this evaluation, as in all such
assessments, are subject to a wide variety of uncertainties. In general, the main sources
of uncertainty include:
- environmental chemistry sampling and analysis
- environmental parameter measurement
- fate and transport modeling
- exposure parameter estimation
- toxicological data.
Uncertainty in environmental sampling arises in part from the potentially uneven distribution
of chemicals in the media sampled. Consequently, there is significant uncertainty as to the
actual levels present. Environmental chemistry-analysis error can stem from several
sources including the errors inherent in the analytical methods and characteristics of the
matrix being sampled.
Uncertainties in the exposure assessment are related to estimates of how often an
individual would actually come in contact with the chemicals of concern, the period of time
over which such exposure would occur, and in the models used to estimate the
concentrations of the chemicals of concern at the point of exposure.
Uncertainties in toxicological data occur in extrapolating both from animals to humans and
from high to low doses of exposure, as well as from the difficulties in assessing the toxicity
of a mixture of chemicals. These uncertainties are addressed by .making conservative
assumptions concerning risk and exposure parameters throughout the assessment. As
a result, the Risk Assessment provides upper-bound estimates of the risks to populations
near the Site, and is highly unlikely to underestimate actual risks related to the Site.
There are, also, additional uncertainties unique to the Site that would serve to underesti-
mate Site-related risks. Specifically, they are: the presence of previously undetected drums
and associated contaminated soils; an on-site "reservoir" of contaminants that may
potentially migrate from the facility property; designation of future land use at the facility
property as industrial rather than residential; and the contribution to risk resulting from - but
not quantified, as a result of limited scientific data - dermal exposure to soil-borne contaminants.
10
-------
More specific information concerning public health risks, including a quantitative evaluation
of the degree of risk associated with various exposure pathways, is presented in the Risk
Assessment Report.
Current federal guidelines for acceptable exposures are a health Hazard Index equal to 1.0
and an individual lifetime excess carcinogenic risk in the range of 10"4 to 10"6. Some of the
on site soil and sediment risks fall within EPA's acceptable risk range. However, EPA has
determined that remedial action is necessary in these areas due to: the uncertainties as
mentioned above, the contribution of some of the chemicals to the ground water
contamination, and that unless these soils and sediments are remediated, they would
continue to migrate off the facility property and accumulate which would likely result in an
unacceptable risk to the public.
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this Site, if not addressed by
the preferred alternative or one of the other active measures considered, may present a
current or potential threat to public health, welfare or the environment.
REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES
Remedial action objectives are specific goals to protect human health and the environment;
they specify the contaminant(s) of concern, the exposure route(s), receptor(s), and
acceptable contaminant level(s) for each exposure route. These objectives are based on
available information and standards such as applicable, or relevant and appropriate
requirements (ARARs) and risk-based levels established in the risk assessment.
The cleanup levels have been chosen for each area where an unacceptable exposure risk
was determined or from data which indicates that a disposal area contributes to the
groundwater contamination. These cleanup levels are derived from the point of departure,
as defined in the NCP, of 1.0Q.X10"6 or a Hazard Index of 1 and using the same risk
modeling assumptions used in the risk assessment, thereby yielding a cutoff value below
which the ingestion of sediment at the Site is no longer a risk.
Soils and Sediments - The following remedial action objectives have been determined for
clean-up of soils and sediments at the Site.
Surface Soils (0 to 2 feet below ground surface) and Sediments
Unnamed Drainage Way and Mays Creek Soils/ -
Facility Surface Soils/Sediments Sediments
Semivolatiles (ppm)
Benzo (a) anthracene 20 3
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 20 3
Benzo (k)fluoranthene 43 7
Benzo(a)pyrene 3 1
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 12 2
11
-------
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 3 1
PCBs (ppm) 10 1
Inorganics (pom)
Arsenic 19 7
Chromium - 1110
Cleanup levels are lower for the Unnamed drainage way and Mays Creek soil/sediment
than for facility soils and sediment because there is a greater potential for residential
exposure (as opposed to industrial exposure) in areas off the facility property.
Subsurface Soils ( > 2 ft below ground surface)
Facility Subsurface Soil
Semivolatiles (pom)
Benzo(a)anthracene 54
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 55
Benzo(k)flouranthene 118
Benzo(a)pyrene 8
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 33
PCBs (ppm) 25
Inorganics (ppm)
Arsenic 52
The facility subsurface soils cleanup levels are higher than facility surface soils cleanup
levels because the potential for human exposure to subsurface soils is restricted to
occasional exposure to utility workers.
Soils and Sediments Which May Pose a Threat to the Aquifer
Analytical data from soils and sediment collected from Disposal Areas 6,10, and 5 indicate
that these areas may be contributing to the Site ground water contamination. For these
areas, soils and sediments will be analyzed using the TCLP method to determine this
potential, and soils or sediments which do not pass this test will be remediated. In
addition, preliminary confirmatory data from the bottom of the excavation in drum removal
areas 1,2,3 indicate that a small volume of soils remaining pose a threat to ground water
quality. These areas will be re-excavated, and confirmatory sampling will be re-conducted.
12
-------
Ground water
Cleanup levels for ground water are established by federal and State laws and regulations.
According to Rl data, the aquifer beneath the Site is contaminated with a variety of
chemicals. The aquifer is designated by EPA as a Class Ha aquifer and New York State
designates the aquifer as a class GA aquifer, or a potential source of potable water. This
designation requires that applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) for
drinking water be met. Cleanup levels are thereby driven by MCLs established by State
and federal regulations. See Table 8. For example, the maximum concentration of the
organic chemical TCE in ground water is 190 ppb, while the MCL for TCE for the aquifer
is the NYSDEC standard of 5 ppb. For chromium, an inorganic chemical, the maximum
concentration in ground water at the facility is 1540 ppb, while the MCL for chromium is the
NYSDEC standard of 50 ppb.
DESCRIPTION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES
CERCLA requires that each selected site remedy be protective of human health and the
environment, be cost-effective, comply with other statutory laws, and utilize permanent
solutions, alternative treatment technologies and resource recovery alternatives to the
maximum extent practicable. In addition, the statute includes a preference for the use of
treatment as a principal element for the reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume of the
hazardous substances.
This Record of Decision evaluates in detail eight soil and sediment and two ground water
remedial alternatives for addressing the contamination associated with the Site. The time
to implement reflects only the time required to construct and/or implement the remedy and
does not include the time required to design the remedy, negotiate with the responsible
parties, if appropriate, or procure contracts for design and construction.
These alternatives are:
MEDIA 1 and 2: SOILS AND SEDIMENTS
Alternative 1 - No Action
Capital Cost: $ 0
Annual O&M Costs: $0
Present Worth: $ 0
Time to Implement: Could be implemented immediately.
The Superfund program requires that a "no action" alternative be evaluated at every site
to establish a baseline for comparison. Under this alternative, a public awareness program
concerning surface soil contamination would be implemented, including conducting public
13
-------
meetings and posting warning signs. The Site would be reviewed every five years to
evaluate the protectiveness of the remedy.
Alternative 2 - Access Restriction
Capital Cost: $9,750
Annual O&M Costs:$0
Total Cost: $9,750
Time to Implement: Approximately 6 months
This alternative consists of deed restrictions to restrict future uses of the Facility to
industrial operation, to prohibit the extraction of ground water to be used as drinking water,
to provide maintenance of the fences surrounding the facility, including the unnamed
drainage way south of the facility, and to continue 24-hour security. The Site would be
reviewed every five years to evaluate the protectiveness of the remedy.
Common Action for Sediment and Soil Remedial Alternatives
Six of the remedial alternatives evaluated for remediation of surface, subsurface soils and
sediment contain the common actions of removal and de-watering of sediment, consolida-
tion of soil, and product recovery, as described below:
1) Excavation of sediment from May's Creek, the Unnamed Drainage way, the North
drainage way, and Area 10 Lagoon. The sediment would be staged in one area and de-
watered.
2) Excavation of surface soils from Areas 6,7, and 8 and subsurface soil from the oil/water
separator and Area 4.
(Volume calculations of the amount of soils and sediments exceeding cleanup levels, which
were performed during the FS, indicate that an estimated 3,480 cubic yards of contaminat-
ed soil and sediment must be removed to reduce risks posed by the contaminated soil to
the 10"6 range. In addition, it is estimated that 55 cubic yards of cadmium contaminated
soils must be removed from disposal Area 6 to remove the potential threat to ground water
posed by these contaminated soils.)
3} Confirmation sampling to ensure remediation goals are obtained.
4) Replacement of existing sediment and soil with clean fill.
5) Implementation of a free-product investigation and remediation program. This program
will investigate the source (likely to be contaminated soils) of the floating product detected
at monitoring well D-5, and following this study, source control and product recovery will
be performed.
14
-------
6) Access restrictions in the form of existing fences and facility security. This prevents
inadvertent trespassing onto the industrial property.
7) Collection of additional soil samples from Area 5 and analysis for TCLP. Based on the
TCLP data, a RCRA cover pursuant to 40 CFR Part 264 would be installed over the
contaminated areas of Disposal Area 5. A fence with a gate would be placed around the
disposal areas. If the volume of contaminated material is very small, EPA will consider off-
site treatment and disposal of this material.
8) Collection of additional samples from Area 4 so that wastes may be segregated for
proper disposal of PCB-contaminated soils.
9) Installation of a geotextile membrane under rip-rap in May's Creek. This will be installed
as a protective measure for aquatic species exposure to low levels of cadmium which have
been detected.
Alternative 3 - Consolidate Soil and Sediment. Install RCRA Cover
Capital Cost: $913,094
Annual O&M Costs: $14,300
Present Worth of O&M: $134,849
Total Cost: $1,047,943
Time to Implement: 1 year
The common actions described above would be completed prior to clearing vegetation and
grading in a portion of the western half of the facility property selected for the disposal and
capping. The consolidated and de-watered sediment would be placed in this selected
area. A RCRA cover pursuant to 40 CFR Part 264 would be installed over the soil and
sediment. A RCRA cover includes two feet of soil capable of supporting adequate
vegetation, a six inch thick drainage layer or synthetic drainage net, a 60 mil geotextile
membrane liner, non-woven geotextile, and a one-foot thick layer of intermediate cover
above consolidated soil and sediment. A fence with a gate and lock would be installed
around the RCRA cover area. Post closure care would include maintenance of the RCRA
cover and restricting of facility operations in the area of the RCRA cover.
Alternative 4 - Consolidate Soil and Sediment. Stabilize. Install RCRA Cover
Capital Cost: $1,447,869
Annual Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs: $14,300
Present Worth of O&M: $134,849
Total Cost: 1,582,718
Time to Implement: 1 year
The common actions described above except de-watering would be completed prior to
clearing vegetation and grading in a portion of the western half of the facility property
selected for the disposal of the stabilized material. A treatability study would have to be
15
-------
conducted in order to determine the most effective stabilization agent. Stabilization agents
include Portland cement, lime, cement kiln dust, and commercially available materials. The
RCRA cover and fencing would be identical to that described for Alternative 3.
Alternative 5 - Segregate Soil and Sediment. Use Low Temperature Thermal Treatment.
Stabilize. Install RCRA Cover
Capital Cost: $2,207,215
Annual O&M Costs: $14,300
Present Worth of O&M: $134,849
Total Cost: $2,342,064
Time to Implement: 2 years
The common actions as described above would be conducted. The soil contaminated with
inorganics in Area 7 would be segregated from the remainder of the excavated soil and
sediment. The Area 7 soil exceeds cleanup levels for metals (arsenic) but not for PAHs
and PCBs. Soil and sediment would be treated using a low temperature thermal treatment
system. The excavated soil and sediment from Area 7 would then be mixed with the
thermally treated material and would be stabilized following a stabilization treatability study.
An area in the western portion of the facility property would be selected for placement of
the consolidated soil, cleared of vegetation, and graded. The RCRA cover and fencing
would be identical to that described for Alternative 3.
Alternative 6 - Consolidate Soils and Sediment. Dispose of Off-Site at Industrial Waste
andfill
Capital Costs; $2,811,931
Annual O&M Costs: $0
Total Cost: $2,811,931
Time to Implement: 1 year
This alternative consists of all the common actions described above. The excavated soil
and de-watered sediment would be staged in a central area. After consolidation, all the soil
and sediment would be transported to a RCRA approved industrial waste landfill.
16
-------
Alternative 7 - Consolidate Soil and Sediment. Build an On site RCRA-Disposal Landfill
Capital Costs: $ 1,052,252
Annual O&M Costs: $14,300
Present Worth of O&M: $134,849
Total Cost: $1,187,101
Time to Implement: 1 year
This alternative consists of all the common actions described above. An area in the
western portion of the Facility property would be selected for construction of the on-site
RCRA landfill (approximately 10,340 square feet are required). The on-site RCRA landfill
would be constructed as follows: a multi-liner would be constructed from top to bottom
consisting of: 1 foot protective cover, non-woven geotextile, 60 mil- geotextile membrane,
non-woven geotextile, 1-foot drainage layer, non-woven geotextile, 60 mil- geotextile
membrane, non-woven geotextile, 6" compacted sub-base. The liners would be designed
and constructed to meet 40 CFR and NYS 6 NYCRR 373-2 requirements. The contaminat-
ed soil would be placed over the liner and non-impacted soil would be placed between the
contaminated soil and the RCRA cover. The RCRA cover and fencing would be identical
to that described for Alternative 3.
Alternative 8 - Consolidate Soil and Sediment. Ship Off-site For Treatment and Disposal
Capital Costs: $ 2,462,334
Annual O&M Costs:$0
Total Costs: $2,462,334
Time to Implement: 1 year
This alternative consists of all the common actions described above. The soil and de-
watered sediment would be staged in a central area. After consolidation, all the soil and
sediment would be transported to an approved treatment and/or disposal facility.
Treatment would be conducted in order to meet RCRA Land Ban Regulations. This
alternative includes TSCA waste (PCBs > 50 ppm) disposal in a secure TSCA double lined
landfill facility (approximate volume 1,275 cubic yards). RCRA waste (e.g. PCBs < 50 ppm,
Arsenic > 5 ppm, Chromium > 5ppm) would be stabilized to prevent leaching of metals
and disposed of in a secured RCRA lined facility .(approximately 2,124 cubic yards as
determined as the reasonable likely quantity in the Feasibility Study), and non-RCRA wastes
would be disposed of in an industrial waste landfill (approximate volume 120 cubic yards).
Based on soil estimates of 3000 to 6000 cubic yards, approximately 150 to 300 trucks
would be expected to leave the facility. The cost estimate is based on the 2,124 cubic
yards and may vary depending on the final volume actually excavated.
17
-------
MEDIUM 3: Ground Water
Ground water analyses conducted during the Rl indicate that 14 organics and 7 inorganics
are present in concentrations above cleanup levels at the facility.
The ultimate goal of the EPA Superfund Program's approach to ground water remediation,
as stated in the NCP (40 CFR Part 300), is to return usable ground waters to their
beneficial uses within a time frame that is reasonable. Therefore, for this aquifer, which is
classified by New York State as a potential drinking water source, the final cleanup levels
will be federal and State drinking water standards. The remedial alternatives for ground
water include no action and ground water treatment.
Alternative 9 - No Action
Capital Costs: $12,000
Annual O&M Costs: $14,300
Present Worth of O&M: $134,849
Total Costs: $146,849
Time to Implement: At least 30 years
As previously stated, the Superfund program requires that a "no action" alternative be
evaluated at every site to establish a baseline for comparison. Under this alternative, a
public awareness program concerning ground water contamination would be implemented,
including conducting public meetings and posting warning signs. Institutional controls
would be implemented to prevent untreated ground water use as a source of potable water
at the Site. Long-term surface water and ground water monitoring would be included to
track any contaminant migration. The Site would be reviewed every five years to evaluate
the protectiveness of the remedy.
Alternative 10 - Ground water Treatment
Capital Cost: $1,082,726
Annual O&M Cost: $153,419
Present Worth of O&M (20 years): $1,305,596
Total Costs:$ 2,388,322
Time to Implement: Approx 20 years
This alternative involves the pumping and treatment of contaminated ground water with the
goal of achieving federal and state drinking water cleanup levels. Treatment will consist of
air stripping the extracted water to remove VOCs and, if necessary, metals removal by
either filtration or precipitation. Air emission treatment, if necessary, will be installed to meet
6 NYCRR Parts 200,201, and 212 regulations and New York State Air Guide 1. See Figure
9. The exact treatment specifications required will be determined during the remedial
design. Treated ground water will be discharged to the non-contact cooling system at the
18
-------
plant, or to surface water in accordance with the State Pollutant Discharge Elirnination
System requirements. The costs are based on pumping and treating 30 gallons per
minute. It is possible that higher pumping rates will be required to contain and/or capture
contamination in ground water at the facility. The exact pumping rate will be determined
during the design stage. Recent studies have indicated that pumping and treatment
technologies may contain uncertainties in achieving concentrations required under Federal
and State standards over a reasonable period of time. However, these studies also
indicate significant decreases in contaminant concentrations early in the system
implementation, followed by a leveling out. For these reasons, this alternative stipulates
contingency measures, whereby the ground water extraction and treatment system's
performance will be monitored on a regular basis and adjusted as warranted by the
performance data collected during operation. Modifications may include any or all of the
following:
a) at individual wells where cleanup goals have been attained, pumping may be
discontinued;
b) alternate pumping at wells to eliminate stagnation points;
c) pulse pumping to allow aquifer equilibration and to allow adsorbed contaminants to
partition into ground water; and
d) install additional extraction wells to facilitate or accelerate cleanup of the contaminant
plume.
If it is determined, on the basis of the preceding criteria and the system performance data,
that certain portions of the aquifer cannot be restored to their beneficial use in a reasonable
time frame, all of the following measures involving long-term management may occur, for
an indefinite period as a modification of the existing system:
a) engineering controls such as physical barriers including trenches, source control
measures, or long-term gradient control provided by low level pumping, may be
implemented as containment measures;
b) chemical-specific ARARs will be waived for the cleanup of those portions of the
aquifer which cannot be restored based on the technical impracticability of achieving
further contaminant reduction;
c) institutional controls will be provided/maintained to restrict access to those portions
of the aquifer which remain above cleanup levels;
d) continued monitoring of specified wells; and
e) periodic reevaluation of remedial technologies for ground water restoration.
19
-------
The decision to invoke any or all of these measures may be made during a periodic review
of the remedial action, which will occur at intervals of no less often than every five years
after the initiation of the operation.
All costs and implementation times are estimated.
Remedial design period is not included in implementation times.
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
During the detailed evaluation of remedial alternatives, each alternative was assessed
utilizing nine evaluation criteria as set forth in the NCR and OSWER Directive 9355.3-01.
These criteria were developed to address the requirements .of Section 121 of CERCLA to
ensure all important considerations are factored into remedy selection decisions.
The following "threshold" criteria are the most important, and must be satisfied by any
alternative in order to be eligible for selection:
1. Overall protection of human health and the environment addresses whether or not
a remedy provides adequate protection and describes how risks posed through each
exposure pathway (based on a reasonable maximum exposure scenario) are
eliminated, reduced, or controlled through treatment, engineering controls, or institu
tional controls.
2. Compliance with ARARs addresses whether or not a remedy would meet all of the
applicable, or relevant and appropriate requirements of federal and state environmen
tal statutes and requirements or provide grounds for invoking a waiver.
The following "primary balancing" criteria are used to make comparisons and to identify the
major trade-offs between alternatives:
3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence refers to the ability of a remedy to maintain
reliable protection of human health and the environment over time, once cleanup
goals have been met. It also addresses the magnitude and effectiveness of the
measures that may be required to manage the risk posed by treatment residuals
and/or untreated wastes.
4. Reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment is the anticipated perfor
mance of a remedial technology, with respect to these parameters, that a remedy may
employ.
5. Short-term effectiveness addresses the period of time needed to achieve protection
and any adverse impacts on human health and the environment that may be posed
during the construction and implementation periods until cleanup goals are achieved.
6. Implementability is the technical and administrative feasibility of a remedy, including
the availability of materials and services needed.
20
-------
7. Cost includes estimated capital and operation and maintenance costs,.and the
present-worth costs.
The following "modifying" criteria are considered fully after the formal public comment
period on the Proposed Plan is complete:
8. State acceptance indicates whether, based on its review of the RI/FS and the
Proposed Plan, the State supports, opposes, and/or has identified any reservations
with the preferred alternative.
9. Community acceptance refers to the public's general response to the alternatives
described in the Proposed Plan and the RI/FS reports. Factors of community
acceptance to be discussed include support, reservation, and opposition by the
community.
A comparative analysis of the remedial alternatives based upon the evaluation criteria noted
above follows.
Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment
Soils and Stream Sediments: All of the alternatives, with the exception of the no action
alternative and access restriction alternative (Alternatives 1 and 2), would provide adequate
protection of human health and the environment by eliminating or controlling risk through
containment, removal, or treatment.
Alternatives 1 and 2 are not an acceptable remedial option given that the current risk from
PAHs, PCBs, and inorganics posed by the Site exceeds the acceptable risk range of 10"*
to 10"6 in certain areas of the Site. Therefore, since Alternatives 1 and 2 do not meet this
threshold criterion, they will not be discussed further in this section.
Ground water: Only the treatment alternative (Alternative 10) for ground water attempts
to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment by reducing
contaminant levels to cleanup levels. Although there is no current exposure pathway for
ground water use at the facility, the no action alternative is not protective
of public water supplies because it will not prevent the migration of contaminants within the
Newtown Creek Aquifer. Consequently, and in accordance with EPA ground water policy
as set forth in the NCP, Site remediation is warranted to restore ground water to its
beneficial use. Therefore, since Alternative 9 (no action) does not meet this threshold
criterion, it will not be discussed further.
Compliance with ARARs
Soils and Stream Sediments: Alternatives 3,4,5,6,7, and 8 provide containment or
treatment as a means of eliminating potential exposures.
21
-------
Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) are chemical- and action-specific ARARs that are
triggered by the placement of wastes regulated under RCRA. LDRs require that excavated
hazardous wastes be treated to acceptable levels before land disposal. For non-listed
wastes, on-site or off-site disposal of treated wastes is permitted provided the wastes are
not, after treatment, RCRA characteristic hazardous wastes. Soils in Area 6 contain
hazardous waste and must therefore be treated so that the contaminants remaining in the
leachate (as determined by TCLP) are less than the Toxicity Characteristic limit so as to
no longer be considered hazardous waste and therefore be eligible for disposal. Area 5
contains listed hazardous waste, and LDR restrictions would prevent any land disposal of
these materials. The LDR requirements, however are not triggered if the material is
contained without excavation with a RCRA cover. Alternative 8 would meet Land Disposal
Restrictions for all wastes while Alternatives 3 and 6 would not.
One sample from Disposal Area 4 indicated PCBs at a concentration of 320 ppm.
Therefore, the potential exists that additional soils and /or sediments will be encountered
with concentrations above 50 ppm. For these sediments or soils, Alternative 8, which
includes excavation, segregation and off site disposal in a TSCA regulated landfill, would
meet TSCA ARARs.
Alternative 7 would not meet New York State requirements as set forth at 6 NYCRR 373-2
for all contaminated soil or sediments because ground water must be greater than 10 feet
from a landfill's cell bottom and because the area proposed for the landfill is a ground
water recharge zone. Perched ground water was encountered at 4-5 feet below the
ground surface during drum excavation activities in Disposal Areas 1 and 2 and therefore
this requirement cannot be satisfied.
Other action-specific and location-specific ARARs that are applicable or relevant and
appropriate would be met under the selected alternative (Table 9). Examples include
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards for Hazardous
Responses and New York RCRA Hazardous Waste Facility Requirements for the handling
and storage of hazardous wastes.
Ground water: According to the federal site-specific classification scheme, the ground
water at the Site is Class 2A, which is potential drinking water. New York State classifies
the Site ground water "GA" which indicates that the underlying aquifer is a potential drinking
water aquifer. Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) MCLs are federal chemical-specific ARARs
as are NYSDEC Class GA Ground water Quality Standards.
Alternative 10 attempts to meet these ARARs; if ARARs are demonstrated to be
unattainable after implementation of a ground water extraction and treatment system, the
contingency exists for a waiver of these ARARs, as outlined in the Summary of Alternatives
section.
Alternative 10, ground water treatment, would also meet action-specific ARARs. Location-
specific ARARs that are applicable or relevant and appropriate would also be met under
the preferred alternative. Examples include OSHA Standards for Hazardous Responses
22
-------
and New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Requirements for Site
Runoff, Surface Water and Ground Water Discharge Limits (Table 9).
Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence
Soils and Stream Sediments: Alternative 8 would be both effective and permanent once
the construction phase is complete because the potential risks posed by the contaminated
soil and sediments would be removed and the contaminated soil areas would be restored
to ambient conditions. Alternative 8 will result in transporting additional material to an
existing off-site disposal facility as opposed to creating a new disposal facility on-site,
thereby restricting future uses of that on site piece of property. Each of the remaining
alternatives offer long-term effectiveness and some degree of permanence by removing the
exposure pathway or treating the contaminated materials.
Ground water: Alternative 10 is effective and permanent in that the remedial goal is to
achieve ARARs and the pumping and treatment would remove the ground water
contamination and prevent further negative impacts to the Newtown Creek Aquifer.
Reduction of Toxicity. Mobility, or Volume
Soils and Stream Sediments: Alternative 3 provides no reduction in toxicity or volume
because of the absence of treatment, but it would reduce the mobility of contaminants in
the soil because they would be contained and no longer exposed for transport by wind or
water erosion.
Alternatives 4 and 8 would reduce the mobility of inorganic contaminants through
treatment. These alternatives may increase the total volume of waste material. No
reduction in toxicity of contaminated soils or sediments would occur under Alternatives
3,4,6, 7 or 8. Only Alternative 5 meets this criterion fully.
Ground water: Alternative 10, pumping and treatment, would contain the ground water
contaminants thereby reducing mobility and the ability of contaminants to migrate into the
Newtown Creek Aquifer. The treatment process would reduce contaminant concentrations
in the treated ground water to below surface water discharge standards and would have
the goal of reducing contaminant concentrations in the aquifer to below ARARs, effectively
diminishing both toxicity and volume.
Short-term Effectiveness
Soils and Stream Sediments: The short-term effectiveness of all the alternatives is high
since each alternative involves relatively little construction and implementation. Although
the potential for dust release is higher for Alternative 8 than for on-site alternatives, this
alternative is neverthless effective in regard to this criterion. Reliable technologies would
23
-------
be used in the excavation, treatment, transport, and consolidation phases to ensure that
any dust releases would be minimized.
Ground water: The short-term effectiveness of Alternative 10 is high since there is no
exposure to contaminated ground water during implementation. Any short-term risks are
derived from the potential of constructing and using a ground water well on site before
institutional controls are in place, which is considered highly unlikely since the Site is
provided with water from the town municipal system. Implementation of Alternative 10
would not result in any exposures through proper operational procedures. The estimated
time for implementation of the construction phase for the preferred alternative is 24 months,
with a minimum of 20 years of monitoring to complete the remedial action.
Implementability
Soils and Stream Sediments: Alternative 3 is technically easy to implement, although it
requires maintenance to remain effective.
Alternative 8, excavation and off-site disposal after treatment, utilizes technologies that are
readily implementable. The equipment and personnel required for this alternative are
readily available. The removal of all surface soil and sediment will require approximately
150 to 300 trucks leaving the facility.
Treatment alternatives 4 and 5 would require treatability studies to ensure effectiveness,
and Alternative 5 must be able to meet NYS air regulations prior to full scale operation.
Ground water: Alternative 10 uses standard equipment and well developed technologies
that are commercially available. Treatment alternatives for the extracted ground water
would require treatability testing during remedial design. The small volume of residuals
from the construction of this alternative would be transported off-site for disposal.
However, contingencies will be included to maximize the pump and treatment system's
effectiveness in realizing this goal.
Cost
Soils and Stream Sediments: Based on the Rl data and the FS evaluation, the cost of
treating soils and sediments to meet LDR's, prior to off-site disposal in an Industrial Waste
Landfill (Alternative 8) is not substantially higher than the cost of the on-site disposal and
treatment alternatives (Alternative 4 and 5). The cost of off site treatment is higher than
construction of a RCRA cell for treated wastes, but removal and treatment provides for
permanent removal of the contaminants.
The estimated present worth cost of the selected Alternative #8 is $2,462,334. The present
worth costs for soil and sediment remediation ranged from $9,750 for Alternative 2 to
$2,811,931 for Alternative 6.
24
-------
Ground water: The actual cost of Alternative 10 could be considerably less depending on
whether the contingency measures are invoked after initial implementation, or if EPA
decides that the treatment system should be operated for more than 20 years.
The thirty year present worth cost of the no action alternative is $146,849, while the twenty
year (estimated time for remediation) present worth cost of the treatment alternative is
$2,714,721. Individual cost breakdowns are included in the Summary of Remedial
Alternatives section of this Proposed Plan.
State Acceptance
The State of New York concurs with the preferred alternatives presented-in this Record of
Decision.
Community Acceptance
The Public Comment Period on the Proposed Plan for the Site was held from May 27,1992
through June 27, 1992. In addition, a Public Meeting was held at the Village of Elmira
Heights Village Hall on June 16, 1992 to discuss, answer questions about, and accept
comments on the Proposed Plan. No negative comments regarding EPA's Proposed Plan
were made by the public during the Public meeting.
SELECTED REMEDY
Based upon consideration of the requirements of CERCLA, the detailed analysis of the
alternatives, and public comments, both NYSDEC and EPA have determined that
Alternative 8: Consolidate Soil and Sediment, Ship Off site for Treatment and
Disposal; and Alternative 10: Extraction/Air Stripping /Metals Precipitation and or
Filtration/Surface Water Discharge are the appropriate remedies for the Site.
The major components of the selected remedy are as follows:
o Excavation of contaminated soils and sediments from the Disposal-Areas identified
in the Risk Assessment and where soils and sediment pose a risk to ground water
quality,
o Disposal of TSCA waste (PCBs > 50 ppm) in a secure TSCA double lined landfill
facility (estimated at approximately 1,275 cubic yards),
o Stabilization of RCRA waste to prevent leaching of metals and disposal in a secure
RCRA lined facility (approximate volume 2,124 cubic yards),
25
-------
o Disposal of non-RCRA wastes in an industrial waste landfill (approximate volume
120 cubic yards), '
o Strategic placement of pumping wells to extract the contaminated ground water
from the aquifer,
o Storage of pumped ground water in a central collection tank for subsequent
treatment in an above-ground system,
o Treatment of the contaminated ground water to meet Federal and State Standards
for surface water discharge. Treated ground water would then be either discharged
as effluent to the facility non-contact cooling system or to a surface water
discharge,
o Recommendation that local institutional controls, in the form of local zoning
ordinances, be implemented in an attempt to control any future site use that could
open an exposure pathway to subsurface soils,
o Recommendation that institutional controls will be provided/maintained to restrict
access to those portions of the aquifer which remain above cleanup levels, and
o Implementation of a long-term monitoring program to track the migration and
concentrations of the contaminants of concern.
The ground water alternative also stipulates contingency measures, outlined under
Alternative 10 in the Summary of Remedial Alternatives section of this Record of Decision,
whereby the ground water extraction and treatment system's performance will be
monitored on a regular basis and adjusted as warranted by the performance data collected
during operation. If it is determined, in spite of any contingency measures that may be
taken, that portions of the aquifer cannot be restored to its beneficial use, ARARs may be
waived based on technical impracticability of achieving further contaminant reduction. The
decision to invoke a contingency measure may be made during periodic review of the
remedy, which will occur at intervals of no less often than every five years.
The selected alternative is believed to provide the best balance of trade-offs among the
alternatives with respect to the evaluation criteria. Based on the information available at
this time, EPA believes the selected alternative would be protective of human health and
the environment, would comply with ARARs, would be cost effective, and would utilize
permanent technologies to the maximum extent practicable. The preferred alternatives also
treat the most grossly contaminated material (surface soils, sediments, and ground water),
meeting the statutory preference for the use of a remedy that involves treatment as a
principal element.
26
-------
STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
Under its legal authorities, EPA's primary responsibility at Super-fund sites is to undertake
remedial actions that are protective of human health and the environment. In addition,
Section 121 of CERCLA establishes several other statutory requirements and preferences.
These specify that when complete, the selected remedial action for this Site must comply
with applicable, or relevant and appropriate environmental standards established under
Federal and State environmental laws unless a statutory waiver is justified. The selected
remedy also must be cost-effective and utilize permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource-recovery technologies to the maximum extent
practicable. Finally, the statute includes a preference for remedies that employ treatment
that permanently and significantly reduce the volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous
wastes, as available. The following sections discuss how the selected remedy meets these
statutory requirements. The contingent remedy will also meet these requirements.
Protection of Human Health and the Environment
Once excavation and shipment off-site of sediment and soils with unacceptable levels of
contamination is completed, the unacceptable risks posed by these materials will be
permanently removed. The soils and sediments will be shipped off-site for treatment and
disposal, confirmatory sampling will be conducted in the excavated areas to ensure that
all unacceptably contaminated material is removed, and the excavated areas will be
covered with clean fill. In addition, EPA will recommend to local officials that institutional
controls be implemented to prevent activities at the facility from opening an exposure
pathway to the subsurface soils.
After design and construction of a ground water pump and treat system is completed,
contaminated ground water will be pumped in order to contain the facility ground water
contamination, and to restore the aquifer quality to appropriate State and Federal
Standards for a Class Ha and GA aquifer. EPA will recommend to local officials that
institutional controls be implemented to prevent installation of a drinking water well in areas
effected by the contamiantion caused by releases at the facility.
Compliance with ARARs
At the completion of the response actions, the selected remedy will have complied with the
following:
Action Specific ARARs
Soils and Sediments -
6 NYCRR 373-1 Hazardous Waste Facility standards for permitting, 40 CFR 761 PCB Spill
Cleanup Policy, and RCRA Land Disposal restriction under 40 C.F.R. 268, 40 C.F.R. 261
27
-------
determination of whether a waste is hazardous, 40 C.F.R.262 Hazardous waste generator
requirements, and 40 C.F.R. 263 Hazardous waste transporter requirements.
Ground Water -
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Maximum Contaminant Levels (40 C.F.R. 141.11-141.16)
and 6 NYCRR Ground Water Quality Regulations (Parts 703.5, 703.6, 703.7) as well as NYS
10 NYCRR 5, 10NYCRR 170 (State Public Drinking Water Standards and State Public
Drinking Water Sources Standards, 6 NYCRR 750-757 State Pollution Discharge Elmination
System. For air pollution control 6 NYCRR 200, 201, 211, and 212, as well as 6NYCRR 257,
and NYS Air Guide 1 will have been considered.
Chemical-Specific ARARs:
Since the ground water at the Site is classified by EPAas lla (GA by NYSDEC), drinking
water standards are relevant and appropriate. Again, these include SWDA MCLs and
6NYCRR Ground Water Quality Regulations. However, achieving chemical-specific ARARs
for ground water is dependent on remediation of the contaminant sources at the facility.
The remedial action is intended to result in attainment of chemical specific ground water
ARARs providing that the remedy is effective in eliminating the sources of aquifer
contamination.
Other potential remedial action objectives are presented in Table 18.
Cost-Effectiveness
The selected remedy is cost effective and provides the greatest overall protectiveness
proportionate to costs. Excavation, segregation and shipment off-site for treatment and
disposal at a present worth of $2,462,334, is more expensive than some of the other
alternatives but it does not result in the incurrence of the cost of treatability studies; also
it can be completed more quickly than these other alternatives at a reasonable cost. The
present worth cost of the ground water treatment and discharge (to the non-contact
cooling system or the surface water directly after treatment) is $2,388,322 based on
pumping and treating for 20 years and pumping and treating 30 gallons per minute. This
alternative provides for containment of the contaminant plume and restoration of the aquifer
at the facility to meet Federal and State standards at a reasonable cost.
Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment Technologies to the Maximum
Extent Practicable
The selected remedy utilizes permanent solutions and treatment technologies to the
maximum extent practicable. The selected remedy represents the best balance of trade-
offs among the alternatives with respect to the evaluation criteria.
28
-------
Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element
The preference for treatment as a principal element is satisfied since treatment of the
principal threat (soil and sediment and ground water) will be conducted. The off-site
treatment of soil and sediment may include stabilization and incineration, if necessary, to
meet LDRs. For ground water treatment: filtration and/or precipitation, and air stripping
of contaminants will be utilized to attain ARARs.
DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
There are no significant changes from the preferred alternative presented in the Proposed
Plan.
29
-------
APPENDIX I
FIGURES
-------
Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location
Figure 2 - Facility Plan
Figure 3 - Ground Water Flow Direction
Figure 4 - Regional Ground Water Flow Direction
Figure 5 - Surface Water Flow at the Facet Facility
Figure 6 - VOC Concentrations in Ground Water
Figure 7 - Cadmium and Chromium Concentrations in Ground Water
Figure 8 - Regional TCE Concentration in Ground Water
Figure 9 - Ground Water Treatment System
-------
•o> «• \'
FACILITY LOCATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
ELMIRA. N.Y.
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS
TAKEN FROM USGS 7.8 MINUTE QUADRANGLES
ELMIRA AND HORSEHEADS. N.Y.
-------
Figure 2
HARK TWAIN MUNICHAL OOLF COURSE
Ot/WATIN
•fPAMATOM
Intermillenl Drainage Swale
~ Wetland
:t11l: Railroad Tracks
Facol Facility Dotirakiiy
Mx*tod tam f HU. I9QO3
lluilding
Dirllioad
Disposal Area
Standing Water
FACET ENTERPRISES
-------
Figure 3
Go
O
o-
UONTTORMd WELL
ESTIMATED OROUNOWATER CONTOUR
GROUNOWATER FLOW DIRECTION
J ! L
_J U
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
ERM-Northeast
ESTIMATED GROUNDWATER
CONTOUR MAP
i':roo'
-------
Figure 4
SiNNSSfcWh' .5
'X\\ CW3RHH.JBI
rfirrTioifcwiOS *'
«'W-CW15S '••'.•"-*'
USGS OPENFILE REPORT 82-110
MYOROGEOLOGY OF THE VALLEY-FILL
AQUIFER IN THE ELMIRA AREA.
CHEMUNG COUNTY. N.Y.
AND FLOW DIRECTION IFEET MSD
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
KENTUCKY AVENUE WELLFIELO SITE
GROUNOWATER ELEVATIONS
DECEMBER 13-1$. 1988
EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED
SOUKCE: USDS. HOKIEMEAOI. llri 4 ILUIRA. 1I«I OUAOKANOLC^ .
-------
SNuauvd MOU aovNivua AJJIDVJ
6NV3UXG -««
S3H31ia •«.
MOld 133H6 O
ON3O31
0§
22 ^
Qo
-------
I
Figure 6
'
=D r >r,'K is
LEGEND
ESTIMATED TOTAL VOLATILE
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS I3OCON
«UMf V IUMA iCOin
MOMTORMQ WQ1
— —•. — • INFERREO
ESTIMATED TOTAL VOLATILE
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ISOCON3
BASED OH 1»»0 OROUHOWATER DATA
10-
-------
Figure 7
NORTH
e
GO
C*L C£
00
o
o-
LEGEND
Cd: CADMIUM CONCENTRATION (ppb)
Cn CHROMIUM CONCENTRATION (ppb)
NO: NOT DETECTED
9 MOWTORMO WELL
CADMIUM AND CHROMIUM CONCENTRATIONS
IN GR^UNDWATER (UNFILTERED)
BASED ON 1900 GROUNDWATER DATA
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
l':20O'
DAT!
10/90
-------
Figure 8
0107534
62 MW3S
120 MW3D
f"/' FUMT'IV:
i'^Jswrifc
SCALE
POOR QUALITY
ORIGINAL
LEGEND:
•—• AQUIFER BOUNDARY
22 CONCENTRATION OF TCE
IN ppb, JANUARY 1990
NOTE: NYSDEC WELLS WERE INSTALLED
BY CLEAN HARBORS INC.,1989.
SOURCE: USQS. MORSEHEAOS. 1978 & ELMIRA, 1*69 OUAORANQLE
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
KENTUCKY AVENUE WELLFIELD SITE
TCE DISTRIBUTION IN
SULLIVAN STREET MONITORING WELLS
(NYSDEC)
EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED
-------
""i'.v_: re 9
Ca(OH),
• o*
• o
o* . •
loop p «QOP
1ST RECARBONATION
1ST STAGE
TREATMENT
INFLUENT
EFFLUENT
LAMELU
SETTLE??
r
ft
Na,CO,
2ND STAGE
TREATMENT
POLYMER
I
SAND
FILTER
2ND RECARBONATION
POLYMER MIX TANK
(IF NEEDED)
imc
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
METALS REMOVAL SYSTEM
GROUND WATER TREATMENT
PREPARED FOR
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
-------
Figure 9 contd.
AIR EMISSIONS
STACK HEIGHT:
JO FT
METALS REMOVAL SYSTEM
SEE FIGURE 4-8
PROCESS FlOW DIAGRAM
\
GROUND WATER
RECOVERY
SYSTEM
GROUND WATER
PUMP STATION
TREATED WATER
DISCHARGE
GROUND WATCT THEATMBOT
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
HPHOtOt
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
NIB
-------
APPENDIX II
TABLES
-------
TABLE 1
TABLE ,
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA I AND AREA 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUKOLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
StUi1:6-a
TCL Compound SBS:4< SBV68 (SB5:6*Dup.| 585:6-10 566 6 B SB6:6 10 SB6 6 10 SB9:4fi 589:6-6 SB12:4< SB12:6< 5B12:I
Acetone 7J 6J 8J «J— _-. _gj___
1.1-tXchtoroelhani 1J
1.2-OlcNoroetheni 12 5J — 6 — — — — —
1.1.1-TrteMoroetherw 2J — — - — — — — —
TikNoroethene 110 69 12 53 3J 4J - - 12 30 42
Benzene -• -- •-• — — — 2J ... _ _ _
Tetrachtofoettiene — — — — -•• — 1J — — —
Notes: At concentriUont In mtoogrimi per Uogram (uoAg - pwls per Mkm (ppb)).
No voMte orgMk compoundi (Mr* detected ki 586:4-6. 587:4-6.587:6-6. 587:6-10.
588:4-6. 586^6. 589:6-10. 5810:4-6. SB10:6A 5810:6-10. S811:4«. 5811:6-6.5811:6-10.
5813:0-2. 5813:2 4. end 5813:4«
— - Compound not detected kitNsMmple. but present In anotlier.
J • Semt-qumtltatlve due to concentration below Contract Required Ouanillatlon Until (CROL).
-------
TABLE 1 contd.
TABLE'
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA I AND AREA 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compound
2 Methytoaphthalene
Phenanthrene
Fkioranlhene
Pyrene
Benzo(a)Anihracene
Chrysene
Benzo(b)Fhjoranlhene
Benzo(k)Fhiroanlhene
Benzo(a)Pyrene
Di-n-Butylpfithalaie
Bb(2 ElhythexyOphthalale
SB5I66
SB5:4< SB5:64 (SB5:6 6 Pup I
SB5:8 10 SB7:6 6 SB7:9 10 SBtO B 10
SB12:6-6 SB12:B 10 SB13:0 2 SBt3:2 4 SBI3:4 6
B6J —
51J
53J
74J
84J
tOOJ
B4J
66J
66J
130XJ
130XJ
51J
72J
56J
44J
TIC Compounds
Total Unknowns
Total Unknown Hydrocaibons
2H-1 Benzopyran-2-one
UHBenzoduorene
Mono(2 Ether)Hexanedioic Add
Trimdhythexane
230J 240J
240J
230J 230J
140J
47SOJ
3820J
190JN
300J
190 JN
300J -
Notes: AH concentrations In mtcrograms per Mogram (ug/kg = parts per bWon (ppb)).
No semi-volatile organic compounds were delected In SB6:4 6. SB6:64. SB6:8 10, SB7:46.
SB8:4«. SB8:6fl. SB8:6-10, SB9:4«. SB9:64. SB98 10. SB10:4«. SBtO6^1, SB11:46. SB11:6 10. and SB12:4«.
- Compound not detected In this sample, but present in another.
J • Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC criteria outside of control limits, value below Contract Required Ouanlilalion Limit (CROL) or compound being a TIC.
X » Identifies coeKitkig Indistinguishable isomers.
N - Identified TIC.
-------
TABLE 1 contd.
TABLE -i
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA I AND AREA 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROI.ATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
AnaMe
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
BeryMum
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
Anatyt«
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
DCf JflPUIH
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Mcket
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
565:46 565:6-8
107OOJ
9.2
91.6J
.•JOB
S7.3J
2410J
1170J
98J
792
242J
10400J
5.2
9B.4J
.590
77.9J
224J
62/J
9.3J
2S.S
17SJ
5851:68
(SB5: 6< Oup.1
8790J
7.0
64.3J
.428
73.BJ
2I5J
63.4J
10.2J
23.4
174J
18
SB5:8 10 566:46 566:68 566:810 567.4-6 567:68 567:8-10 SBB:4-6 568:68 SB8:6 10 SB9:4 6
B71OJ
16
84.3J
460
3!i1J
548.1
532.1
B.ai
379
15 I
9.7
.12J
21.9
14.7
8.5
16.9
442J
3.O
26.3
92
17.0
60.1
634 590
SU 10:6-8 5610:8-10 SBIMfi 5611:6-8
43.4
24.1J
296
81.3
53.1
27.2.1
329
6SS
1.2
7740
639
.306
18.1
20.2J
22.1
68.6
13600J
7.0J
129J
.516
11.8
96.6J
30.4J
10.8
27.8
139J
11300J
7.6J
9S.4J
.416
49 6J
25 8J
g.a
263
81 5J
11SOOJ 7170
5.7J 41.1
95.4J 604
.388 .316
50.4J
26.1J
11.4
30.2
87.2J
12.5
20.9J
22.7
67.2
5612:6-6 5612:810 5613:02 5613:2-4 5613:4-6
17500 12900 8870
4.0J 3.8J 37J
132 99.6 100
.546 .536 .376
158J
9 IJ
9.3J
23.0
4.7U
63 5J
20 OJ
11 OJ
11 8J
27.1
92.4J
18.5
219.1
31.1
66.2
25.8
302.1
382
105
19 tt
24.6.1
330
94.5
16.7
21.2J
243
692
9600
6.7J
151
.326
14.4
73.8J
308
78.2
10800 20100
4.0J 8.9.1
1S1 152
.356 .776
776
166 113
20.2.1 42.7.1
256
702
436
137
8760
3.7J
77.1
.338
2.7
67.3
21.4J
32.2
88.7
15900
14900
17500
7.8J 88J —
125 162 145
.578 .548 .756
- 16.8 —
100 545 25.1
26. IJ 81.4J 32.SJ
10.4 -
29 d I
81.2
780
137
7.0
322
803
38
12100
11.5J
989
.386
185
27.3J
316
87.0
Notes: Al concenhiHom are In mMgrams per klogram (mg/kg - puils per mnon (ppm)).
> Analyle not detected n IMs tampta but present ki another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to QAAX requirements.
8 - Value Is above Instrument Detection Umlt (IOI). tint licit iw Cunliutl HennheO Detection Umll (CROL).
-------
TABLE 2
TABLE 2
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA 3 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
SB50:2-4
TCL Compound SBI:2-4 (SBI:2-4 Pup.) 51)2:8-10 SB4:6-8
Acetone — — 9J —
1,2-Dichloroelhene — 3J — —
2-Hulanone 6J --- --- 2J
Trichloroelhene 2J — — —
Toluene --- --- 2J
Notes: All concentrations in micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg - parts per billion (ppb)).
No volatile organic compounds were detected in SB 1:4-6, SBI:8-IO, SB2:2-4, SB2:4-6,
SB3:2-4, SB3:4-6, SB3:6-8, SB4:2-4, and SB4:4-6.
— m Compound not detected in this sample, but present in another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to concentration below Contract Required Quantitation Limit (CRQL).
-------
TABLE 2 contd.
TABLE
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA 3 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
SB5024
TCI Compounds SB1:2-4 (SBt:24 Pup) SBI:B-10 SB2:23 SB3:24 SB3:46 SB3:66 SB4:2~4 SB4:46 SB466
Benzole Add - - — - - - 67J
Penlachlorophenol ' — ••• — . — — ••• — 66J
Fkioranlhene 50J - - — — '- ~ —
Pyrene ' 45J ••• — — — • •• —
Benzo(a)Anlhracene 48J ••- — — — — ~
Bis(2 Elhylhexyt)phinatale - 40J - — - ..- 68J — - 52J
Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 69XJ - - - - - _____
Benzo(V)Fluoranthene 69XJ — — — — ...___
TIC Compounds
Total Unknowns 2600J 13SOJ 220J 3760J 620J 2640J 590J - 250J
Total Unknown Hydrocarbons 1220J I650J - 3240J - 430J — - _ _
Total Unknown Aldehydes 240J - - ......•_ _ _ _
Decane - - - 150JN -- - - - - -
Octadecanal - - - - - 360JN - — - -
Notes: Al concentrations In micrograms per Mogram (ug/kg * parts per bMon (ppb)).
No semi-volatile organic compounds were detected In SB1.46.
m Compound not detected hi this sample, but present In another.
J • Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC criteria outside of control limits, value below Contract Required Ouanlitalion Limit (CflQl) or compound being a TIC.
X - Identities coduting Indistinguishable bomers.
N • Identified TIC.
-------
TABLE 2 contd.
TABLE
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA 3 SOIL RORING SAMPLES
METALS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Anaryte
Aluminum
Arsenic
Balkan
BeryMum
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zmc
SB50:24
SB1:24 (561:2-4 Pup I 581:4 li !iUI:B 10 SB2:2-3 562:3-4
SB3:24 583:46 563:64
584:2-4 SB4:4< SB468
13600 129001 12700
7.3J 3.4J a 4.1
147 103 505
.458 .288 479
1.5J 1.3J
265 29.9 4/5
27.9 243J 33 4
14.9 41. U 12.4
26.S 284 214
889 27BJ 805
IOBOOJ
58
74 3J
S.1B
IJ3J
4C*J
1431
1I.M
938
2b6J
16100
55J
174
.556
S0.7J
2110
270
180
.14J
S76
209
15400
60.1
33.38
.438
S7J
664
231
117
...
253
73.7
10900J 13300J
4.S
6631
.588
22. U
12.2J
9.SJ
301
84 5J
165
.498
16.7
4.JO.I
15.9
267
73.6J
15800J
56
92 at
.728
17.6J
52BJ
16.4J
263
81.U
10000J
70.4
152
11.7
27.S
76.4J
15000J 13000J
152
.488
19.3
21.6
12.7
78.1J
121
.388
15.9
14.9
292
M.9J
13500
4.8J
128
.448
17.Z
247
12.4
259
74.4
Note*: At canccnlfallom «r« In mMgrams pa ktogiani (ing/kg - parts pet mWan (ppm))
Cyanide was not dMactad h any ol VMS* samples.
— • Anatylt not dettcUd In W» sample but present m another.
J • Seml-quanmatJvt due to QAAX requirements.
B • Value Is above mstrument Delecflon Limit (ItM |. but below Contract Required Detection UrnM (CHOL).
-------
TABLE 3 r
. VALID ANALY. ^AL RESULTS
AREA 4 SOIL BOKING SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
I'llROLATOK PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compounds
1.1-Dfchloroethane
Chloroform
2-Butanone
Benzene
Toluene
Elhyibcnzune
Xytenes
SB21:10 14
2IOJ
520J
760J
SB22.9 H SU2369
1J
29J
3J
7
9
3J 47
SB32:6 9
1SB23:6 9 Pup.)
B40J
SB23:910 SB24:3 5
3J
4J
SB24:11 15
SJ
4J
TIC Compounds
Total Unknowns
Total Unknown Hydrocarbons
Unknown Sub. Cydohexane
Oecane
Dimelhyl Cydohexane
Dimethyl Cydopenlane
Dimelhyl Nonane
Dimethyl Octane
Elhylmethyt Benzene
Elhytmelhyl Heptane
Heptane
Methyl Cydohexane
Methyl Nonane
Methyl Propyl Cydohexane
Propytheptanol
Trimelhytoenzcne
Trlmelhyl Octane
7000J
13600J
4000J
4300JN
4000J
3300JN
5900 JN
4000J
13J
B.5J
I8JN
220J
180J
160J
1570J
360J
450JN
390J
5BOJ
320J
35300J
2B600J
12000J
5900J
tOOOOJ
23J
1BJN
13J
Notes: AN concentrations In mJcrograms per klogram (ug/kg « parts per biRkm (ppb)).
No votalle organic compounds were deteded In SB22:I1 13. SB22:13 15. SB23:11 13. SB24:03. SB2524. SB25:46. andSB25:6«.
Compound not detected In this sample, but present In another.
J Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC criteria outside ol control limits, value below Contract Required Quanlilalion Limit (CRQL) or compound being a TIC.
N Identified TIC.
-------
TABLE 3 contd.
AREA 4 SOIL L aNG SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCt Compound
Napthalena
2-Metrtykiaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Dtoenioluran
Fkjoiena
Phenanltecne
Anthracene
» n-Butylphthalate
Fkxxanthene
Pyretic
Benzo(a)Anlhracern
Ctvysenc
Bh(2 Elhyt
Dt nOclyl PWhatate
Bnuo(b)Fkjor*nnwnc
B«KO(k)Fluoc«nlhen*
SB 72:9- 11
670J
1400
4:«IJ
ItOO
670
44J
47J
85J
190XJ
190XJ
SB??:I? U
48.1
44.1
40J
111) I
SB??:14 li
SB?3:6 9
78OJ
MOJ
IrtWJ
4WW
10HOJ
580J
49TIO
76(10
7300
2100.1
970J
3
930J
4MXI
J9W
3300
79OO
SB?3:9 10
56J
170J
SB7311 13 SB?4:35
SB7V4-6
6JJ
45J
73J
lndeno( 1.7.3 td)Prrene
Ot>eiuo(a.h)AnU»acefM
Bento(g.h.l)Pery*ptadeean«
Hexalrlaconlam
lron.Tilcarbonyl|N |Phenyt)|
Methyl Tildccane
N-Ptopyl-Benzamldc
Ttlramelhyl Bcrucne
Telramelhylhepladccane
2.6.10.14-
Telramethylpenladccane
Undecylcyclone>ane
441OOJ
99900J
57OOJ
BTOOM
6200J
S390J
2100OJ
390OJN
44OOJN
7700J
17900J
IMOJ
813OJ
740J
530J
143600J
1640001
47OOXJ
700OJ
B5OJ
360J
1450OOJ
211000J
74000J
_
20TJOOJN
21000JN
4SOOJ
14SOOJ
17500J
1100JN
2100J
3ODO.I
1100J
J610J
46OJN
Notes: Al conccnliatlons are In mtcrograrns per tier (ug/t - parts pei bMion (ppb|)
No aeml-vokilie organic compound* were detected ki 5823:0-3. S874:1 Mb. 5875:6-6.
— - Compound not present hi tNs sample but present ki another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to concentration below Contract Requkud duiillkitlon Limit (CROL). data validation requirements » cunipuund being a TIC.
N - Identified TIC.
X - Identities codutkig Indistinguishable Isomers.
-------
TABLE 3 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA 4 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
PESTICIDE/PCII COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIKOLATOU PRODUCTS COMPANY
SB32:6-9
TCL Compound SB2I:IO-I4 SD22:9-H SB22:12-I3 SB23:6-9 (SB23:6-9 Duo.) SB23:9-IO
Arochlor 1248 I3000C 780 140 35000C 28000C
Arochlor 1254 — --- — — — 190
Notes: All concentrations in micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg - parts per billion (ppb».
No pesticide/PCB compounds were detected in SB22:I3-I5, SB23:11-13, SB24:0-3, SB24:3-5.
SB24:II-IS, SB25:2-4, SB2S:4-6, and SB25.6-8.
—. - Compound not detected in this sample, but present in another.
C - Value confirmed by GC/MS Analysis.
-------
TABLE 3 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AKEA 4 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLA TOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
5832:69
Anatyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
BetyNum
Cadmium
Ctwomkjm
Copper
lead
r Mercury
.•':. Nkket
I'."' tin
2mc
Cyanide
5621:1014
13600J
_.
16 6J
628J
.648
322
851J
22IJ
1J3
1.9J
2T3
...
11601
S7.S
5622:911
281001
...
B6J
272J
1.1B
2.3
40.9J
40. U
12.9J
.28J
60.1
_
141J
1.7
5822:1213
16000
—
3.9J
135
.558
4.5
31.9J
11.1
13.1
—
44.2
—
108J
2.9
5622:14 15
7480
9.9BJ
39J
91.7
.348
...
12 BJ
154
7.9
...
19.5
—
48.2J
—
SB2J:6 9
2OOOOJ
96J
II10J
.908
476
12MI
382J
235
2.2J
386
528
2590J
38.5
15823:6 9 Pup >
215OO
I13DJ
553
I.OB
IbO
482J
146
88.0
1.7
159
962J
29.1
5623:910
22900J
14. U
278J
.988
440
137J
66 9 J
28 OJ
94J
796
...
293.1
18.2
5623:11-13
14600J
...
145J
150J
518
1116
476.1
29 8J
193J
.24J
38.3
•-
126J
25
5624:0-3
14600J
-.
47J
139J
.658
213J
22.3J
11.4J
.27J
29.7
—
84 BJ
—
SB24:35
13SOOJ
—
3.0J
84.1J
.598
...
18.6J
I8.3J
12.SJ
.36J
24.0
—
73.9J
—
5624:11 15
24400J
—
12.3J
202J
.998
...
3S.4J
40 7 J
17 6J
33J
48.0
—
154J
1.0
5625:2-4
13700J
74J
817J
.588
...
194J
20 5J
136J
.31J
27.4
—
75 7J
—
5625:4-6
19200J
97J
194J
.758
29. U
33. U
14 4J
22J
430
—
104J
—
5625:6-8
27100J
8.2J
252J
1.18
...
32 JJ
28. U
16 BJ
.26J
52.1
—
. 105J
—
Notes: At concentrattom ate ti mMgrnnt per Mogram (mg/kq - parts per mMon (ppni))
— - AnatyU not delected kithbtampte but praa*nl ki anottwr.
J • Semt-quartlUllve due to QAAK requkemenl*.
B • Value Is above Instrument Defection Urn* (101). but below Contract Rcujmud Uulu-cllon limit (CRDL)
-------
TABLE 3 contd.
TABLE 6-9
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS,
PESTICIDES AND PCBs
SOIL SAMPLES
1986 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Compound
PCB-1016
PCB-1248
PCB-1254
PCB-1260
4-Methylphcnol
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphihalene
Flurorene
Phenanihrene
Anthracene
Di-n-butylphthalate
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) Anthracene
Chrysene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
120
24000 —
230
-kg"
290
3130 J --
150
LJ. D-12-S SB-31-7
53
110
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
• —
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA -
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
—
96J
170
140 J
83 J
605
190
230
550
350
250 J
370
...
3600 J
800 J
NOTES: All concentrations in parts per billion (ppb).
= Compound not detected in this sample, but present in another.
NA = Compound not analyzed for in this sample.
J = Semi-quantitative value due to QA/QC data validation requirements or value below CRQL.
* = L-8 is a duplicate of L-4.
6-34
-------
TABLE % -
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA S SOIL BORING SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC AND PESTICIDE/I'CB COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
I'llROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCtVOC SB14:13 SB14:35 SBt4:6-B 5615:13 5615:3545 SB 15:4 5 SB16 4 6 SBU:24 SB17:S 1 5617:8 10 SBlB:1-3 5618:44 5618:68 5B19:2 4 5619:46 5620:4 « S6?0:B 5 1U
Carbon Usulflde - - - - - - - - - 4J - 1J — -
I.l-Olcltoroelhane ••• - - - — — — 4J 5.1
1.2-achtoroelherw — — — -•• 5U — — '— -. UO no
1.1.1-TrtoNoroethane — — — — 10 - — 2J
Trkhkxoethene 4J 3J 2J / 240U 27 3J - - 2J 14 19 - 3D 2J 1J 2J
Toluene — — - - ~ - - SJ — -- _._.____
Einrtoenzene — ••- — — -•- — — I — ..._.__ — — _ —
Slyrene — — — — ••• ••- — U — .._. — ____
Xvlenea •-- ••• *•• — ••• ••• —• 2J -•• • -•—- — — „___
TICVoloMes
ToM Unknowns - — - - 16J - - 35.8J 140J 24S.1J - 23J — - - —
Total Unknown Alcohols - - - - - - - - - - - — 31J — — —
TCI Pesllchte/PCB
Arochtor1248 - - - - 580 - - - - 1500 '___.__
Atochtot 1254 310 — — — — - — — — •-• — — — _.__.
Moles: AI concentrations we ki mlcrogiwns per Mogrim (ug>g • p«rt» per bIMon (ppb)).
No volatle o»g«nk «nd pestlcMe/PCB compounds were detected In SBIbfl 2. SB 16:2 4. 5619:6 8. md SBM 6 8.
— - Compound not present In INs sample, but present In another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to QA/OC criteria outside of control Imlts. value bHnw Contract Required Quantltatton Umtt (CRQL) or compound being u TIC.
8 » Contamination found In associated blank. Sample value h greater then 111 times Hie associated blank value
E • Estimated value. Sample result Is over the Instrument's linear calbrallon unye by less than 10"*.
-------
TABLE A contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AREA 5 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
P1IROLA TOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Anal vie
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
SBI4:l-3
8220J
—
8.3J
95.91
.28B
143
2961
82.3J
24.4
.12
130
2.0BJ
IIS
406J
2.2
SBI4:3-5
9870J
—
II. 2J
S6.5J
.266
18.6
45.3J
34.2J
17.8
—
36.7
___
12.8
I28J
1.6
SBI4:6-8
I0600J
—
54J
85.8J
28D
—
25.8J
I8.7J
8.4
—
227
—
—
72.7J
1.0
SUI 5: 1-3
9-I70J
—
5.0J
643J
—
1.6
I9.2J
32.0J
12.3
—
22.6
—
—
92.4J
.70
SBI5:3.5-4.5
I3700J
—
9.4J
2I9J
56B
107
2750J
352J
73.0
.96
138
6.8J
113
373J
25.0
SBI5:4~5
I6IOOJ
—
II 9J
I73J
.61 B
—
II2J
35.IJ
15.5
—
34.4
—
—
I02J
—
Sll 16:0-2
I3300J
—
5.4J
I06J
.39B
5.7
38.6J
24. 6 J
I6.9J
—
29.3
—
—
9I.9J
.63
SB 16:2-4
I5IOOJ
—
—
I3IJ
580
—
I9.2J
I6.6J
40.7
—
25.6
—
—
79.0J
—
SB 16:4-6
I4400J
—
—
II9J
.508
4.9
3I.3J
54.3J
11.8
—
40.3
—
—
87.3
—
SBI7:2-4
I0900J
—
—
52.6J
JIB
1.3
I9.2J
39.3J
11.2
—
26.9
—
—
99.4J
—
Notes: All concentrations are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg = parts per million (ppm)).
SB 15:6-8 not submitted for analysis.
— - Analyle not detected in this sample but present in another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC requirements.
B = Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL).
-------
TABLE 4 (conf'd)
Analvte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
SBI7:5-7
I8300J
—
—
I24J
.67 B
—
29. IJ
24.6J
14.9
—
39.3
...
._.
93.7J
.86
5017:8-10
I5200J
—
5.2J
I05J
.61 B
—
23.IJ
2I.9J
12.5
—
26.2
__.
...
7I.6J
—
SBI8.I-3
9780J
8.6BJ
2.3BJ
I32J
.260
439
4060J
337J
45.1
.39
516
7.9J
193
2290J
114
SOI8:4-6
9070J
—
—
5I.9J
.29B
15.7
54.6J
38.6J
12.8
—
35.2
9.7
IIIJ
2.2
SB 18:6-8
20900J
—
—
I26J
.67 B
1.9
52.8J
29.8J
14.9
—
44.0
—
I06J
I.I
SB 19:2-
7940J
23.7J
—
85.8J
—
3390
I3000J
I9IOJ
50.3
—
320
3.0J
133
3460J
167
SB 19:4-6
9030J
5.3J
76.9J
280
—
26.9J
38. IJ
I0.9J
2IJ
20.3
—
7I.2J
6.2
SBI9:6-8
9060J
5.3J
77.9J
.258
—
I5.9J
20.2J
22.8J
25J
20.7
—
62.8J
3.2
SB20:4-6
9I50J
5.IJ
55.IJ
.258
38.7
94.8J
94.4J
14. IJ
.22J
21.6
2.8J
I65J
6.2
SB20:7-8
8740J
5.IJ
46.4J
.286
4.0
78.6J
49.6J
9.4J
.26J
21.2
—
72. IJ
.57
,5SB20:8.5-I
II300J
32.4J
116
.50B
I26J
23.6J
23.6J
.30J
23.1
—
74.0J
.67
Notes: All concentrations are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg - parts per million (pprn)).
SBI 5:6-8 not submitted Tor analysis.
— - Analyte not detected in this sample but present in another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC requirements.
B «• Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL).
-------
TABLE 4 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AKKA 5 SOIL BORING SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCLCompounds SB14:1 3 SBM35 SBI5:1 3 SBI5.3545 SBt5:45 SB1602 SB16:2-4 SB17:24 SB17:57
Benzole Acid 220J - - 990J - - ... B5J
Acenaphlhytene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
N Nilrosodiphenytamlne - •-• - 42J
Pentachlorophenol — - -- - - 54J
Phenanthrene 100J
Anthracene
CM n-Butytpltlhalate - - - I20J - MOJ — — S5J
Fhioranthene 84J
Pyrene 11OJ --- — — — — —
Bulyfcenzytphlhalale - - I60J - - _
Benzo(a)Anlhracen« — — .— — — — —
Chrysene - - 100J - ... _ 420 -
Bis(2€lhyfhexyi)phlhalale 250 J 52 J 89 J 340 J 42J - - - 1BOJ
U* Oclyl Phlhalale - - - - 74J - . - - -
Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 84XJ — — — — — — —
Benzo(k)Fhioranthena 8«J - - - ...___
TIC Compounds
Total Unknowns S72BOJ 8760J - 171300J - 220J 600J 36100J 10700J
Total Unknown Hydrocarbons - - - - - 260J B3800J 8680J
Total Unk. Cyclic Hydrocarbons - - - - - 4700J -
Aiochlor - 2IOJN - - - - j
Bromochkxobenzene — — — — — — — |
Benzo Oulnofine
Dimethyl Heptadecane •- - — — - - 300J — 3900J
Hepladecane — — — — — — — — 990JN
Mono(2 Ether)Hexanedk)Jc Add - -- - : - -
2.6.10.14 Tetramdhyl Hexadecane - - - - - - - — 1000JN
2.6.10.15-Tetramethyl Heptadecane - - - - - - - — 2200JN
Notes: All concentrations In microgmms per hlogram (ug/kg - parts per bMon (poo)).
Nosentvolalte organic compounds were detected In SB 14:6-8, SB15:64. SB16.44. and SB20:6 8
• Compound not detected hi this sample, but present in another.
J » Semi-quantitative due .to QA/QC criteria outside ol control NmHs. value below Contract Required Quanlitalion Limit (CHOI) or compound being a TIC.
X - Identifies coelutinglndislingulshableisomers.
N - Identified TIC.
-------
TABLE 4 o(conl'd)
TCL Compounds SB 17:610 SB16:1 3 SBI946 5816:66 SB19:24 SBt9:46 SB19:6* SB20:4* SB20:6.5 10
Benzole Acid — 84J — — ... ._ /2J
Acenaphthytene — — — — — — — 360 47J
Acenaphthene — — — — — 77J —
Fkiofene — — — — — — — 130J
N-NHrosocfiphenyfamine — — — — — — ~
PenlachkNophenol --• — - — — — —
Phenanthrene — 9IJ - - 05J - — 67J -
Anthracene — — — — — •-- — 530
Di n Butytphlhaiate — 56J 47J
Fluoranthene — 64J — — 340J - - 120J
Pyrene ~ 130J 360J - - 130J
Butylbenzylphthalala - - 180J - -
Benzo(a)Anthrac«n« — 310J - 380XJ
Chrysene — - - - 380XJ
Bis(2€lhytiexyQphthaMe 7SJ 56J - 1200 45J 53J 270J
Dta-Octyl Phthatale — 150J - - 230J — -
Benzo(b)FhJormthene — — ••• — — — —
Benzo(kJFhjoranthene — — — — — — _ _ _
TIC Compounds
Total Unknowns - 120300J 9990J 670J 104000J - 34300J -
Total Unknown Hydrocarbons ~ 20700J 2960J — 92000J — — 91300J —
Total Unk. Cycfc Hydrocarbons - - - - -
Alochlor - - - - -
Bromochlorobenzene — — — — — — — — 230J
Bemo Oubiofine — - - - - 2100J -
Dimethyl Heptadecane — — — — — — — — ~
Heptadecane — — — — — — —
Mono(2Ether)HexanedioteAdd 390JN
2.6.10.14-Telramethyl Hexadecane — — — — — — —
2.6.10,15 Tetramelhyl Heptadecane
Notes: Al concentrations in micrognims per Mogram (ug/kg = parts per bWon (ppb)).
No semUotatfe organic compounds were detected In SB14:6^, SB15:6fl. SB16:46. andSB20:66.
— • Compound not detected In this sample, but present in another.
J » Semi-quantitative due to OA/QC criteria outside ol control fcnils, value below Contract Required Ouanlilation Unit (CROL) or compound being • TIC.
X - Identifies coetutinglndistingulshabteteomers.
N • Identified TIC.
-------
TABLE 5
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE SOIL SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOK PRODUCTS COMPANY
SS2I:0-I
TCL Compounds SSI:0-I SS2:0-I SS4.0-I SS5:0-1 SS6:0-I SS7:0-I SS9:0-1 (SS9.-Q-I Pup.)
Vinyl Chloride 2J
Melhylene Chloride --- --- --- 22BJ
Acetone --- --- --- 5J 34J
Carbon Disulfide --- --- --- --- — — — I5J
1,1 Dichloroelhane 3J — — — — — — —
1,2 Dichloroelhene 43 2J IJ --- 4J
2-Butanone — — — — 9J — — —
1,1,1 Trichloroethane II --- — — — — —
Trichloroelhene 130 — 5J — 2J — 7J IOJ
Chlorobenzene --- --- — IJ -— —• —
TIC Compounds
Unknowns — — — — — 99J — —
I
Notes: All concentrations are in micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg = parts per billion (ppb)).
No volatile organic compounds were delected in SS3:0-I, and SS8:0-I.
— " Compounds not present in this sample, but present in another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC criteria outside of control limits, value below Contract Required Quantitation Limit
(CRQL) or compound being a TIC.
B «= Contaminant found in associated blank. Sample value is greater than 10 limes the associated blank value.
-------
TABLE 5 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE SOIL SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCI Compounds
ssiai
SS20:0- I
ISS2:01Dup.>
555:01 556:0-1
4-Methylphenol
2.4 DJmcthylphcnol
Benzole Acid
Naphthalene
2-MethytnaphalefM
Acenaptithene
(Mbenioluran
Fluocene
PentacMorophenol
Anthracene
04 n-B
Fluoranfhene
Pytene
Benio(«)Antt»»cenf
Cnryiene
01 n-Oclyl PMhaMa
Bnuo(b)F(iKX«mhen«
Benzo(k)Fluo(*nthciM
Benzo(*)Pytene
lndeno(1.2.3-cd|Pyrent
Dlbenz((.h)Anthracen«
Ben/o(g.h.l(P«yl»f>e
Acenaphthytenc
71J
450
1301
770
520
430
340J
46J
690XJ
690KJ
aaoi
210J
50J
59J
480
3201
220)
200J
62J
130J
410XJ
410NJ
2IOJ
13UJ
21HJ
14OJ
350J
190J
80.1
360IU
380 XJ
200J
99.1
991
300J
1101
2601
200J
250J
2600
560
60J
3700
2400
14in
1500
86J
2500XJ
2500XJ
1400
490
190J
440
5SJ
84J
49J
9901
7600J
3OOOJ
83OOJ
490OI
8400J
77000
18000
19000XJ
19000XJ
7400
2800
610
7500
150J
22OJ 110000
180J 65000
76J 43000
54J 32000
52XJ 69000X1
52XJ 6900DXJ
33000
16000
5200J
17000
2601
210J
350J
83J
2601
210J
200J
140J
1401
5521:0-1
558:0-1 559:0-1 (559:010up.l
72J
- 3400J
— 360OI
220OI 7300
150J
490J
-------
TABLE 5 '-contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE SOIL SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROI.ATOK PRODUCTS COMPANY
Analvte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
SS 1:0-1
9420
—
II.3J
229
—
25.IJ
1280
33.7
19.6
—
119
—
—
—
—
106
.74
SS2:0- 1
8280
—
—
129
.368
50.9J
823
46.6J
20.3
I3J
59.6
—
—
—
—
135
2.3
SS20:0- 1
(SS2:0-I DUD.)
10300
—
—
152
—
I7.IJ
641
34.3J
15.3
.3IJ
46.9
—
—
—
—
121
1.2
SS3:0- 1
M400J
—
9.5J
288
.478
2.9
28.1
83.8J
29.5
.12
40.4
—
—
—
—
I62J
.73
SS4:0- 1
69IOJ
—
—
25IOJ
.528
26.5J
I69J
I2IOJ
292J
.35
224
—
—
—
15.5
2840J
3.6
SS5:0-1
I6400J
—
247
732J
7.6
—
26.2J
56.6J
57.IJ
.13
52.5
—
—
I6.7J
—
95. IJ
—
SS6:0-I
6760J
—
6.4J
588
.448
78.9J
1220
442J
88.2J
.51
138
—
—
—
—
535J
10.7
SS7:0- 1
8I80J
—
16.3
88.4J
.768
—
I0.6J
64.3J
N IJ
—
—
—
—
—
5.4
44.IJ
—
SS8:0- 1
7550
II. 7J
4.IJ
318
—
622
3940
459J
110
.52
198
—
2.6BJ
—
435
3880
25.5
SS9:0- 1
7840J
25.9J
8.IJ
766J
—
796J
IOIOOJ
IIIOJ
3IIJ
.78J
452J
—
4.6BJ
—
387J
IIIOOJ
40.3J
SS2 1:0-1
(SS9:0-I DUD.)
7440J
18. IJ
697J
830J
7370J
8I9J
286J
1 IJ
520J
—
—
_ —
478J
I2600J
38.5J
Notes: All concentrations are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg= parts per million (ppm)).
— = Analyte not detected in this sample but present in another.
J = Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC requirements.
B = Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL).
-------
TABLE'S contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE SOIL SAMPLES
PESTICIDE/PCB COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
•UROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compound
HeptachlorEpoxide
Arochlor 1248
Arochlor 1254
SS20:0-1
S2:0-1 (SS2:0-I DUD.) SS3:0- i SS4:0- i SS5:0-1 SS6:0-1
SS2I:0-I
57:0-1 SS8:0-I SS9:0-I (SS9:0-I Pup.)
15
540
3700C 5300C 320 I1000C
1000
1000
3300C I4000C 8900C
Notes: All concentrations are in micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg = parts per billion (ppb)).
No pesticide/PCB compounds were detected in SS 1:0-1.
— = Compound not present in this sample, but present in another.
C - Value confirmed by GC/MS analysis.
-------
TABLE 6
Compound
Trichloroelhenc
Tdrachlofodhene
l.t.Dichloroethane
1.1,1 Trichloroelhan*
1-1.2Dlchloroe1hene
Trichtorofluoromelhane
Methytene Chloride
1 .2 Dtchtorobetuene
Compound
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroelhene
1,1 Dlchlor oelhane
1.1.1 Trichloroelhane
1-1.2-CNchloroethene
Trichtorofluofomelhane
Melhytene Chloride
1.2-Dtchterobenzene
TABLE 6-11
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
SOIL SAMPLES
I9R6 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
SB 1525
124 50.8 23 5 J 289 25.4 J
150 — 634
858
- - 13.5 J 185 15.0 J
9.22 J 13 0 J
SB 17 7.5 SB 18 2.5 SB 18 5 SB 19 5 SB 20 5
7.13 156 16.9 149 7.59
253 397 J 118 65.1 7.57 83.9 139 118
20.5 -- 20.2 J — 14.6 - - 8.04
_ ... ... 5.75
SB 22 5 SB 23 7.5
SB 22 5 PUP) SB 22 7.5 SB 23 7.5 (DUP) SB 24 2.5 SB 24 7.5 SB 25 2 5
28.9 189 236 - - 112 27.5 4.92
18.5
11.2
19.8
24.7
22.7
20.7
25.7
226
10.4
216
150
-------
TABLE 6
TABLE 6-11 (conl'il)
SB252.5 SB277.5 SB 31-7
Compound (PUP) SB 26 2.5 SB 26 7.5 SB 277.5 PUP) SB 29 10 SB 31 7 (PUP) Q 9 2.5 D95 D97.5
Trlchloroelhene 5.14 121 346 585 424 569 507 7.53 47.7 06.2 44.4
Tetrachloroclhcne — 7.97 12.7 17.0 . ... see 7.31
1,1 Dlchloroelhane — .... . ... ... ... ... _
1.1.1-Trichloroetham 26.9 48.1 122 18.1 20.4 ... _ 20.8
11.2Dlchloroelhene — — — — - — — ... 22.2
Trichtorofluoromethane 18.4 29.0 — 15.3 13.1 — - — _. _
Mdhytene Chloride - 15.8
l.2Dtchlorobcnzene — — — — — — — 14.3
Notes: All concentrations are In parts per bWon(ppb)
— Compound not detected In this sample, but present In another.
J • Semi quantitative value due to QA/QC data vaRdalion requlremenls.
-------
TABLE 7
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS, PESTICIDES/PCBs
AND TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
1990 REMEDIATION INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL - VOC SW-OWS SED-OWS SB26' SB27:0-4 SB:28:2-4
Acetone 91J 6800J —
Chloroform 0.6J ~ —
Toluene — — — 2J —
Chlorobenzene — — — U
TIC Volatiles
Unknown Compounds 65J —
Unknown Hydrocarbons 120J 50000J
Decane — 24000JN
Undecane 25JN
Undecane and Unknown — 13000J
Dichlorobenzene and — 15000J
Unknown
Ethylmethylbenzene ™ 6200J
Trimethvlbenzene — 8800J
TCL Pesticide/PCB
Delta-BHC — — — 130
Total Petroleum 1100 180000 NA 3000 NA
Hydrocarbons
Notes: All volatile and pesticide concentrations are in micrograms per kilogram
(ug/kg) except SW-OWS which is in micrograms per liter (ug/1). Both
units are equivalent to parts per billion (ppb). TPH concentrations are
milligrams per liter (mg/1) for SW-OWS and milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg) for SED-OWS and SB27:0-4. Both units are equivalent to parts
per million (ppm).
= Compound not present in this sample but detected in another.
J = Estimated value due to QA/QC criteria outside of control limits, value
below Contract Required Quantitation Limit (CRQL), or compound being
a TIC.
N = Identified TIC.
NA = Not analyzed for in this sample.
" = Sample from SB26 was collected at a depth of 5.5 to 7.5 feet.
9-55
-------
TABLE 7
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compounds
SB//.I) 4 bU2B:?4
?
On
o\
Phenol
2-Mcthytphenol
4-Methylphenol
Nitrobenzene
2.4 CHmethylphenol
Naphthalene
2-Methylnapthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzoturon
Dtethytphthalate
Fluor ene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluor anthene
Pyrene
Benzo(a)Anthracene
Chrysene
Bls(2-Ethy1he>ry1)phthalate
Benzo(b)Fhjoranthene
Benzo(k)Fluoranthene
Benzo(a)Pyrene
lndeno(1 ,2.3-cd) Pyrene
Dlbenzo(a.h)Anthracene
Benzo(g.h.l)Peryfene
!
—
15J
29J
-.
22J
48J
21J
32J
--
60XJ
60XJ
18J
—
—
220J
400J
10OOJ
380J
180J
—
650J
3100J
3100J
2300J
2400J
...
UOOJ
3400J
34OOJ
130OJ
B90J
400J
1000J
...
71J
—
55J
—
79J
69J
SOJ
...
40J
—
—
...
390.1
230.1
550.1
SbHJ
IHUtIO
64(10
noo.i
^5000
151100
200HO
IWJJKXI
31000
320000
210000
160000
13'WOO
3JI«IIX)XJ
330WIOXJ
130000
29000
12000
28000
1IC Compounds
Total Unknowns
Total Unknown Hydrocarbons
Total Unknown PAH
Tola) Unknown Alcohol
Benzofluoranthune
Benzonapthoturan
Dlmethylphenanlhrcne
Dodecanamlde.N.N-Bls(2-Hydro)
Heptadecane
Hexadecane
Henadecanolc Acid
Methyl Chrysene
Tetradccanolc Acid
sw-ows
28300J
48000J
—
2BOOJ
...
...
SEDOWS SB26
71000J 4900J
96200J 160J
_
._
._ _.
SB27.0-4
302000J
B6000J
344000J
-.
soono.i
5600IIJ
36000J
SB2B:2-4
3120J
...
...
480JN -
520JN
— 5000OJ
360JN -
370JN
370JN
Notes: SW-OWS concentrations In mlcrograms per Uter (ug/l - parts |n.-i tulllon (ppb)). AH other concentrations In mlcrograms per kilogram (ug/kg - parts per bIDon (ppb)).
J - Seml-quantttatlve due to QA/OC crtterla outside ol control llmlis. value below Contract Required QuantHallon Umtt (CRQL). or compound being a TIC.
N - Identified TIC.
X - Identifies coelutlng Indistinguishable Isomers.
— - Compound not deluded In this sample, but present In unotliu
-------
TABLE 7 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Analvte
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel '
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
sw-ows
933J
165BJ
11.5J
16.2J
67. U
51.9J
269J
SED-OWS SB26
SB27:0-4 SB28:2-4
9700
7.7J
256
44.0J
153J
425
158J
.65
73.5
26.5
767
2.7J
13000J
5.0J
98.8J
.60B
18.5J
23.5J
11.4J
24J
22.8
75.1J
10900J
10.9J
319J
.6 IB
41.4
45.1J
502J
583
.43J
129
8.4
675J
4.3
13600J
3.4J
156J
.67B
37.7J
41.4J
123J
.25J
31.0
78.0J
Notes: All concentrations, except for SW-OWS, are in milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg = parts per million (ppm)). Units for SW-OWS are micrograms per
liter (ug/1 = pans per billion (ppb)).
= Analvte not detected in this sample but present in another.
J = Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC requirements.
B = Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract
Required Detection Limit (CRDL).
9-57
-------
TABLE 8
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
UNNAMED DRAINAGE WAY SEDIMENT SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
I'UKOLATOK PRODUCTS COMPANY
TS2I:01 TS20:01
TO.Compound TS1:2-3 TS2:0 1 TS2:23 TS*01 (TS*0-t Pup) TS6.01 TS7:01 (TS7:0-t Oup\ TS9:01
2-Butanone — — - — — — — 1J
TffcMoroelhene 3J 2J 8 5J 6J 6 3J 7J 3J
Notes: • Al concentrations In mlcrogrwns per Mogram (tig/kg « parts per bMHon (ppb)).
No votalle organic compounds were delected In TS1.D-1. TS1:S4. TS2:Sfl, TS3:0 I, TS323. TS3:56, TS4:23. TS4:54,
TS5:(H. TS5:2-3. TS5:5«. TS6:2-3. TS6:54J. TS8:01.
J » Seml^juanlH«llve due to concentration betow Contract Required QuanlitatlonLimW (CRQL)
— • Compound not detected In this sample, but present hi another.
-------
VALID ANALV'CAL KfcSULIS
UNNAMED DRAINAGE V SEDIMENT SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE Ofc^ANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PtIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCI Compounds TS1:0-1 TSI:2 3 IS2O I
Phenol —
4-Mcthylphcnol
Nitrobenzene —
Benzole Acid — B7J
Naplithalene 110J 33W 1»U
2-Mcttiylnaphthalene 130J 540 330J
Acenaphthylene — 76J 120J
Acenaplilhen« — 5IJ !ft.l
Dtbcnznluan - UilU IWI
Fluorene — 6SJ I4UJ
PentacMorophenol
Ptienanthrene 54OJ 560 liMO
Anthracene 140J 76J 170J
CH n Butytphthalate — 140J
Fluocamhene 890 090 IbOtl
Pyrene 430J 570 '.fM
Benzo(a)Anthracene 380J 530 1WIO
Ctwysene 420J 4BO 000
Bls(2-Ethytieifyl)phttiaMe — 6UJ
Dl-n-Octyl PMhatate
Benzo(b)Fkmrmlhene 690XJ 13OOXJ 13OUXJ
Benzo(k)Fkior«nthcne 690XJ 1300XJ 13UOXJ
Benzo(a)Pyfene 380J 440J U)0
lndeno(1.2.3-cd)Pytene 120J 13OJ 300J
Olbenzo(a.h)Anthraceiw — 62J
Benzo(g.n.l)Perylefie 11OJ 16OJ 470
1.2.4-TMchtorobeniene
4-CNoro-3-Memylphenol
TIC Compounds
Benxeneam>rve.HydtochtofMe —
BenzoFhiorene — —
BenzoPyrene J10J —
Oecane
4 Methyl Octane
Total PCS — 3SOOJ
Total Unknown AMehyde 4900J
Total Unknown Hydrocarbon 4570J
Total Unknown Sub.Hydrocarbon S400J
Total Unknown PAH
Total Unknowns 1840J 36760J BUGUOJ
TABLE 8 contd.
TS?:?3 TS?:56
470J
aoj
68J
110J
99J
2001
110J
130J
140J
I90JXJ
190JXJ
1OOJ
56J
51J
TSJ:I) I
240.1
3M)J
670
/2.I
6/.I
A»t.l
7JJ
670
100J
6M
StiO
6110
B10
480
10OOXJ
1000IU
32OJ
190J
56.1
300J
TS21:01
TS4:Ot
7SOJ
330J
490
69J
t7(U
I70J
140J
1500
210J
66J
2500
1700
1100
1100
100J
1700KJ
1700XJ
77O
310J
98J
380J
TS4:?3
360J
120J
1301
260J
16OJ
300J
2BOJ
2BOJ
330J
460XJ
460XJ
300J
200J
190J
82J
46J
930JN
3690J
S20J
14430J
30600J
i7onj
83tiOOJ
B700J
14140J
20370J
263200J
200JN
3030.1
2250J
Notes: At concentrations tn mtcrograms per klogram (ug/kg - |ioili per bHlon (ppb)).
No seml-votatte organic compounds were detectedm IS 1:5-6. TS3:2-3. TS3:5-6. TS5:5«.
J > Semt-quanMatlvc due to QAAX criteria outside of control ImRs. value below Contract Required Quanlrlatlon I Inilt (Cl Wl) or compound being a TIC.
N - Identified TIC.
X - Identities coekitlng InrJstlnguishiitalc Isomrrs
Compound not delected In this sample, but prudent In unullwr.
-------
TABLE 8 (confd)
TCL Compounds TS4:S-6 TSVO-t
Ptwool ••• •*•
4 M<-thflph<-nol
Nitrobenzene
Benzole Acid
Naphthalene — 45J
? Mrthylnephthalene — 80J
Acenaphthytene — 130J
Acenaphthene —
Dtoenzoruran — S1J
Fkioiene — 130J
PenlBchlorophenol —
Pherantlicne «3J 380.1
Anthracene — 92J
DI-n-Butylphthalute
Fhjoranthene 75 J 310J
Pyrene SSJ 2»J
Benzo(a)Anlhracene 54J 2SOJ
Chrysene 42J 1MJ
Bls(2 Ethyt>e«y1)pt>thatate — 53J
Ol-nOctyl Pnthalale
B«uo(b)Fluorannwnc . B8XJ 29UXJ
Bcnto|li)Fluoranth«n< MXJ 290XJ
Benzo(a)Pyien« S2J ISO!
lndeno<1.?.3-cd)Pyrene — SflJ
O*>«nzo(a.h)Ann»acefw
Benzo(g.h.l)PctylefW — 6?J
1.2.4 Trfchlorobefuene
4<:Hoco-3-Me«hylphenol
TIC Compounds
Bctuenramlne. Hydroehtorlde
BefUoFkiorcne — 23OI
BcnxoPyicnc •*• *~*
Oecan*
4 Methyl Oclune
Total PCB —
Total Unknown Aldehyde
Total Unknown Hydrocarbon
Total Unknown Sub.Hydrocarbon
Tola! Unknown* TOO! S490J
TS6:0 t
1.10J
TS6:5€
B4J
I40J
IIWJ
100J
74J
IdilXJ
teoxj
en
S9J
59J
120J
I3IU
94J
94J
67J
12IIXJ
120XJ
SSJ
TS7:0-1
210J
230J
440J
550J
330J
290J
340J
4300
S70J
4SJ
42J
strnu
3900J
5100J
BHOJ
'440J
t^UOXJ
12000XJ
560OJ
laooj
830J
1BOOJ
TSTttOI
fTS7:0-1 Oup 1
100J
320J
440J
460J
560J
110J
470J
310J
4501
370J
6600
770J
1SOOO
11000
8000
7000
12008
KXinoxj
18000KI
6200
4ono
800J
3900
TS001
640J
5501
6901
B40J
S40J
60OJ
440J
8300
950J
3«U
20000
13000J
11000
11000
6OOJ
jnoooxj
30000KJ
11OOO
6OOO
1SOOJ
6300
TS9:0-1
290J
180J
47UJ
690J
140J
350J
330J
320.1
3900
690J
11000
67UO
4400
5500
440J
1/UOOXJ
17000XJ
6700
4100
1000.1
4900
160.1
800J
150JN
1310J
3600J
S670J
2070J
1020J
76000J
389000J
3866001
111200J
394300J
52800J
168100J
Notes: Al concentratlom In mtciogianra per Mogtam (ug/hg - parts rx-i taHon - |ppb|).
No wml-votalie organic compound> wcra delected kt TS1:S-6. TS3:2-J. TS3:5-6.
J - Seml-quantllatlve due to OA/QC crRerki oulsMe of control Imfls. value below Contracl Required Quantllallon Urn* (CROL) or compound being • TIC.
N - Identified TIC
X - Identifies coekitlng Indistinguishable Isomers.
• Compound not delected In this sample, but present In another.
B - Contaminant round In associated blank. Sample value Is greulor lluii to limes the assoculed blank value.
-------
TABLES contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
UNNAMED DRAINAGE WAY SEDIMENT SAMPLES
PESTICIDE/PCB COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIKOI.ATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compound
HeptachkxEpoxkfe
DieWrin
Arochlor1260
Arochlot 1254
TS21:01 TS20:01
TS1:01 TS1:23 TS2:0 1 TS2:2 3 TS3:01 TS4:0 t fTS4:0 1 Pup) TS5:01 TS6:01 TS7:0 1 (TS701 Pup)
31
39
240
570
3400C 1500C 1100C 6800C 3000C
210
1200C
570
Notes: Al concentrations In mkrograms per kilogram (ug/Kg > parts per bWon (ppb))
No pestWde/PCB compounds were detected In TS1:S8. TS2:5fl. TS323. TS3:56. TS423.
TS4:5<. TS5:2 3. TS5:56. TS6:23. TS6:56. TS8:0-t. TS8:0 1.
C - Value confirmed by GC/MS analysis.
— m Compound not detected In this sample, but present hi another.
-------
TABLE 8 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
UNNAMED DRAINAGE WAY SEDIMENT SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUKOLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Anatyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
BeryWum
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Tin
Zinc
Cyanide
TS1:01
15400J
—
—
510
.658
96J
68.4
146J
61 .5 J
.44
38.7
_
21 7 J
.82
TS1:2-3
20000J
._
6.3J
327
.768
6.7J
56.1
72.4J
45.8J
2.3
34.9
—
160J
16.7
TS1:5-6
12100J
...
92J
126
.408
...
18.5
—
132
.12
23.0
—
58 3 J
-
TS2:01
10100J
...
15.7
260J
.658
44.8J
246J
181J
153J
.68
41.8
77
443J
.87
TS2:23
15200J
-
120
637J
958
59. U
208J
217J
126J
.60
599
5.2B
386J
13
TS2:56
14800J
...
2.4
127J
BOB
1.5J
22.0J
4.9BJ
43.9J
—
20.9
—
60 7 J
—
TS3:01
14600
...
455
.638
49.4J
373
338
199J
99J
730
5.18
964
3.7
TS3:23
21 BOO J
—
...
253
1.0B
_.
27.8
—
16.0
—
21.4
—
102J
—
TS3:5<
15300
...
23 OJ
174
.408
...
22.3
—
14.0
—
21.5
—
65.1
—
TS4:01
8620
—
—
B30J
.448
55 6J
150J
542
109J
.57J
96 5J
7.7
621J
198
TS2t:01
(TS4:0 1 Dup)
10100
10.6BJ
._
194J
.308
372J
3920J
814
108J
.97J
1510J
— .
1090J
49.5
Notes: Al concentrations are In mWgrams per kftogram (mg/kg « parts per mMon (ppm)).
— • Analyte not detected In this sample but present in another.
J > Semi-quantitative due to QA/OC requirements.
B - Value Is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL). bill below Contract Required Detection UmH (CRDL).
-------
TABLE 8 (conf'd)
Analyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
BeryMhim
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Tm
Zinc
Cyanide
TS4:23
16400
...
95J
254
.698
81. 5J
67.1
79.9
17.3
—
60.1
—
96.7
1.1
TS4:5«
16100
—
50J
230
668
22.4J
30.0
34.2
14.1
—
355
6.0B
65.0
—
TS5:01
20600J
—
...
243
.698
52.6J
394
104J
36.9J
.21
63.9
—
126J
61.0
TS5:23
25100J
29^
948
2.7J
409
...
166
.40
30.9
...
11IJ
74
TS5:5^
14000J
_.
6.6J
166
.308
...
230
—
110
—
21.6
—
58.4J
—
TS6:0 1
21100J
...
257
718
47J
32.7
—
25.6
.29
30.3
—
113J
2.2
TS6:23
22100J
...
...
334
.658
16.6J
406
333
182
.19
36.4
._
132J
1.5
TS6:5<
14400
—
179
.468
—
166
—
12.6
.11J
24.1
_
61.2
—
TS20.01
TS7:01 (TS7:0 1 Dupl
6300J 10500J
60J
tea
.328
25.9J
157
269J
143J
62J
57.0
85
619J
1.6
5.5
224J
.628
36.3J
299J
349J
190J
.68
60.2
13.1
SOU
1.2
Al concentrations are hi mHgrwns per Mogrwn (mg/kg = parts per mWon (pom)).
Anatyte not detected hi tnto sample but present hi another.
Semi-quantitative due to QA/QC requirements.
Value Is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL). but below Contract Required Detection LhnH (CRDL).
-------
TABLE 9
PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS ANALYTICAL RESULTS
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
4L^_^« IHtsnA *.---- ^B 4^feMt *44h»»4M^rih *- ._ 4^^hH _M^M^^H .. - — _ .
VMHE WK^H JWV <•• IW MTgDEC HHP9I e. iwl NT9DBC *ftM TO, «!•»
Lun4Ui. Arxt Awl «ml «ra>a Ami *-« >Lt»s» laui M.Dh* a am NJXm an *m» TV - AM) Hmvr- Arv4 Arm!
Moai aom MBI SMS^ ^m jam
M.3 auMUM-K MM M» NMNMNMNMMMNMNMNM-- - J MM - - — - -
1.1.1-TAMonMMM NMNM NMNMMMNMMMNMMMN/III1— » — MM MM — — MM I
TiMoroMM—i NMNM MMMMMMMMMMNMNMNMM9 MOMNMMM—0 — MM —
NMNM MMMMMMMMNMNMNMWAMMMM 0.01 — MM MM 190 — MM —
MM NM MM NM MMNMNMNMMMNM — — — — MM N/A JO — MM —
PCI-1141 MMNM NMNMN/AMMNMWANMIW-- - - H,* tvt - J»000 MM -
40 440 HO « » MO U9 • - — — - - - _ « » NM - -
4 a i 4 m ixa aoo re O.IM ajnr tarn ojno OJOT ooa jt 130000 a MM - -
i» 1400 ion S40 MOO m f4o no aiw — 0040 aoos « ojoot 400 1*000 w MM 14 -
140 SB 110 MO 9BO JJOD OB 940 O.HJ — OJ40 «_• 0.14 — MOO 11000 B NM 0.040 OJB
140 1JO 109 1«0 MO 1«0» 1*0 BO - — - U* — — -DO -10» - MM OMO -
MM JJ 40 wo 10B •« t7 ioojj*i»---- _____ MM
m 190 • aoo ao sot 900 ao OJT turn u OJTS OJBO bon a 19001 " MM - 0.1
NMNM MMMMMMNMMMMMNMMM- ttffN) Ojn» — NM NM NM NM NM X,
uminnmm
«if«t«u t
6-23
POOR QUALITY
ORIGINAL
-------
TABLE 9
PREVIOUS INVESTTGATTONS ANALYTICAL RESULTS
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
** Sol
« JSH1 9«1
«n»f
ha
I-M Ok
1.1.1-Ti*
TrtoMW
tat
HIH MM
MM N/»
MM MM
MM NM
«n>« N.OMI SAMl MOM COkM H
M M. SMI Wxv «MV *M
sal asei ast B 1M1
OL. ta. ac
001
irnatc JHO 10.1*11
nmt tntia—
M Sot
ii-11-oj
joo
no
30
10
(el
fi-in-04
PC»-1J«»
CfMW
no n»
140 m
M »
* »
>• ISO
iao BOB ra am amr aa»
tioo MO no an« — awo
WO MO VO aM9 — 03M
— — N U »
— — M - -
OJJOT OJODS n IJOMO a
i* OJODO 4io ixa» n
aoi
•ear
-n» -no -
aw - OJT
•oo -«o n
O.K - OJ4
MA 14
m» a«o
air aaa
• m>nM>K»Mi m««
•MtrMCfM Bimn.
•va-c
6-23
POOR QUALITY
-------
If,
TCL Compounds
1,1-Dichloroelhane
cis-1,2-Dichloroelhene
Trichloroethene
Chloroform
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Chloromethane
Acetone
Carbon Disulfide
TIC Compounds
Unknown Compounds
Unknown Hydrocarbons
I.OJ
TABIJL 10
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE WATER SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCrS COMPANY
SW-I SW-2
SW-IO
(SW-2 Pup.)
0.2J
—
0.03J
—
6J
0.7J
IIJ
0.08J
5J
6J
0.6J
10
0.07J
4
4
SW-3
26J
24J
34UJ
O.IJ
2.2J
7.9J
SW-4
SW-5 SW-6 SW-7
5J
3J
O.SJ
0.4J
5J
2J
6J
O.IJ
I.SJ
O.SJ
4J
0.9J
Notes: All concentrations are in micrograms per liter (ug/l = parts per billion (ppb)).
Or the compounds detected, only TCE has a guidance value (I Ippb) Tor Class C waters as presented in NYSDEC Water Quality
Standards, Parts 700-705, effective September I, 1991.
— - Compound not present in this sample but present in another.
J - Semi-quantitative due to concentration below Contract Required Quanlitation Limit (CRQL), data validation requirements or
compound being a TIC.
D = Contaminant found in associated blank Sumple value is greater than 10 limes the associated blank value.
-------
TABLE 10 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE WATER SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PIIROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
SWIO
TCLCompounds SW I SW2 (SW2 Dupl SW3 SW 4 SW5 SW< SW7
Ms (2 ElhylhexyQphthalale - - 5J --- - BJ 4J
Benzole Acid - - 3J
1.2Dichlorobenzene - - - 2J 2J
TIC Compounds
Dfcnethylheptadecane - - 52J - 19BJ -
Tetramelhytpenladecane — — — 48J ... _ _ _
Trimelhyldodecane — — — — — — 38J 72J
Unknowns - - - 62J - - 192J 990J
Unknown Hydrocarbons - - 462J - - 490J 1570J
Unknown Cycle Hydrocarbons — •-• — — — — 28J —
NOTES: Al concentration are In mtooo/ams per liter (ug/l • parts per bMon (ppb)).
Ol the compounds delected, only 1,2-Otahtof obenzene has a standard (5.0 ppb) tor Class C waters as presented In NYSOEC Water Oualty Standards. Parts
700-705, eftecltve September t. 199t.
> Compound not present In this sample but present hi another.
J • Semi-quantitative due to concentration below Contract Required OuanlHalion Limit (CRQL), data validation requirements or compound being a TIC.
-------
TABLE 10
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SURFACE WATER SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Analvte
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
C -ide
NYS
sws
100
1901
NS
5
16
22
110
2185
30
S.22
SW-1
174B
-—
81.8B
.—
_
—
2.7BJ
—
~
_
SW-2
127B
...
149B
._
._
_
_.
—
18.6BJ
_
SW-10
(SW-2 Duo.1
134B
...
L50B
_
_
._
—
._.
17.9BJ
_
SW-3
766
_
1100
5.4
11.6
36.7J
15.7J
~
153
20 SB
SW-4
133B
...
45.8B
—
_
_
_
—
302
413
SW-5
379
3.0B
81.4B
—
...
27.0J
9.9
.~
171
._
SW-6
194BJ
•••
163BJ
77.8J
1290J
29.0J
11JJ
—
335J
...
SW-7
548J
—
24QI
76.61
219QJ
70.8J
28.1J
6121
894J
12.7
Notes:
NYS SWS
NS
1
J
B
All concentrations are in micrograms per liter (ug/1 = parts per billion (ppb)).
New York State Surface Water Standard for Class C waters as presented in NYSDEC Water Quality
Standards, Parts 700-705, effective September 1,1991, based on a reported average hardness of 125 ppm.
No standard.
Dissolved form.
As free cyanide.
Analyte not present in this sample but present in another.
Estimated value due to QA/QC requirements.
Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract Required Detection Limit
(CRDL).
-------
TABLE 11
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
TCL Compounds
Mctnylcnc CWocWtj
1.1-DlcNoroethane
crs-1.2-OtcNoroethene
TrfcNoroetherw
1.1-Olchloroethena
Chloroform
1.1.1-TrlchkHoethane
Vinyl CNorlde
1 .2 -Otchlor oethana
TrlcrMoronuui uinetnana
Isopropyfbenrene
tf vns • i ,2 *OICiWOf octtMfM
CMorotncthsM
Acetone
NYS
OW5
9
9
9
9
9
7
9
2
9
9
9
9
9
90
MWU-2
MWD 20
(MWD 1 dup 1 MWD-2 MWO-3 MWD 4 MWD-9 MWO6 MWD-7 MWD* MWD-9 MWD-10 MWD 11 MWD-1
41J
140J
2J
41
190J
2J
0.2J
13J
19J
0.4J
0.4J
03J
0.4J
0.2J
0.7J
0.3J
19J
10J
0.3J
6J
1J
0.4J
0.2J
U
1601
64J
1J
0.08J
0.4J
33J
2J
7J
40J
0.1J
0.1J
0.3J
0.8J
9
0.09J
0.9J
0.8J
23J
1J
0.1J
OBJ
O.JJ
•J
BBJ
TK Compountfi
Unknown Compounds NS
Unknown Hydrocartiont NS
Heune NS
2BJ
0.9J
0.7J
SOJ
J.4J
0.9J
2.0JN
Notes:
NYS QWS
NS
J
B
N
Al concentrations are ki mfcrograms per tier (ug/l - parts per Mon (ppb)).
New York State Oroundwater Standard as presented In NYSOEC Water OuaDtr Standards. Parts 700-705. effective September 1.1991.
No standard.
Compound not present ki Ms sample, but present ki another.
Seml-quantllatlve due to concentration below Contract Required Ouantltatlon UmN (CROL). data validation requkements or compound being a TIC.
Contaminant found ki associated blank. Sample value Is greater than 10 times Hie associated blank value.
Identified TIC.
ttouriuwaler samples were oJeUed during Ha 1990 M usteq • WaTerra kMrtM pmnp tjatitsOim ol a »ka>fc»s ateel etiCT* wJve and tetton lubkig. UStFA ftetfon • H4»aaai*j«>
-------
TABLE 11 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
I'UROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
MWD 20
TCL Compounds MWU-2 MWD t (MWD 1 Dm 1 MWO 2 MWD 3 MWD-4 MWD i MWD-6 MWO7 MWD 8 MWD 9 MWD-10 MWD-11 MWD-12 MWD-13
bis (2-EthytieKyl)phttialate - - — 4J - - - - — - — -
Benzole Acid ••• — • •• — . ••• — — — 3J
2.5-Cyclohexadlcne-1.4-Dlone — — ••• - — 8OJN ••• • — — — --- --
Unknown Oxygenated Afcane ••• — --- • •- — — ••• — — — 10J
1.2 Berwtncdtol.J Fkjoro - - — - - - - - 16JN - -
Total Unknowns - 74J - 172J - - - - 7U 116J - 20J 32J
NO1ES: Al concentrations are ki mlerogranis pe> Mogram (itg/kg - parts pv> bMon (ppb))
O> tha compounds delected, orty bta<2-Etn|fliei)i«)pMhalate has a standard (SO ppb) as presented In NYSDEC Wdler Quatty Standards. Part* 700-705. effective September 1.1991.
- Compound not present In IMs sample but present ki another.
J • Semi quantitative due to concentration below CIXH or data validation requirements.
-------
TABLE 11 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
CKOUNDWATEK SAMPLES
METALS AND CYANIDE
1990 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLA TOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Analvte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Notes:
NYS GWS
NS
•*
J
B
NA
F
NYS
GWS
NS
3*
25
1000
3*
10
50
200
25
2
100*
50
300
100
Allc(
- New
• Nost
fllll/fl
» OUIQ
- Tents
B Anal;
- Semi
- Valu<
« Anal]
= Fillei
MWU-2 MWD-I MWD-IF
6360
NOB
18.1
3I.2J
10 IJ
104
29800J
9.2B
778
I.6B
249
I52J
36.2J
.25
74.1
26IJ
36.7
12511
NA
75.41)
NA
334J
I5.6B
7.2B
NA
MWD-20
(MWD-I Dun.)
22500
10.2
917
I.2B
296
I54J
40.2J
71.7
222J
32.8
MWD-20F
(MWD-IF Dun.)
I37B
NA
2.2B
76.0B
NA
_--
43.3J
I7.2B
—
—
—
10 IB
NA
MWD-2
29900
—
7.3B
491
• LIB
—
54.0
168
—
.26
88.4
413
—
MWD-3
21100
—
6.5B
547
I.2B
11.3
52.4
148
46.8J
—
62.3
264
36.6
MWD-4
4570
—
3.41)
I7IB
—
35.2
202
73.7J
8.7J
86.7
66. IJ
99.4
MWD-4F
I860
—
—
56.3B
—
—
I45J
9.5
—
—
—
5.6B
NA
MWD-
39400
40. IB
300
679
I.5B
55.8
55.0
I200J
IIIJ
5.6
79.1
615
—
All concentrations in micrograms per liter (ug/l ** parts per billion (ppb)).
New York State Groundwater Standard as presented in NYSDEC Water Quality Standards, Parts 700-705. effective September I, 1991.
No standard.
Guidance value.
Tentatively proposed USEPA MCL
Analyte not present in this sample but present in another.
Semi-quantitative value due to QA/QC requirements.
Value is above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL), but below Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL).
Analyle not analyzed for in this sample.
-------
TABLE 11 (coql'd)
Analvte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Notes:
NYSGWS -
NS
• „
** m
.
J
B
NA
F
NYS
GWS MWD-6
NS 9080
3*
25 3.9B
1000 294
3*
10
50 20.5
200 3I.8J
25 50. IJ
2
100**
50
300 124
100
MWD-7 MWD-8
43300 8<>00
— —
7.IB 3.711
739 517
1.80
6.9
92.8 17.2
274 34.IJ
58.2J 27.8J
.25
117
— —
698 147
— —
All concentrations in micrograms per liter (ug/l •
MWD-9
29600
—
20.4
672
1.411
10.5
960
456
45.8J
.77
338
10.2
254
31.9
> parts per
MWD-IO
6380
—
5.IB
II8B
—
—
27.6
30.9J
6.2J
—
64.1
—
65.0J
—
MWD-
9710
6.8B
237
—
—
47.2
68.7J
I5.3J
—
—
—
106
—
II MWD-IIFMWD-12
I3IB
NA
5.111
II3B
NA
—
_._
9.IB
—
—
—
—
6.3B
NA
95500J
4S.8BJ
—
9IIJ
4.2BJ
—
3I8J
337J
I46J
.25J
290J
...
II80J
—
MWD-13 MWRB-I
4 5 500 J 10211
43.5BJ
6.7BJ
6I3J
I.9BJ
... —
I540J
353J
56.8 J
___ —
602 J
— —
792J I0.7BJ
—
billion (ppb)).
New York State Groundwater Standard as presented in NYSDEC Water Quality
No standard.
Guidance value.
Standards.
Parts 700-705,
effective September 1. 1991
Tentatively proposed USEPA MCL
Analyle not present in this
sample but present in
another.
Semi-quantitative value due to QA/QC requirements.
Value is above Instrument
Detection Limit (IDL)
, but below Contract
Required
Detection
Limit (CRDL).
Analyte not analyzed for in this sample.
Filtered sample.
-------
TABLE 11 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
GRO1INDWATER SAMPLES
1986 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Compound
. ,1-Dichloroethene
I-1,2-Dichloroethene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Chlorobenzene
Vinyl Chloride
Trichlorofluoromelhane
1,1-Dichloroethane
Melhylene Chloride
Chloroform
Total Xylenes
D-6 D-7 P-8
D-8 D-ll
(PUP) D-9 D-ll (PUP) D-12 D-i:
PW-3 FT
J.J — - ---
31 176 — - 11.5 2.96 189 25.4 23.4 — - 14 Q 12
7 S J Aft S .- - - - - --
140 438 7.3 Q 10.0 13.9 66.5 51.3 55.1 34
inj
MO -- 1 1 1 IS O 99
2 1 J
"
MR
140 8.85
I
-------
TABLE 11 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS COMPOUNDS,
PESTICIDES AND PCBs
GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
1986 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
MWD-11
Compound MWD-1 MWD-9 MWD-11 (PUP) MWD-12
Pemachlorophenol 300 — — — —
Bis(2-ethylhexyi)phthalate 7Q 5 3 4 3
4,4'-DDT ' — — — 0.02
Methoxychlor 3.0 — — ~ --
NOTES: All concentrations are in parts per billion (ppb).
— = Compound not detected in this sample but present in another.
Q = Qualitative due to QA/QC data validation requirements.
6-43
-------
TABLE 11 contd.
VALID ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOTAL AND DISSOLVED METALS AND CYANIDE
GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
1986 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
PUROLATOK PRODUCTS COMPANY
MWD-1 MWD-1 MWD 3 MWD 3 MWD 4 MWD 4 MWD 9 MWD 9 MWD 10 MWD-IO MWD II MWD-11 MWD-11D
Analyle Total Fit. Total F«. Total FIB. Total Fit Total FHt. Total F«. Total
MWD 11D
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide
NOTES:
NA
J
42
12 J
280
115
50
65
165 J -
10 J
41
135
53
0.2
0.1
208 J -
51J
NA
24
NA
5J
7
119
68
14
0.1
61
75 J
100
67
NA
10 J
50
13/
18
0.2
68
130 J
27
11
29
Al concentrations are hi parts per bWon (ppb).
D-110 Is duplicate sample of 0-11.
Anaryte nol detected In this sample, but present hi another.
Anaryte nol analyzed for in this sample.
Semi-quantitative value due to QA/QC data validation requirements.
16 J
64 -
86
28
0.1
109 -
251 J -
NA
9 J
62
125
21
02
78
162 J
21
O.t
NA
12 J
78
157
69
0.1
218 J
MWD 12 MWD 12 MWU-2 MWU2
Total f». Total FMt
41 J
135
193
63
201
566J
NA
NA
18 J
6
106
355
17
218
648 J
NA
NA
-------
TABLE 12
SOM4AMT STATISTICS ro* FACET BITS. BT CHEHICAL AMD NBDIOM/AKBA
Hum. Hum. Lov««t Highest Oao«. 95 Pet. Hln. Max.
TIM* 8e*ple« Detected Detected Mean Opp. Conf. Detect. Detect.
Anelyte Detected Anelyted Cone. Cone. Cone. Limit Limit Limit
Vinyl Chloride
Hethylene chloride
1. 1-Dlchloroethehe
1 . 1-Dlchloroethene
cle-1.3-Dlcbloroethene 1
Chloroform
1.2-Dlchloroetbue
1. 1. 1-Trlchloroetnene
Trlchloroetbene
Bthylbenzene
TrlchloroCluoroMthejM
tr«na-l. 2-Dlchloro«tb«n«
I Bopropy lb«nt«n«
••nzolc Acid
bla( 2-Bthylb«xyl|phthalat«
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
11
13
.40 20.
.00 69,
.00 1.
.30 2.
.30 1(0.
.05 2.
.30 0.
.90 11.
.00 190.
.40 0.
.10 19.
.20 2.
.70 0.
.00 3.
.00 4.
AlUHlnua 1J 13 4570.00 tSSOO.
Antimony 3 13 40.10 45.
Araanlo 12 13 3.00 20.
BarluM 13 13 110.00 »11.
B«rylllUM • 13 1.10 4.
C«dalUB 5 13 t.90 55.
ChroMlua 13 13 17.30 1540.
Copper 13 13 30.90 1200.
L««d 12 12 C.20 14C.
ttarcury * " 0.25 5.
Mlckcl 10 13 C2.30 602.
Silver 1 13 10.20 10.
Zinc 13 13 65.00 1100.
Cytnid* 4 13 31.90 99.
Tin 1 13 1C. 10 1C.
0.04
1.91
o.oc
0.«9
5.70
0.59
0.09
1.09
9.69
0.91
0.02
0.03 . 1.
0.95 . 1.
20.62 . SO.
4.91 . 10.
20016.06
21.54 . 35.
5.25 . 2.
450.14
1.04 . 1.
5.20 . . 5.
6.
20.
12.
1.
1.
12.
12.
5.
1.
12.
10.
12.
12.
50.
10.
*
35.
2.
•
1.
S.
104.24 .
144.06
36.19
0.21 ' . 0. 0,2
03.12 . 39. 39.0
4.30 . 0. 0.0
257.05
9.02 . 10. 10.0
0.39 . IS. 15.9
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SOMtAKY STATISTICS POR FACET SITB. BT CHEMICAL AND MBDION/AMBA
TTPB-Oroundvat«r (Filtered)
Anelyt*
Hum.
TlB««
D«C«ct«d
NUM.
Sanplca
Areenlo
Berltm
chroeilua
copper
lino
D«t«cc«d
Cone.
131.00
2.20
SC.30
3t.3S
».10
S.iO
Highest
O«t«et«d
Cone.
IOC.00
S.10
113.00
145.00
1C.40
o.ts
o<
Mean
Cono.
147.230
2.23t
70.304
25.552
11.234
t.733
fS Pet.
Opp. conC.
LlMlC
Hln.
O«t«ct.
Limit
Detect.
e
2
e
C
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
BONNART STATISTICS rOK FACET 8ITB, BT CHBHICAL AMD MSDIOM/ARRA
— —-- TYPE'droundwater (Background) -—-----------—.-
Analyte
MUM.
TlM«
D«t«ct«d
NUM.
Samples
Analyxcd
Bar tun
ChroMluai
Copper
Lead
tine
Detected
Cone.
CJCO.
140.
!•.
II.
10.
104.
Highest
Detected
Cone.
Oeo«.
Hean
Cone.
tS ret.
Opp. Cent.
Llalt
Kin.
Detect.
Llnlt
Men.
Detect.
Llalt
•360.0
140.0
10.1
31.2
10.1
104.0
•360.0
140.0
10.1
31. >
10.1
104.0
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
flOMMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITB. BT CHEMICAL AMD HBDIOM/ARBA
NUM.
Tla.ee
Analyta Datactad
Matbylana Cblorlda
Acatona
1,2-Dlcbloroatnana (total)
2-Butanona
Trlchloroathana
Ch lorobanzana
' Benzole Acid
Maphtbalana
2-Hethylnapbtbalana
Aeanapbthana
Dlbenzofuran
Fluorana
Pan t acb loropbanol
Pbanantbrana
Anthraeana
Dl-n-butylphtbalata
Fluoranthana
Pyrana
Benzol a) antbraeana
Chryaana
bla( 2-BthylheByl)pbthelate
Banxo(b) (luorantbana
Benzoi k) fluor an thane
Banzo( a)pyrana
Indanof 1, 2,3-ed)pyrena
Dibenzof a, h) anthracene
Benzol g.h, Dperylene
Aroclor-124* S
Aroclor-1254 1
AluMlnue) 7
Areenio 7
Be clue) 7
BerylliUM 7
CadnluM S
Chroaiua 7
Hum.
Baaplaa
Analyzed
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Lowest Hlflheat
Datactad
Cone.
22.00
5.00
1.00
9.00
2.00
1.00
•90.00
55.00
45.00
260.00
200.00
250.00
49.00
• 4.00
560.00
60.00
100.00
• 4.00
66.00
54.00
72.00
52.00
52.00
51.00
490.00
190.00
440.00
320.00
1000.00
6760.00
5.40
08.40
0.39
2.90
10.60
Datactad
Cone.
22.00
34.00
4.00
9.00
5.00
1.00
••0.00
7600.00
3000.00
•300.00
4900.00
•400.00
54.00
77000.00
10000.00
110.00
110000.00
65000.00
43000.00
32000.00
430.00
69000.00
69000.00
33000.00
16000.00
5200.00
17000.00
11000.00
1000.00
16400.00
247.00
2510.00
7.60
76.90
1220.00
aeon. 95 Pet.
Mean Opp. Conf.
Cone. LI* It
5.00
7.20
2.54
5.97
2.M .
2.49
•36.06
•11.40
245.90
515.01
421.14
512.60
215.16
1332.59
747.41
126.42
1760.94
1290.79
••6.69
701.53
158.10
1265.06
1265.06
933.39
755.02
3*6.74
753. (6
756.15
200.01
10*65.77
17.39
334.8*
0.75
5.75
85.64
Hln.
Detect.
Limit
5.00
10.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
1*00.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
1800.00
370.00
370.00
300.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
90.00
170.00
e
.
.
.
1.10
•
Max.
Detect.
LlBlt
1*.00
14.00
6.00
12.00
6.00
7.00
2000.00
300.00
370.00
410.00
410.00
410.00
1*00.00
370.00
410.00
410.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
370.00
410.00
370.00
370.00
410.00
410.00
410.00
410.00
91.00
1000.00
,
*
*
,
1.30
*
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
(Continued)
Anelyte
copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
BelenlUM
Thai llua
line
Cyenlde
Tin
NUM.
Tlaee
Detected
7
7
4
t
1
1
7
S
a
NUM.
•••plee
Analysed
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Lowest Highest
Detected
Cone.
24.60
14.10
0.12
20.00
11.00
16.70
44.10
0.63
5.40
Detected
Cone.
1210.00
292.00
0.51
224.00
11.00
16.70
2040.00
10.70
15.50
Oeoa. 95 Pet.
Mean Opp. Conf.
Cone. Lie It
110.42
41.70
0.12
41.00
0.63
0.43
200.44
1.40
2.97
Mln.
Detect .
LlMlt
.
.
.10
.40
.43
.43
.
.54
.50
Hex.
Detect.
LlMlt
.
.
.11
.40
.30
.52
.
.63
.20
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SUMMARY STATISTICS POK
Nu*. NUM.
Tlaiaa Saaplaa
Analyta Datactad Analytad
Acatona
Carbon DlaulClda
1, 1-Dlchloroatbana
1,2-Dlchloroatbaaa (total)
Ctilorofon
2-Butanona
1, 1. 1-Trlcbloroatbaoa
Trlcbloroathana 2
Benzene
Tetrechloroe thane
Toluana
Bthylbantana
•tyrana
Xylana (total)
N-Nltroao-Dl-a-propylaalne
Bantolc Acid
Naphthalana
2 -Hathylnaphtbalana
Acanaphthylan*
Acanaphthana
Dlbansofuran
Pluorana
N-Nltroaodlphaaylaalna
Pantachlorophanol
Phananthrana
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
71
71
70
71
60
60
70
70
60
69
69
70
60
60
71
Anthracana 2 69
Dl-n-butylphthalata 7 69
Pluorantbana 10 70
Pyrana 7 70
Butylbenzylphthalata 2 69
Benzo( •) anthracene 5 70
Chryaene 7 71
bl*(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 22 70
Dl-n-octylphthalate 4 70
Benzo( b|f luoranthana 3 69
FACET 8ITB.
Lowe at
Detected
Cone.
7.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
S.OO
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
7.00
1.00
2.00
400.00
67.00
S6.00
120.00
47.00
77.00
580.00
130.00
42.00
66.00
44.00
530.00
44.00
40.00
45.00
160.00
40.00
110.00
40.00
74.00
69.00
BY CHEMICAL
Hlgheat
Detected
Cone.
170.00
4.00
S.OO
110.00
S.OO
29.00
10.00
240.00
3.00
1.00
210.00
520.00
1.00
760.00
400.00
2100.00
1200.00
1550.00
360.00
670.00
500.00
1050.00
42.00
66.00
S350.00
965.00
500.00
4700.00
3250.00
100.00
2000.00
2450.00
1200.00
340.00
3650.00
AND MRDItM/ARBA
OeoM.
Mean
Cone..
.52
.04
.03
.44
.90
.74
.09
.25
.06
.03
.10
.10
.03
.33
109.10
707.31
192.29
197.17
105.33
100.41
190.27
193.32
103.14
074.77
105.02
194.70
172.57
173.53
107.34
106.60
193.74
200.00
152.54
106.10
190.42
95 Pet.
0pp. Conf.
tli
•It
.03
.96
.02
.24
.90
.36
.05
.62
.00
.95
.01
.54
.95
.24
194.41
1112.01
315.52
226.60
196.66
200.01
190.20
200.97
193.96
900.16
241.97
210.61
190.00
230.42
223.03
180.00
226.15
234.45
216.49
193.97
224.41
Mln.
Detect.
Limit
10.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
11.00
S.OO
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
340.00
1400.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
1600.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
Max.
Detect.
LlMlt
79.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
92.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
430.00
2100.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
2100.00
430.00
430.00
420.00
430.00
430.00
' 430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
(Continued)
Analyte
Bencot k) f luoranthene
Benso(a)pyrene
IndenoC l,a.3-cd)pyrene
Dlbenxot a.h) anthracene
Beoiolo.h.Dperylene
Aroclor-1240
Aroclor-1254
MUMlnua
Antimony
Arvenlc
Barlua
Berylllua
Cadnlun
CbroBlua
copper
Lead
Mercury •
H'ckel
a Iver
Sine
Cyanide
Tin
Nun.
TIM*
Detected
71
70
71
67
29
71
71
71
21
71
6
71
27
I
Nun. Low«at Highest
Samples Detected Detected
Analysed " •*—
69
69
69
69
69
71
70
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
Cone.
69.00
1700.00
690.00
360.00
605.00
140.00
190.00
7170.00
0.60
1.50
33.30
0423
1.30
12.50
3.70
3.60
0.12
16.90
1.00
40.20
0.57
4.20
konv.
3650.00
1700.00
690.00
360.00
605.00
31500.00
310.00
20100.00
23.70
32.40
031.50
1.10
3390.00
13000.00
1910.00
161.50
1.95
S16.00
7.90
3460.00
167.00
193.00
Oaon.
Hean
Cone •
190.42
193.34
190.75
100.96
190.73
62.04
95.90
12434.26
4.26
5f>*
a 02
109.43
• «*
e 1J
2.52
53.03
34.19
14.70
011*1
• vy
36.09
In*
• Q J
110.30
0.75
2. SI
95 Pet.
Opp. ConC.
LlMlt
224.41
212.26
200.14
360.00
200.05-
173.10
105.21
14011.09
4.70
7.71
142.45
O.SS
04.36
301.63
109.00
20.30
0.10
S3. 43
1.22
200.56
4.53
S.73
Mln.
Detect.
LlBlt
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
340.00
04.00
170.00
7ilO
3.70
0.21
1.00
•
•
0.10
•
1.40
O.S4
3.20
Max.
Detect.
LlBlt
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
100.00
1000.00
9.30
2.70
e
0.34
1.30
e
• .
0.13
•
2.10
0.63
4.20
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE
NUM. Nu«. Loweet
Tlnee Saaploe Detected
Analyte Detected Analyzed Cone.
Toluene
Ch lorobentene
Naphthalene
2-Hethylnaphthelene
Acenaphthene
Dlbensofuran
Olethylphtbalete
Pluorene
Phenantbrene
Anthracene
Pluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzol •) anthracene
Chryaene
• B«nzo(b)f luoranthene
Benzol k) f luorantnene
Benzol a) pyrene
indenol 1. 3, 3-cd)pyrene
Dlbensof a, h) anthracene
Benzol g, h. 1 ) perylene
AluMlnuai
Araenlc 4
Barlu*
Beryl HUM
CadejlUM
ChroBlUM
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide
Tin
2.00
1.00
15000.00
5600.00
21000.00
13000.00
71.00
22000.00
55.00
50000.00
79.00
(9.00
50.00
130000.00
40.00
330000.00
130000.00
35000.00
13000.00
34000.00
10900.00
3.40
90.00
0.60
41.40
10.50
23.50
11.40
0.24
22.00
75.10
4.30
0.40
, BY CHEMICAL
Ntoheet
Detected
Cone.
2.00
1.00
15000.00
5600.00
21000.00
13000.00
71.00
22000.00
190000.00
50000.00
320000.00
210000.00
160000.00
130000.00
330000.00
330000.00
130000.00
35000.00
12000.00
34000.00
13600.00
10.90
319.00
0.67
41.40
45.10
502.00
50.30
0.43
129.00
675.00
4.30
0.40
AND MEDIUM/AREA
Oeoei. 95 Pet.
Mean Opp. Conf.
Cone. Llnlt
2.62
2.00
036.34
602.21
935.61
797.39
119.16
950.23
1270.54
1312.70
1716.34
1425.72
1169.61
1717.92
1302.00
2343.47
1717.92
1109.29
776.39
1090.62
12444.27
5.70
170.04
0.63
2.10
31.57
70.75
20.14
0.30
45.01
150.13
0.65
2.01
Mln.
Detect.
Limit
6.00
6.00
390.00
390.00
390.00
390.00
400.00
390.00
400.00
390.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
390.00
400.00
390.00
390.00
390.00
390.00
390.00
.
.
.
.
1.00
.
.
.
.
.
.
0.51
3.20
Ma*.
Detect.
Limit
6.00
6.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
• 400.00
400.00
.400.00
e
.
e
.
1.00
.
.
.
.
.
.
O.S1
• 3.30
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
a
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE, BT CHEMICAL AMD MEDIOH/ARBA
TTPB-Plent 2 Yard Soll-fiubaurf. (190C date)
Mu
Analyte
trana-1.2-Dlcbloroethene
1,1.1-TrIchloroethane
Trlchloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
1.2-Dlchlorob«ns«n«
TricbloroCluoroM«chMi«
S
10
!•
4
1
1
NUM.
Saapla*
Analyzed
21
21
21
21
txnraat
D*t«ct«d
Cone.
S.T5
• .04
3.46
7.31
14.30
14.20
D«t«ct«d
Cone.
22.2
23.7
tlO.O
150.0
14.3
14.2
Mean
Cone.
1.2740
9.0790
17.3334
2.00SC
1.0009
14.2000
95 Pet.
Opp. Conf.
LlBlt
4.3440
14.5403
•1.9965
22.305
1.C949
Mln.
Detect.
LlBlt
1.30
0.50
3.20
0.30
1.90
Hex.
Detect.
LlBlt
1.3
19.0
4.4
4.0
1.9
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
8UHMAMT STATISTICS FOR FACET 8 ITS, BT CHEMICAL AMD MBDIOM/ARBA
HUM. MUM. Lowest Highest Oeo*. 95 Vet. Min. Me*.
Tl*ee 8aaple» Detected Detected Mean Opp. ConC. Detect. Detect.
Analyte Detected Analysed Cone. Cone. Cone. Llalt Llalt Llait
Ace ton*
Phenanthren*
Pluoranthenej
Pyrene
B«nao( •) anthracene
Cnryeene
Benzo(b) fluoranthen*
Bensot k) f luoranthen*
Benso( e)pyrene
Indeno( 1,2,3 -cd) pyren*
B«nco(a.b,l)perylene
AluBlnu*
Areenlo
Barlua
Beryl HUM
ChroeiluM
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Mlckel
lino
5.00 5.00 5.63 . 11.
120.00 120.00 162.69 . 350.
220.00 220.00 199.10 . 350.
220.00 220.00 199.10 . 350.
140.00 140.00 171.25 . 350.
120.00 120.00 162.68 . 350.
230.00 230.00 202.07 . 350.
230.00 230.00 202.07 . 350.
130.00 130.00 167.08 . 350.
53.00 53.00 123.09 . 350.
CO. 00 CO. 00 129.12 . 350.
. 13.0
410.0
410.
410.
410.
410.
410.
410.
410.
410.
410.
14400.00 1C300.00 15347.00
4.00 7.40 5.14
•7.90 103.00 94. CC
0.50 0.71 O.C2
18.80 42.20 25.70
4.80 5.90 5.20
12.90 33.40 20.05
0.15 0.85 0.19 . 0.1 0.1
1C. 00 30. CO 22.91
72.70 105.00 90.22
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
8DHHART STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE, BT CHEMICAL
Mum. Mum. Loweet Highest
Tlmee Samples Detected
Analyte Detected Analyzed Cone.
2-Butanone
Trlchloroetbene
Toluene
4-Methylphenol
Benzole Acid
Naphthalene
4-Chloro-3-methylpbenol
2-Hethylnaphthelene
Acenaphthylene
Acenapbthene
Dlbenzofuran
Fluorene
Pentechloropheaol
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Dl -n-buty Iphtbalate
Fluoranthane
Pyrane
Benzot a) anthracene
Chryaene
bla( 2-EthylbexyUphtbalata
Benzo(b) fluor an thane
Benzot k) fluor an thane
Benzot a) pyrene
Indenot 1.2.3-cd)pyrene
Dlbenzot a, b) anthracene
Benzot a. h.llperylene
Heptechlor epoxlde
Dleldrln
Aroclor-1254
Aroclor-1260
Aluminum
Antimony
Araanle
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
1.00
2.00
2.00
50.00
130.00
45.00
140.00
45.00
72.00
67.00
51.00
73.00
440.00
04.00
92.00
67.00
140.00
100.00
100.00
74.00
53.00
100.00
100.00
07.00
50.00
56.00
62.00
31.00
39.00
210.00
240.00
9360.00
10.60
3.20
203.50
0.37
4.70
32.70
21.00
as. oo
Detected
Cone.
1.00
6.00
2.00
300.00
640.00
550.00
140.00
690.00
140.00
040.00
540.00
600.00
440.00
0300.00
950.00
390.00
20000.00
13000.00
11000.00
11000.00
1500.00
30000.00
30000.00
11000.00
6000.00
1500.00
6300.00
31.00
39.00
6000.00
240.00
21100.00
10.60
15.70
512.00
0.71
213.00
2035.00
470.00
210.00
AND HEDION/ARBA
Oeom. 95 Pet.
Mean 0pp. Conf.
Cone. Limit
5.61
3.65
3.39
213.07
500.07
235.57
232.04
260.69
140.05
226.03
210.40
221.44
1043.52
1003.19
254.21
190.40
1730.20
1257.24
1111.55
939.70
294.01
1945.75
1945.75
055.29
403.73
309.32
554.10
7.05
14.92
050.07
143.15
13336.37
5.34
5.30
311.74
O.SS
33. iO
100.06
202.54 .
103.37 .
Mln.
Detect.
Limit
12.0
6.0
6.0
370.0
1900.0
370.0
370.0
.
370.0
370.0
370.0
370.0
1000.0
^
370.0
370.0
*
• •
*
*
370.0
.
,
.
370.0
370.0
370.0
9.0
10.0
290.0
100.0
a
0.1
2.3
.
.
.
•
•
t
Max.
Detect.
Limit
10.0
9.0
9.0
760.0
3700.0
370.0
760.0
.
760.0
760.0
740.0
760.0
3700.0
.
370.0
760.0
.
.
.
.
7(0.0
.
.
.
370.0
760.0
370.0
60.0
140.0
1400.0
1400.0
.
12.7
2.3
.
.
.
.
t
t
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
IContinued)
TVPE-aedlHent-Oreln Swele (flurf.)
Analyte
Mercury
Nickel
Zlno
cyanide
Tin
HUH.
Ti«e«
Detected
9
9
*
Nua.
Saaple*
Analysed
Lowect
Detected
Cone.
e.2i
30.90
119.00
0.82
S.10
Highest
Detected
Cone.
0.99
003.25
964.00
Cl.OO
U.70
Oeo*.
Heen
Cone.
0.57
75. (•
433.01
3.1«
S.47
95 ret.
Opp. ConC.
LlMlt
Mln.
Detect.
LlMlt
Hex.
Detect.
Ll«lt
3.7
3.7
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE, BY CHEMICAL AND MEDIUM/AREA
Analyte
Trlchloroethene
Nitrobenzene
Benzole Acid
1,2.4-Trlchlorobenteoe
Naphthalene
2-M«thylnaphthaleae
Acenaphthylene
Acenephthene
Dlbenzofuran
Fluorene
Phenanthrea*
Anthracene
Dl-n-butylphthalate
Fluoran thane
pyrene
Benzot a) anthraceae
Chryaene
bla( a-Kthylhexyllphthalate
Benzo(b) C luorantbane
Benzol k) fluor an thane
Banzo(a)pyrane
lndeno< 1,2,3-cdlpyrene
Dlbenzo( a, h) anthracene
Benzol o.h, Dperylane
Aroclor-1254
AlUBlnUM
Araenle
BarluB
Beryl lUm
CadMlua
ChroalUB
Copper
Load
Mercury
Nickel
line
Cyanide
Tin
Nua.
TlMe
Detected
•-
12
0
12
12
7
12
12
12
6
12
12
5
a
NUB. Loweat Hlgheet Oaoau 95 Pot.
Sa«plea
Analysed
ia
la
la
la
la
la
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
ia
Detected
Cone.
3.00
470.00
00.00
46.00
60.00
110.00
59.00
51.00
160.00
59.00
43.00
76.00
140.00
45.00
55.00
54.00
43.00
40.00
43.00
00.00
52.00
50.00
42.00
51.00
1100.00
12100.00
2.40
126.00
0.30
1.50
16.00
4.40
11.00
0.11
20.90
50.30
0.74
S.20
Detected
Cone.
0.
470.
02.
46.
330.
540.
76.
51.
160.
OS.
5(0.
76.
140.
090.
520.
530.
400.
02.
1300.
1300.
440.
130.
63.
160.
3400.
35100.0
23.0
637.0
1.0
01.5
200.0
217.0
126.0
2.3
(0.1
306.0
K.7
C.O
Mean 0pp. Conf.
Cone. Halt
3.30
219.30
635.09
100.60
190.05
206.11
166.05
179.04
196.94
160.41
173.07
105.10
194.76
176.96
173.55
174.90
166.34
160.05
103.03
306.07
160.69
173.54
101.90
174.69
150.10
17313.40
3.07
233.74
0.64
3.57
36.13
17.36
31.30
0.14
30.37
90.44 .
0.65
a. 34
Mln.
Detect.
LlMlt
6.00
300.00
1000.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
100.00
.
0.50
*
.
1.10
.
. .
.
0.10
.
.
0.57
J.70
Max.
Detect.
Llalt
7.00
470.00
2100.00
470.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
310.00
.
3.30
.
.
. 1.30
.
.
.
0.13
.
.
0.66
4. CO
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SONMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE. BT CHEMICAL
Num. NUM. Lowest
Times Samples Detected
Analyte Detected Analysed Cone.
Hethyleno Chloride
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
•yrene
Benzol a) anthracene
chryeene
bls( 2-Ethylhexyllphthalste
Benzo(b) Cluoranthene
Benzol k) Cluoranthene
Benzol a) pyrene
Indenol 1.2.3-cd)pyrene
Benso(g,h,l)perylene
Aroclor-1240
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
nickel
Potassium
Vanadium
Zinc
Cyanide
.
0.00
500.00
1200.00
630.00
560.00
1700.00
2300.00
1400.00
2300.00
2000.00
2000.00
1100.00
1000.00
1100.00
5400.00
7.50
130.00
9(.20
1*200.00
225.00
(.00
200.00
14100.00
40.30
4130.00
165.00
0.20
47.10
•10.00
11.00
572.00
7.10
UB. 9»AI*.eltf V w"»
Hlgheat
Detected
Cone.
0.00
4400.00
1200.00
0500.00
•300.00
4000.00
4000.00
1400.00
4000.00
3700.00
3900.00
2000.00
1000.00
1100.00
((80.00
13.20
390.00
003.00
17(000.00
4340.00
(.00
2070.00
20400.00
111.00
5170.00
(32.00
0.32
202.00
1120.00
15.40
7730.00
7.10
AMD MEDIOM/ARBA
Oeom. 95 Pet.
Mean Opp. Conf.
Cone. Limit
7.01
15(4.31
1909.02
2523.25
2557.74
2445.21
2873.00
2460.69
2704.43
2515.11
2559.43
1(70.63
1570.01
253.16
S999.79
10.19
222.00
225.51
(97(3.70
•(3.35
3.49
712.53
1(133.70
(0.4(
4700.02
345.94
0.31
115.27
538.89
0.09
1(52.10
1.09
Mln.
Detect.
Limit
14.0
*
4300.0
*
e
4300.
4300.
4300.
4300.
4300.
4300.
4300.
4300.
100.
B
%
e
e
^
B
4.«
9
#
9
i
^
i
t
345.0
0.3
.
0.0
Man.
Detect.
Limit
17.00
e
(100.00
e
.
4300.00
4300.00
9900.00
4300.00
4300.00
4300.00
4300.00
4300.00
590.00
t
e
e
e
t
e
3.20
e
m
e
t
B
e
e
345.00
0.30
^
0.92
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
Analyta
Acetone
Naphthalene
2-Methylnapbtnalene
Acenaphthana
Dlbanxoturaa
Pluorene
Phananthrana
Anthracene
Plueraothaaa
Pyrana
Benio(•)antbracaaa
Chryaene
blat2-Ktbylbe>yl)pbtbalate
Benso(b)fluoranthena
Baniolk)fluorantbene
Benio(a)pyrana
Indano(l,2,:
Barlua
Beryl Hua
Cadalua
Calclua
Chroalua
Cobalt
Xron
Lead
Hagnealua
Manganeaa
Mercury
Nickel
Potaaalua
Vanadium
Xlno
^
•*tact.<|
1
Bi
Jit
""•• u>v..t
'•Plea Datactad
lyzad (v»i<.
* ~ •• WOOC.
290.00
3600.00
2500.00
•400.00
4900.00
7(00.00
55000.00
14000.00
50000.00
56000.00
29000.00
26000.00
990.00
36000.00
50000.00
22000.00
6300.00
5900.00
11300.00
22.00
195.00
1.20
24.10
6390.00
92.20
0.40
21900.00
53.80
3930.00
276.00
0A -
.06
23.90
1630.00
19.60
M •* A j. —
4 jf .00
* WMJf |
Hlghaat
Detected
Cone.
290.00
3(00.00
2500.00
•400.00
4900.00
7COO.OO
55000.00
14000.00
50000.00
5(000.00
29000.00
2(000.00
990.00
3(000.00
50000.00
22000.00
(300.00
5900.00
11300.00
22.00
195.00
14A
• afO
94 t A
«* • 10
€390.00
92.20
• An
• VII
21900.00
53.80
3930.00
9?£ A A
i'O .00
0.0(
23.90
1(30.00
19.60
439.00
2T .J'S':
•—. i£l' •2T- °"
"»»a)it Limit tl
290.00
3(00.00
2500.00
•400.00
4900.00
7(00.00
55000.00
14000.00
50000.00
56000.00
29000.00 ' * <
26000.00 ' * •
990.00
36000.00
50000.00
22000.00
•300.00
5900.00
11300.00
22.00
195.00
19A •
• al V •
24.10
C390.00
92.20
a
0.40
21900.00
53.80 ' '
3930.00
276.00
041f • •
.86 •
23.90
1(30.00 '
19.60
439.00
la«.
•act.
•1C
a
• 1
• 1
a I
a 1
t 1
• 1
» 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SOMMAMT STATISTICS rO« f*CBT SITE.
•JtVDffe* A a* ft 1 fBflint —
HUH. Nun. Loweet
Tlaee Sa»pl«e Detected
An.lyt. "•t-C"d *n'l¥"d CO"C'
t •» 00
Vinyl Chloride
1, l-Dlchloroeth«n«
1.2-Dlchloroethene ( total)
1.1. l-Trlehloroethene
Trlehloroethen*
Acenaphthene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Dl-n-butylphtbaUt*
riuoranthene
Pyrene
Benxot •) •nthrMWM
Chryeene
ble( 2-«thylhemyl)P»>th«l«t«
Dl-n-octylphthelate
Bento(b) f luoranthen*
Benxo( k) fluorenthen*
Benio(a)pyrene
lndeno(1.2,3-cdlpyt«i«
B«nzo(«,h,i)p«ryl«n«
Heptachlor epoxld*
Aroclor-1240
AlUMlnUB
Areenlc
Barluai
Beryl llua
CadaluM
Chroailua
Copper «
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
2 3.00
2.00
1 Cyanide
11.00
130.00
71.00
170.00
50.00
59.00
345.00
230.00
205.00
195.00
46.00
130.00
395.00
395.00
205.00
99.00
99.00
15.00
540.00
9290.00
4.90
140.50
0.36
25.10
732.00
33.70
17.00
0.22
S3. 25
106.00
0.74
BT CHEMICAL
Htoheet
Detected
Cone.
2.00
3.00
43.00
11.00
130.00
71.00
450.00
130.00
59.00
720.00
520.00
430.00
' 340.00
71.00
130.00
690.00
690.00
350.00
99.00
99.00
15.00
540.00
9420.00
11.30
229.00
0.36
34.00
1200.00
40.45
19.60
0.22
119.00
120.00
1.75
AND HBDIOH/MIBA
Deo*. 95 Pet.
Mean OPP- Conf.
Cone. LlMlt
3.67
3.12 •
9.27
5.90
20.55
124.27
276.59
00.62
112.63
490.40
345.03
350.07
257.49
57.15
167.10
522.06
522.06
267.06
145.09
145.09
0.66
.164.32
9354.77
7.44
179.37
0.22
29.21
967.97
3«.92
18.60 1
0.11
79.60
116.40
1.14
Hln. Hax.
Detect. Detect.
LlBlt Limit
13.50 13.50
6.50 6.50
• •
6.50 6.50
6.50 6.50
435.00 435.00
. •
• •
•30.00 430.00
. •
• •
. •
. •
• •
•30.00 430.00
• •
. •
• •
•30.00 430.00
430.00 430.00
10.00 10.00
100.00 100.00
e •
• •
e •
0.2C 0.2C
e . •
• •
• •
• •
0.12 0.12
• •
4 *
»
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR FACET SITE, BY CHEMICAL
Mu*. NUB. Loveee Hloheee
TlBea Samplee Detected
Analyte * Detected Analyzed Cone.
Carbon Dl suicide
Trlchloroetbeae
2-Methylnaphthalane
Benzot a) anthracene
Cbryeene
ble( a-lcbylbeayDphtbalate
Benzol b) f luorantbene
Aroclor-1241
AluBlniw
AntlBoay
Areenlo
Barltui
CadMlUB
ChroBlm
Copper
L«ad
Mercury
Mlckel
silver
Zlne
Cyanide
Tin
15.00
o.so
72.00
3400.00
2045.00
2200.00
ISO. 00
3300.00
7550.00
11.70
4.10
310.00
•22.00
3940.00
459.00
110.00
0.52
190.00
2.40
3000.00
25.50
•32.50
Detected
Cone.
15.00
0.50
72.00
3400.00
2045.00
7300.00
ISO. 00 •
11450.00
7440.0*
22.00
7.2S
731. SO
013.00
•735.00
944.50
290.50
0.94
404.00
«.«•
11050.00
39.40
435.00
AMD MBDION/AMA
Oeo*. 95 Fct. Mln. MaM.
Mean 0pp. Conf. Detect. Detect.
Cone. LlMlt Limit Limit
7.75 . 0 0
5.93 . 0 •
72.00
940.21 . 520 520
729.10 . 820 520
4007.49
ISO. 00
•144.95
7594.97 . . ' .
1«.04
S.4S
402.30
711.12
5044.51
««5.3«
101.20 . . .
0.70
310.21
' 3.4C
(790.71
31.70
433.75
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
Analyt*
ChloroMtbui*
cl*-l, 3-Dlchloro«tb«n*
Chlorofom
80TMARY STATISTICS POM PACBT BITE, BY CHEMICAL AND MKDIOH/AMRA
TYPE'Burf. tUt«r-May» Crk. (Dpard)
HUM. MUM.
TlM« 8»pl«B
D«t«cC«d Analyzed
Lowe«c
D«t«cc«d
Cone.
Highest
D«t*ct«d
Cone.
O«o*.
M««n
Cone.
»s ret.
Opp. Conf.
Mln.
O«t«ct.
Limit
MAM.
D«t«ct.
Limit
Mrim
C.OO
• .20
0.03
174.00
01.00
>. 70
«.oo
0.20
0.03
174.00
01.00
2. 70
(.00
0.20
0.03
174.00
• 1.00
a. 70
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
8OMMART STATISTICS fOR FACET SITE. BT CHEMICAL
Nua. NUM. Loweet Hlgheet
Tlaea Beetplee Detected
Anelyte Detected Analyied Cone.
Acetone
Mltrobeniene
Naphthalene
2 -Methy Inaphtbelene
Aeenephthene
DlbenxoCurea
Fluorene
Phen enthrone
Ji ithrecene
Pluorentbene
Pyrene
ble< 2-Ethylhexyl>phtbelete
Bensoi b) C luorenthene
Benso< k) f luorentbene
Ben*o( e ) pyrene
Indenof 1. 2. 3-cdl pyrene
Dlbenio( e , b) anthrecene
Benso(0,h.l)perylene
Al:i«lnua
At ienla
Barium
CedMluM
CbroMluei
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Cine
Cyenlde
Tin
6000.00
220.00
400.00
1000.00
300.00
100.00
650.00
3100.00
3100.00
2300.00
2400.00
1700.00
3400.00
3400.00
1300.00
090.00
400.00
1000.00
9700.00
7.70
25C.OO
44.00
• 153.00
425.00
150.00
0.65
73.50
767.00
2.70
1 26. SO
Detected
Cone.
6000.00
220.00
400.00
1000.00
300.00
100.00
650.00
3100.00
3100.00
2300.00
2400.00
1700.00
3400.00
3400.00
1300.00
•90.00
400.00
1000.00
9700.00
7.70
256.00
44.00
153.00
425.00
150.00
0.65
73.50
767.00
2.70
26.50
AND MEDIUM/ARIA
Oeo«. 95 Pet. Mln. Max.
Mean 0pp. Conf. Detect. Detect.
Cone. LlMlt LlHlt Lleilt
6000.00
220.00
400.00 .
1000.00
300.00
100.00
650.00
3100.00
3100.00
2300.00
2400.00
1700.00 . .
3400.00
3400.00
1300.00
090.00
400.00
1000.00
9700.00
7.70
256.00
44.00
159.00
425.00
150.00
0.65
73.50 . .
767.00
2.70
26.50
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
rot mcrr »m, »T CHMICAL JUH> MIDION/AUA
TYPB-flurf. ltat«r-M*y* Crk. tDvngrd)
HUM.
Aaalyt*
D«t«et«4
1
Cone.
clB-l,3-Dlc)iloro«tli«n«
Chlorofom
1*1, l-Trlehloro«thwi«
Trlchloro«th«n«
••rim
Xlno
Cyaald*
D«t«ct«d
Cone.
Cone.
9S Pet.
Opp. ConC.
LlBlt
Mln.
D«t«ct.
Hax.
D«t*ct.
Limit
5.000
0.450
0.07S
4.SOO
10.SOO
130. SOO
149. SOO
it. 250
20.400
s.ooo
o.cso
0.075
4.500
10.500
130.500
149.500
10.250
20.400
S.OOO
O.C50
0.075
4.500
10.500
130.500
149.500
10.250
20.400
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
•GMtAJtr •TATimca fO« PACIT •!«. BT CHEMICAL AMD MKDItlM/AMA
TYPI-aurt. Meter-Area 10
MUM.
TlM*
D«C«cC«d
MUM.
•••pi**
ChloroMthene
Carbon DleulClde
1, 1-Dlcbloroethane
ele-l,a-Dlcbloroetbeae
Trlcbloroetbene
1 , a-Dlobloroben*eae
Benzole Acid
biaf a-ltbylbeKyUphtfaaUte
Aroclor-1340
Alualntw
BarlUM
Copper
Lead
tine
Cyanld*
t
I
Lowest
Detected
Cone.
0.
0.
• .
t.
a.
3.
4.
1.
Detected
Cone.
10.
7«.
lato.
2*.
11.
*a.
us.
ta.7
Oera.
Mean
Cone.
<
<
1
1
1
<
t
1
4
S4I
241
T
2191
7(
a
C,
09
1
(.
1.
>.
I.
1.
1.
•
>.
1.
1.
I.
».
1.
1.
1.
K
1.
1.'
4
1
I
I
- 1
<
«'
1
\
3J(
n
7'
1441
4
1
3
54
r
1.90
i.aa
>.45
L.50
1.00
1.00
If £
.••
(.00
1.97
f.OC
1.19
».JO
1.00
1.31
i.oa
1.03
T.ac
1.97
95 Pet.
Opp. ConC.
LlMtt
Nln.
Detect.
Limit
1
1
e
1
e
50
MM.
Detect.
LlBlt
1
1
•
1
SO
39
10
39
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
•OtWARY CTATimCI POM MCCT CITC. »T CHBHICAt AMD NtOIOM/JUUA
ChloroMthu*
riuor«n«
Ph«nMithr«n«
Chry*«n«
B«oio( b) (luor«nth«n«
B«nso( k) f luor«ntli«n«
B«nso( •)pyr«n<»
CmOmlvm
ChroMl
Copp«r
L*«d
tine
S.
IS.
at.
aa.
48.
ai.
32.
CO.
CO.
10.
§33.
1CS.
11.
1C.
C7.
SI.
act.
s.
IS.
at.
aa.
48.
ai.
32.
CO.
CO.
10.
§33.
1CS.
11.
1C.
C7.
SI.
act.
s.
15.
at.
aa.
48.
ai.
32.
CO.
CO.
10.
§33.
1CS.
11.
1C.
C7.
SI.
act.
O«OB
H*«n
Cone.
S.
15.
at.
aa.
48.
ai.
32.
CO.
CO.
18.
§33.
1CS.
11.
1C.
C7.
SI.
act.
tS Pee.
Opp. Conf.
klalt
•
»
•
*
•
•
•
•
*
*
•
•
*
•
•
•
*
Mln.
D«t«ct .
Ll.lt
•
•
•
*
*
•
*
•
*
*
*
*
•
•
*
*
*
tux.
D«t«ct .
Limit
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
*
•
•
•
•
*
*
•
*
*
-------
TABLE 12 contd.
SOHHARV STATISTICS FOR FACET SITS. BY CHEMICAL AMD MEDIUM/AREA
TYPB-SurC. ««t«r-Dr«ln 8«ral* (Dvngrd)
Nu*.
D«t«ct«d Analysed
ChloroMtbMM
Ac«ton«
Carbon Dlaulfld*
bl*< 2-Behylh«Brl)phthftUt«
BndriD k«ton«
AlualntM
Ar««nle
••rim
Copper
line
Cyuiid*
Tla
D«t*ct*d
Cone.
24.00
3.00
0.10
S.OO
0.11
133.00
3.00
• S.OO
5.40
11.CO
27.00
9.90
30.20
• 1.30
20. SO
D«t«ct«d
Cone.
Cone.
95 Pet.
0pp. Conf.
LlMlt
24.00
34.00
0.10
S.OO
0.12
7CC.OO
' 3.00
1100.00
5.40
11. CO
3C.70
15.70
171.00
• 1.30
20. SO
1.017
7.990
0.292
S.OOO
O.OC7
337.992
2.4CC
ICO. 064
3.232
• .709
1S.02C
S.377
92.440
10.107
10.902
Hln.
O«t«ct.
Limit
1.0
•
1.0
10.0
0.1
2.0
5.0
c.o
0.0
2.0
10.0
15.9
H«X.
D«t«ct.
tl«lt
1.0
1.0
10.0
0.1
•
10.0
s.o
c.o
0.0
2.0
•
10.0
IS.9
-------
TABLE 13
TABLE WOSLTS.PATHWAY: woesnoNorSHXMBTO IN AREAS <* 10BYTHESTASSSI& RESENTANDFUIUWSONAWOS
VARIABLE
IAHOB
,: VALUE
IfiDTONT ' ^XJSED '; BXnONALB
lm
Youtfe(A|«»-ll)
417
tmwn
(Ytft)
Touch
i . w
8 -:';:;: 10 Tool jmn it i|t r°°P
uo
AHum* youth
. tod bD CM
Ml)
You*
too . »
w i.:--? loo;
RAOS.IN*
'rtcrim hftiujfrtm
KAOS.19I9
eenaalaiMd
*-"tl*l Jm* ffttft)
Yecft
oanevcmefts
MS . MB
IOMO - wso
uas |;;, x»; 1*^. *<&;*. * **t>»
"' i»4 *n bMtf oe «xpow«
RAQS.l«n
ErpoAjn Fiaan Htndbook. ffA «OOt-»««S.
.U A»aa«t Ouidinc* for S^»rfjid. Volunt IE7A J40rt-«9«01 Offi
f)EAH ini. S^wfunO Eipcun Aw«ata Mioual ffA 5*Oa4M»L OBa of R*m«S«! Kjtporm. April INt
-------
TABLE 13
TABLE ES«SUMfATHWAY:IHOESnON OF SHXMBTOD* MATS CREEK BY LOCAL REBDOfB,
mSBfTANDFUTUWSCB«AJUOS
VARIABLE
RAWB
MFEMSCZ
AAJl
fc- ^
?- r^
"
10 fn
miun
MOS.1M9
XnfiaDef Etpeui (Ywit)
SMJIChDd
1 . 1
1 . JO
a
U
KAO&1M*
1 • 27}
I • 27)
ULS f • M
teim ^rini vid bD (M
Hl)
CkM
"100
RACS.1N9
RAOS
RA011M9
^ b eanafflinrad
ciw|«m
M5 . 1019
10950 . 2S550
M5 . 10*90
10MO • 29550
HO I/ JJO»3X
11290
29590
IUO&1M*
1UOS.1M9
MI kiMd oe txpoun
EFH1N9. E>powriF«aanHuw*ac*.EPA/«QO.t.l9/0<). ttpaert *.iiaim»lCraap,Offie«cfHMlthiadEBviiBe»BalA»«ittta. 1N9
SEAH l*U. Supefjxi Eipoun Aumacet Maom; ETA 54QA4M01. 00e« of Xcau6*l lUpxK. Afril INI
-------
TABLE 13
TABU EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INCESHON OF OCTO SUBSWACE SOTLS BY imiJTY WORKERS, fREB*T AHD FUIVRE SCENARIOS
VARIABU tAHOB
MBPCCKr rUSEO '"" BAnOKALB
BEFERENCZ
tm*,~P^lM~. ?;?-.,: :':: UiHiijWarUf.
1*4 *•«*, 10 . Aauoi miiounMBi of
f;V:'':- ' " kl»Md OllitiM It *
^P::T BAGS
iJ4;;";; . 1 ':: A*uat tet ill BD
:.::-••.;.;:, -.•; mtirifi it eonUBiniMd
KTS 1 ':• UOO Rjrft, midpoint ft vih*
U2SO HvC 2SSSO emt tn b«Md en tipoun
|:;?;:l:.V;;:-; Antfea
RAC&19K
RAOS.19I9
RAGS.W9
KAO&1M9
DH m« EipeaiTt Ficon Hindkoek. E?A «O,t49«<3. Expaun AMUMDICroup. Offict rfHultk ind Enviicnacmal AMUEXM. 1919
RAGS. 19W. Kik AutHBcn GuiUne. fvSupirfund. Veluw I E?AS40n<9«01 Offiei of Eo«jenej and liau£i! KMJXMM.
SEAM 1*U. &f»rfjnd Etptmif* Auwatac MMMal ETA HO/14MOI. OOc* of lUotdiil t mprtm. April 1MI.
-------
TABLE 13
TABU EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DCEST10N OP OWTTE SUUACE SOUS IY TOESP ASEKS, PRESEW AND FUTURE SCEXAJUO5
VARIABLE
KAHOB
;VALDB
MIDfOWT vUSH>"
!•* *••«*/ f*>
«C.7
S9 SO* praedk «•>!)• to
s...- ''•'• nap; nlu* 0*4 • r*.
^: rf«T
You*
1 • 10
10 Teal jr«n to i|t |m^
Youfc
i • m
uts
AamM you*
(ill (J»
Mil)
100 - »
ISO , 100
*
RA011M9
toehfldraeaenkia*
•kltlltBO
td b CDnusinittd
MS - MSO
IOMO - XSM
U25
ISBO
MSO R«(t.Bidpoi«.*«»l<
3SSSO MdirtbMdCB
RAO&1N9
BI Group. OCBe* of H«hb uti Enviranataal
RAO& 1W«. Hsk AIMMSK Gui&m (or S^ttfiM Velm V ETA S40/149O02. OOei of BB«|IW} «rf lUndii! K
SEAM 1WI. Scpef^ Eipcaun ABORMOI Masuil ETA 54ai4M01. OOJa eTIUatdiil lUpeMi. Afrt 1«H.
-------
TABLE 13
TABLE BPORKE PATHWAY: DGESHON OF SEZXMEXIS v THE NORTH ORAINAOE DTTCH BY TRESPASSER PRESORT
AND FUTURE SCENARIOS
VARIABLE
tANOB
VALUE
MBFOOrr USED BAHOKALB
J
YaA(Ap9-lf)
&? . «L7
417
EFHIW*
9ttr*ie* ffC^a
You*
1 . 30
10 Teal
i . m
uu
ted bO
nj«sao lUu
Y«A
100 • *0
UD
100
yvidd
RAO&1K9
frwe
,* I
it eonuaiaiMd
RAOS.1M*
(Dffl)
eonorcino|*a
MS • MM
10ISO • 2USO
Rjnp. Bidpoim. ft nth*
UBO ? V5SO
KAOS.19I9
%TK 1M9. Ei^ajnFtaanKwdboek. EPA AOO/149&O. Expocun «aara*iiOroup, OOe*of H*tttud Gnviranocnal AMHWIS. 1919
&ACS. 1919. UtkAuc^aOudne* fa Sotted VeluaiL ETA $40/149M1 Offiaof Effl«f|«ney«id!Un»di»lR«por»t. DKtab«19l9.
SEAM1M*. &ip«fuod E»?o«u» AaaraimM«nuiV EPA Wl-ttW. Ottct oflUandUl KapcaM. Aprtl I9C.
-------
TABLE 13 .
TABLE EXPOSURE PATHWAY: WOESTION OF SSXMBTO w KBOHIS WUOUOE SWALB BY IOCAI «smexis,
VARIABLE
RANDS teoKorr * USED »ATWNALB REFTO&CE
KmV<,'F**J~~, - - UctJRjKfeflU
lull Chnd (AT M)
Aduh
SoallCfeild
Adutt
Scdl Child
Adult •
•laoan Hmt Otf&iy)
Child
Adult
(Utiilta)
Boncarcioofc"
AAih
Mnevrioo|ffli
1 tl.4 Vilw^dB^laent EfKlM*
. * ' HJ iy aaBMabee RAOS. I*t9
1*9 3 (;' • J Tea] put to ift p«v
1 - JO IJ i 10 MftfKMdktotfM RAQS.19W
X
1 . 771 UU ? 1O ftr-imt T l^t mnfr-n
; " ' *»ia|wfflm«&ld«k
1 . XTl 1X4 >;- 11 Aauu 2 4*4 ncdoen
? . - - MM
i''" 100 V«I»cMdiitpclB*b RAOS.1N9
«v
RAOS
^ ' - i A»vn« tat all BD RAQS. 1919
if'o v *
•BB^Bfld • ODQUBIBItrf
MS . 10tS HO 1; 10BS R«|«.Bldpoia.AvmliB RAOS. 1919
10HO . aSMO 1S2SO 1" J5SSO gBd«nbMdae«poM«
MS • 10190 JU fTlOWO Rjn|t,nidpBia.*mvB RAOS. 1W»
10930 - 2S550 1C50 f »»^ wd m l«^ ce «|MM
EFH m». Eipewn F*aon Htadbook. B A *00,l-l?flO. ExpoMn A*aM«ii Oreup, OCCci rfHulih tad bm
SEAM. 19U Supt^und EipoKft AHCUWOI MKMX ETA S40/14MOI. Offie* of fcMditl lUtpoeM. Apfl 1MI,
-------
TABLE 13
TABU! EXKSUie PATHWAY: DOMIATION OP OOKTAMINAWS VOLATTLIZE) PHQM (WOUND WATER WHEN
RSDQTO SWWEK. PWSEXT AND nnvw SCENARIOS
VALUE
VARIABLE RANGE Mrrynvf ^ jif»p RATIONALE REFEXS4Q
*«w r*r»iM~* leaJRMifa
ModtW value (5t* AppMdii Q !p -
* — ;
MMB • • ^Q ^J) flQ^ABtBQO
Adui A.XU , flj 41S f, oj Ma p^mlk Mlw tar
|j , ^^
^ - «t i anfU tmadcnoi
fv»t F'tf^uy (DfytVtf) 1 • MS 1CJ SC5 AHUM diily Aowin
AAJtt . \ M V«J» uMd k M bourfy
RAOS.1M9
RAB&1N9
RAOV1W9
SEAM 19*1
MO&1M*
V
ocoureinona. MS. 25SSO IITPS f IOMO R«|«, ai^oia. * vtha RAOS. 1IW
(wciaepoi 10MO • 255JO 12TTS JSSSO iMdtnbiMdeDaacan
^
Anbeo
EFH.J9I9. Etpoun Ftaon Hin^aok. VAMOf49AO.
HAG& 1919. Rjik AOUBMI Cuidtau (or i$»rfur< Veluat
SEAH tni Supafind Eipoun ABMacoi KUoial ETA WM-ttOOl.
up. 0^-r rf Hritft tn* Bn'nrompnl
1M9
Offm of EoMrgtacy vd Ktat&il Import*. Dvio^r 1M9.
rf lUaxdUl Rapamt. A^il IfU.
-------
TABLE 13
TABLE BPC5URE PATHWAY: DCBDON OP OKOUND WAT» IT LOCAL KB OEHI* PRESS*! AKD PVIUHE SCENARIOS
VARIABLE
ftANOB
MDPOKT * USED" KATMNALB
»•+*•<*/
-------
TABJ.f.
TABLE POTENTIAL NONCARCINOGENIC EFFECTS OF FACET COCs: TOXICITY VALUES
Uncertainty and
Contaminant Chronic RID (oral) Confidence Critical Modifying Factor*
or Concern (rog/kQ/day) Laval (a) EffecVSpaclw (b)
Volatile*
Acetone 1 X Iff'
Benzene -
2-Bulanone 6 x 10*
Carton dfeuTide 1x19*
Chloroform 1 x 10*
tttorornatham -
1.1-Ofchto»oetnan« 1 x Iff'
U-Oichtoroefhane 7.4 X 104 (d)
cb-U- 1 x 10*
ff*tM»A^MB%AfftiajlAMam
low incraasad Nvar waighl UF • 1.000
and nephrotoxicity/rat MF • 1
MF.1
madkm fetal toxidly/hialfonnationa in UF-100
rabbits MF-1
HIOUUII lany cyst NMiiiwion n ur « ituuu
Kvei/dbg MF - 1
- - - '
— — —
_ — —
RfD
Sourc*
IRIS (2«1)
(US. EPA atudy)
IRIS (3W91) (UBela
•rwl nti^nAr 11K';t
ana Dnvyoi, i;f93|
IRIS (5WV91) (Hanfh et.
a)., 1981)
IRIS (2/91)
(Haywood at. al., 1979)
Haast. 1990
HEAST. 1990
U.S. EPA
Drinking Water
Regulations and
Health Advisories.
1990
HEAST. 1990
-------
TABLE 14
TABLE (CONTINUED)
Contanrinanl Chronic HID (oral)
of Concern (mg/kg/day)
•ans-1.2- 2 x 1 0*
Dichloroelhylene
1,1-Otehtoroetfiytene 9 x 10*
EViybenzene 1 x 10*'
AA.aaVi d.ta . **«-• — »_a— m M -ttfvff
MVUIJflVIIV vtaWfUJP O Jl IV
TelracNoioetfiytene 1 x Iff*
Toluene 2x1ff'(c.e)
1,1.1-Trichlororthane 9 x 1O*
TnttMoroethytene 7x10*
»-* • • - ^ •§..--.• 4 H -i Ar^
incrworonuuiDiiieinane j x iu
Confidence Critical
Uvel (a) EffectfSpeclM
bw increased serum alhafne
mmfium hepatic lesions In rats
loxicnyrat
_ iwgwbwMh^hrt
CMS effects**
in guinea pigs
medium hblopalholugy in rats/mice
Uncertainty and
Modifying Factor*
(b)
UF. 1.000
MF.1
UF.1000
MF.1
UF. 1,000
MF.1
UF.100
MF.1
UF.1000
MF.1
UF.100
MF-NA
UF . 1,000
MF.1
*•
UF. 1.000
MF-100
RID
Source
IRIS (2/91)
(Barnes el. al.. 1985)
IRIS (2/91)
(Quasi el. al.. 1983)
IRIS (2/91)
(Wo», el al.. 1958)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2/91) (Buben and
O-Flahmty, 1985)
HEAST, 1990
IRIS (2^1) (Adams el.
al., 1950 Torkelson
el. al.. 1958)
US. EPA Drinking
Water Regufstions
and Health Advisories.
1990
IRIS (2/91) (NCI. 1978)
-------
TABLE 14
TABLE (CONTINUED)
Contaminant
of Concern
Chronic RID (oral)
{mg/kg/day)
Confidence
Level (a)
Critical
Effect/Specie*
Uncertainty *nd
Modifying Factors
(b)
RID
Source
Vinyl Chloride
Xytenes (total)
Arthracene
BenzofcAcid
1.4 x 10* (d)
2X10*
fix Iff*
AcenapNhytene 6x10*
3x10'
4x10*
Benzo(a)anthracene —
Benzo(a)pyrene —
Benzo(b)fluoranthene —
Benzo(g,h.i)P*ryk** 4 x 10* (g)
imdhm hyperactkHy. In-
creased mortatty/rals
no effada In mica
inilation. malaise/
human
UF-100
UP. 3.000
MF.NA
UF. 3.000
MF-1
UF-1
MF-1
US. EPA
Drinking Water
Regulations and
Health Advisoriea,
1990
IRI3(Z/91)
IRIS (3/91) (U.S. EPA.
1989)
U.S. EPA Drinking
Water Regulations
and Health Advisories,
1990 (DWRHA. 1990)
IRIS (3/91) (U.S. EPA.
1989)
IRIS (2/91)
(U.S. EPA. 1987)
IRIS (3/91)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (3/91)
IRIS
-------
r>
-.1
TABLE 14
TABLE (CONTINUED)
Contaminant
of Concern
Chronic RfO (oral) Confidence Critical
(mg/kgYday) Level (a) Effect/Species
Uncertainty and
Modifying Factors RfO
(b) Source
Benzofkjfkjoranlhene —
Bb(2-ethyflMxyO 2ji Iff*
phlhafe'a
Cnryaana •«•
Dfcenzo(«.h) ~
Dfcanzofuran (T) -
r***uty!phthafate 1»Iff'
2K10*
4x1ff*
-itwUale
4X10*
deno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene —
; Methyl naphthalene —
laphthalene 4 x 1ff»
tow
Increased fcver weighV
guinea pig
UF. 1,000
MF-1
ally in rats
elevated Mill ray and
fiver weighlafral
UF. 1.000
MF.1
UF-fOOO
MF-NA
nephropathdogy. ftver UF • 3.000
weight changes, hematological MF-1
changes/mice
hematological changes/mice UF « 3000
MF.1
IRIS (3/91)
IRIS (10790);
(Carpenter, el al.. 1953)
IRIS (3/21/91)
ocular and internal lesionsfol —
IRIS (3/91) (Smth.
1953)
HEAST. 1990
(Piehacz. 1971;
EPA, 1987)
IRIS (3/91)
(U.S. EPA. I960)
IRIS (3/91)
(U.S. EPA, 1989)
IRIS (3/91)
HEAST. 1990
QUAL/TY
-------
TABLE 14
TABLE (CONTINUED)
Contaminant
of Concern
Chronic RIO (oral)
(mg/ko/day)
Confidence) Critical
Uval (•)
Uncertainty and
Modifying Factors RID
(b) Source
I ertacMoraprwnol 3x10*
Pestickles/PCB*
Aiodor-1248
Arodor-1254
Aluminum
An0nio
Barium
1.2 x 104 (d)
1 x 10* (c)
7x10*
low
medkm
•fradwiiiwo
reduced Mespan.
altered blood
chemistries/rat
kwafosts and hyper*
pigmentation/human
increased blood pressure
in humans
UF- 1.000
MF«1
UF- 3.000
MF«1
UF. 1,000
MF»1
UF.i
MF.NA
UF.3
MF«1
IRIS (2/91)
(Schwetx et. al.,
1978)
IRIS (3791)
IRIS (3/91)
(U.S. EPA. 1989)
IRIS (2A1)
IRIS (2/91)
(Shroeder, el at., 1970)
HEAST. 1990
IRIS (2/91) (Wooes el.
al.. 1990; Brenniman and
Levy. 1984)
-------
TABLE 14
TABLE (CONTINUED)
Uncertainty and
Contaminant Chronic RID (oral) Confidant* Critical Modifying Factor*
ofConcam (mg/kg*tey) Laval (a) EffacVSpaclaa (b)
Ben/Hum 5x10*
Cadmium 6x10*
Chromium VI 6*10*
Copper
Cyanide 2x10*
Load NothraahoM
Meicun/ 3xUT*
Nickel 2x10*
Star 3 x 10*
low no observed advene
effect/rat
high aigniNcanl protoinuria/
human
low not dafinadYat
nWQMnl WMgnl 1089, •lyiUM viiowiA,
m/efina degeneration in rats
- -
- neuratoxidry. kidney
effects/rat
HNHJkflii aigyrla/huiiHMu
UF-100
MF-1
UF-10
MF-1
UF-500
MF-100
UF-100
MF-S
-
UF- 1.000
UF-100
MF«3
UF-2
MF-1
RID
Souroa
IRIS (2^1)
(Shroedarand
MHchner, 1975)
IRIS (2/91)
(U.S. EPA, 1964)
IRIS (2/91)
(MacKenria, at. a!.,
1958)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2/91)
\nowmra ana mnzai.
19SS;PhHbricketal.,
1979)
IRIS (2/91)
HEAST. 1990;
(Fewer, at. at., 1987)
IRIS (2^1)
IRIS (2/91);
(Gad and Staud. 1935:
East. at. al. I960)
-------
TABLE 14
(CONTINUED)
Contaminant
of Concern
tti
Zinc
« ««-«-»-
•• nOt •VBBBDIV
Chronic RfO (oral)
(moAg/day)
6x10*'
Confidence Criticn
Level (a) Effsct/bpeelea
~ • anemia/humane
Uncertainty and
Modifying Factor*
(b)
UF-tO
MF.N7A
RfD
Source)
HEAST. 1990
HEAST. 1990
(Pones, et. al.,
Prasad. et. al..
1967;
1975)
rtftl I tin»»«t«iMiAi fT^riil ~ ^ *^* ~»^ * i i f^ T • f* .i> • • AJffl K*. ^-JS-- • *^. ».— -* *• * JAM •A.Atf.a_.t .•..
UFi (104bkf factor for each):
• variation in human aanrt
• animal to human axtrapolnlion
• extrapolation from aubchronic to chronic NOAEL
rom LOAELlo NOAEL
MF§ (greater tfian zero and I»M than or equal to 10)
• fYofasafcnal judgment baaed on adantific ittoartaMiaa of afi«iy and datab
> other than those listed above; defauR value is 1.
(c) Under review by the EPA RfD Work Group; therefore, no IRIS entry.
(d) No RfO available. Chronic protective dose derived from Long-Term Health Advisory (HA) for aduMs as follows:
Protective dose (moAoMay) • (Long-term HA jio/L) (21 exposureAiav^ (mo/1000 ug)
(e) New revised RfD pending.
(0 Available data inadequate for quantitative risk assessment (HEAST. 1990).
(g) The RfD for naphthalene b used as a surrogate for PAHs showing evidence of nonoardnoganfe effects.
Note: Sources are IRIS (EPA. 199f b) and HEAST (EPA. 1990a).
-------
TABLE 15
TABLE SUMMARY OF NONCARCINOGENIC HAZARD INDICES (HI) FOR THE
FACET SITE*
Current/ Acute Chronic
Scenario Receptor Future . HI HI
Ground Water
Ingestion Resident C/F 10 x 10°(b)* 2.0 x 10'(b)*
4.6 x 10°(c)» 4.6 x 10'(c)»
Volatfles Inhalation While Showering R<" " N/A 14 x 10'5
Sou °)
Surface Soil - Ingestion ^ x 104 1.6 x 10"1
Subsurface SoU - Ingestion 3.9 x 10* 6.8 x 10*
Surface Soil, Plant 2 Yard - Ingestion jf 6.6 x 10* 12 x 10*1
Subsurface Soil, Plant 2 Yard • Ingestio. C/F 1.7 x 10*7 6.2 x 1CT7
Oil/Water Separator - Ingestion C/F 3.5 x 10* 4.1 x 10*1
Sediment
Height's Drainage Swale • Ingestion
North Drainage Ditch - Ingestion
May's Creek - Ingestion
Area 6 • Ingestion
Area 10 - Ingestion
Resident
Trespasser
Resident
Trespasser
Trespasser
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
1.3 x ICT'O))
1.0 x 10°(c)*
5.1 x 10-1
1.1 x 10*(b)
8.5 x 10*(c)
3.9 x 10*
5.8 x Iff1
WxKT'Cb)
3.5 x 10°(c)*
3.9 x la1
19 x 10*(b)
4.3 x 10-'(c)
6.8 xlO4
6.0 x lO"1
•Dermal pathways not evaluated quantitatively based on current EPA Region n guidance for the
Facet site (EPA, 1992).
(b) • adult
(c)-child ^
* ffl exceeds one (1). POOR QVJA*.Vn
ORIGINAL
-------
TABLE 15
TABLE SUMMARY OF NONCARCINOGENIC HAZARD INDICES (HI) FOR THE
FACET SITE*
Scenario
Current/ Acute
Receptor Future . HI
Chronic
HI
Ground Water
Ingestion . Resident
Volatile* Inhalation While Showering Resident
Soil
Surface Soil • Ingestion Trespasser
Subsurface Soil • Ingestion Worker
Surface Soil, Plant 2 Yard • Ingestion Trespasser
Subsurface Soil, Plant 2 Yard • Ingestion Worker
Oil/Water Separator • Ingestion Worker
Sediment
C/F 2,0 x 10°(b)* 2.0 x 10'(b)*
4.6 x 10°(c)» 4.6 x 10'(c)»
C/F N/A 2.4 x 10*
OF
C/F
C/F
OF
OF
73x10-*
3.9 x 10*
6.6 x 10*
1.7 x 10*
3.5 x 10-'
1.6 x 10*
6.8 x 10*
2.2 x 10*
6.2 x ID"'
4.1 x 10*
Height's Drainage Swale - Ingestion
North Drainage Ditch - Ingestion
May's Creek - Ingestion
Area 6 • Ingestion
Area 10 - Ingestion
Resident
Trespasser
Resident
Trespasser
Trespasser
C/F
OF
C/F
OF
OF
1.3 x 10*(b)
1.0 x 10°(c)»
5.1 x 10*
1.1 x 10*(b)
8.5 x 10*(c)
3.9 xlO*
5.8x10*
2.4 x lO-'OO
3.5 x 10e(c)*
3.9 x 10*'
2.9 x 10*(b)
4.3 x 10*(c)
6.8 x 10*
6.0 x 10*1
•Dermal pathways not evaluated quantitatively based on current EPA Region H guidance for the
Facet site (EPA, 1992).
(b) • adult
(c) - child
* HI exceeds one (1).
-------
TABLE 16
TABLE .. POTENTIAL CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS OF FACET COCS: SLOPE FACTORS
Chemical
Voiatltoa
Acetone
Oenzene
2-Butanone
Carbon Dlsuflide
Chbromethana
1,1-Dfcrtoroemane
1,2-Jtehkxoethan*
Stope Factor
(mo/kg/day)'
-
2.9x10* (oral)
2.9 x 10* (InhaQ
-
6.1 x 10* (oral)
8.1* 10* (Wai)
1.3 x 10* (oral)
6.3 x 10* (Intel)
-
9.1 x 10* (oral)
EPA
Weight of Evidence
Classification
0
A
O
D
B2
C
C
B2
Type of Cancer/Species
lack of data In humans
and animals
leukemia/human
lack of data In humans
and animals
lack of data In humans
and animals
kidney tumors/rat
hepatoceHular cardnoma/
female mouse
mouse kidney
mouse kidney
hemangio-sarcoma In rat
tar/rat and mouse
Slope Factor Source
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2*1)
(Rinsky. et el.. 1961;
On. et al.. 1978;
Wang, et al., 1963)
IRIS (3/91)
IRIS (201)
IRIS (201)
(Jorgensen. et al..
1985; NCI. 1976)
HEAST. 1990 (CHT.
1981 ;NIOSH. 1984;
US EPA. 1986.87)
IRIS (201)
(NCI, 1978)
IRIS (201)
-------
TABLE-16 (CONTINUED)
Slope Factor
Chemical (mg/fcg/day)1
Cte-1.2-D(Chloroe1hy1ene
trans-1.2-Dichkxoethytene
Ifl a"ht a • •• I i 1 1 • A A w 4 ft* tf <*M fall
,1-Otehtoroelhylene 6.0 x iw lorai)
1.2(MiaJ)
EthytMiuena ••
Mettytone Chtoifcto 7.5 nKT1 (oral)
TftracNoroettiytom S.1 • 10* (oral)
Toluene
,1,1-Tnciaoroeinan* —
TrtcKoroelhylene 1.1 « W* (o«0
EPA
Weight of Evident*
Classification
-
D
C
0
B2
B2
0
0
B2
Type of Cancer/Spectoa
-
lack ol data ki humans
and animate
auivnai |HK>\M«iiiwiiiui«yiuiiid8
In male raVF344
kidney adenocardnoma In
mate ownss mouse
lack of animal btoassay
and human studies
^M^Mtmt* m^mmMt mln m
•vef/VBi ano nwce
1.4 x 104 (Inhal)
Ivef/mouse
no human data; Inadequate
animal data
ro human data; Inadequate
animal data
lunQ and Iver tumoisAiwuse
Stop* Factor Source
-
IRIS (Z/91)
IRIS (2«1)
(NTO, 1982)
IRIS (2/91)
(Mattorl. et at.
1977, 1985)
IRIS(2/9t)
IRIS (2^1)
HEAST.1990
(NCI. 1978)
IRIS (391)
IRIS (2/91)
HEAST, 1990
jkjoA^ni «« «i lanei
-------
TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
i^i,-—,1,,—i
vnanucai
Slop* Factor
(mg/ko/dayy1
EPA
Weight of Evidence
Classification Type of CanceriSpeclea Slope Factor Source
TrichtorolhMKOinethana
Vinyl Chloride
Xytene* (total)
Neutral/Add
1J(oral)(b)
Aoanaphthytena
Anthracene
Oanzoto Acid
Benzo(a)anthracana
1.15 x 10' (c)
D
D
D
B2
tack of data hi humana
and aiwiiab
animal and human dna
(nadequata
no human A
animal data
no
animal data
no human data; Inadequate
animal data
human cardnogenicHy
in mixture (d)
IRIS (2^1)
HEAST.1990
(Maltonl, rt al., 1980)
IRIS (3*1)
IRIS
IRIS (991)
IRIS (2»1)
IRIS (3/91)
(US EPA. 1984.1990;
(ARC. 1984)
-------
TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
Stopo Factor
Chamlcal (mg/kg/day)-*
3amo(a)pyrana 1.15 « 10*
Oaiuo(b)FluofoajtftwBiia 1.15 K 10 (c)
f?snxo(g,h.l)pafytene —
DafuontjnoufBitnsiM i.is * TO icf
^ft^*fi% ^^A^h^a^^^uK^k 4 ^ •• 4)Av aV^a*SBS%
osiz-aiiiyiiiajiyi) i.^ • iu iv*ai|
phthalala
Chrysena 1.15 • 10f(c)
Dnanz(a,h)aninracan8 1.19 • iu w
(Mbanzofufan ••
EPA
Weight of Etndeoca
Ctasslflcatlon
B2
B2
D
B2
B2
B2(b)
D
^.«C««Sp^
tract/mousa stomach .
human cafdnoganlcKy
(nmtxtura (d)
no human data; Inadequate
animal data.
In mixture (d)
and adenoma/mouse
Ivar lumom In mala mica
N/A
lack of data In humans
SWIM Factor sowcf)
AWOC(1966)
(Thyssan. et al.. 1990
US EPA. 1980: Meal
and Rlgdan. 1987)
IRIS (3/91)
(US EPA. 1984, 1990;
(ARC. 1984)
IRIS (3/91)
IRIS (3/91)
(US EPA. 1984, 1990;
(ARC, 1984)
IRIS (2/91)
(NTP.1982)
IRIS (3/91)
(Wbtockl. al. al. 1988;
Buartng at. at., 1986)
HEAST, 1990
IRIS (2/91)
and animals
DMHMlylphthalala
lack of data In humans
and animals
IRIS (3/91)
-------
TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
Slope Factor
Chemical (mg/kg/day)'
DMMxaylphthalale
rHMJIMIIimiV
Fkiorsne . -
Meno<1.23-cd)pyr«ne 1.15 x 10'(c)
A X^aa^ J — •-ii^* — •
Z M6uiyi raprafltWM ••
>l»«itiiii-* __
N^TCIHWnV •*
Pertad*XDphenol l^nlff'
EPA
Weight of Evidence
ClasslHcatlon
••
O
0
B2
-
0
B2(b)
O
n
Type of Cancer/Species
~
no human data; Inadequate
animal data
no human data; Inadequate
animal data
epMenrori careaiomas
In rat's lungs
-
no human data; toadequato
animal data
Hver, adrenal! cfecuhrioiy
systems
m human ifala* hiMtemato
animal data
•M lamiiMi d«l*> lna
-------
TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
Cnamk*
ilarf||||li«»«lf»|l»
t^aaiicioaSfrvoa
Aioctor-1248
kiofQanlca
Akimkwm
AlKNIWiy
Aiaante
Barium
Barytlum
Cadmium
Chromium VI
Co par
Stopa Factor
(mg/kg/tfay)'
7.7 (oral)
7.7 (oral)
1.75 (oral)
••
4 J (oral)
6.1 (WwO
4.1 x 10* (Inhaf)
EPA
Weight of Evktenca
Classification
B2
62
A
B2
B1
A
D
Typa of Cancar/Spaclaa
rats and mtoa
rats and mtoa
cMnlhumans
gross tumors al sUss/lals
VI iy VaiKsOIMWIIKIIIB
lung tumors/rats
king cancsf /humans
Stopa Factor Sourca
IRIS (2/91)
1965)
IRIS (201)
1965)
IRIS (201)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2*1)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2/91)
(Thun. at al., 1985)
IRIS (2/91)
(Mancuso. 1975)
IRK f?A11
-------
TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
Chemical
Cyanide
Leadfa)
Mercury
%
Nickel
SeVer
Tin
Zinc
Slope Factor
EPA
Wef oM of Evidence
Classification
lack of data on humans
andanhnab
B2
D
O
0
animal data
•"•mat and human data
Inadequate
WIS (2/91)
IRIS (2*1)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (2/91)
IRIS (3/91)
(a) EPA Cancer Assessment Group recommends numerical estimate not be used for toad.
(b) IRIS input pending.
(c) Per EPA guidance, the benzo(a)pyrene stops factor b used as a surrogate tor other PAHs where sufficient evidence of cardnomnfcttv
exists, as designated in IRIS or HEAST. w»»"wiy
(e) Soot containing these chemicals was found to be carcinogenic (IRIS, 1991).
*%•_ —
Sources: IRIS - See EPA. 1991 b
HEAST. See EPA. 1990a.
-------
TABLE 17
TABLE . SUMMARY OF CARCINOGENIC RISK ESTIMATES
FOR THE FACET SITE1
Current/ Incremental
Receptor Future Risk
Scenario
Ground Water
Resident OF 2.0x10-**
Ingestion . Resident C/F 8.0 x 10 *
Volatiles Inhalation While Showering Kesioem
Soil
T x 10"**
Surface Soil - Ingestion * /".//U- * 10~'
Subsurface Soil - Ingestion r°r /f^ x 10'10
Surface Soil, Plant 2 Yard - Ingestion Tres J t x 1(JrI1
Subsurface Soil, Plant 2 Yard - Ingestion Wor x 1Q^»
Oil/Water Separator - Ingestion
Sediment
p «A.nt C/F 4.0 x 10"**
Height's Drainage Swale - Ingestion R^en^ ^ g g R ^
North Drainage Ditch - Ingestion R^denV CVF 6.5x10"**
May's Creek - Ingestion «££* ^ 1.7 x 10j
Area 6 - Ingestion Trespasser OF 5.1 x 10 *
Area 10 - Ingestion
* Exceeds 10"* risk.
** Exceeds 104 risk.
•Dermal pathways not evaluated quantatively based on current EPA Region n guidance for
the Facet site (EPA, 1992).
-------
TABLE 17
TABLE . SUMMARY OF CARCINOGENIC RISK ESTIMATES
FOR THE FACET SITE1
Scenario
Receptor
Current/ Incremental
Future Risk
Ground Water
Ingestion
Volatilcs Inhalation While Showering
Soil
Surface Soil - Ingestion
Subsurface Soil - Ingestion
Surface Soil, Plant 2 Yard - Ingestion
Subsurface Soil, Plant 2 Yard - Ingestion
Oil/Water Separator - Ingestion
Sediment
Height's Drainage Swale - Ingestion
North Drainage Ditch • Ingestion
May's Creek - Ingestion
Area 6 - Ingestion
Area 10 • Ingestion
Resident
Resident
Trespasser
Worker
Trespasser
Worker
Worker
Resident
Trespasser
Resident
Trespasser
Trespasser
C/F
C/F
C7F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
C/F
2.0 x 10'3**
8.0 x 10'5*
1.1 x 10"**
4.2 x 10'7
2.5 x 10'10
2.4 x 10'"
1.5 x 10"**
4.0 x 10"**
8.8 x 10"*
6.5 x 10"**
1.7 x 10"*
5.1 x 10"*
* Exceeds 10" risk.
** Exceeds 10" risk.
"Dermal pathways not evaluated quantatively based on current EPA Region n guidance for
the Facet site (EPA, 1992).
-------
TABLE 18
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
CHEMICAL
s-BuryfbcazcBe
C&JOTofonB
U'DienJoraethaae
U-DichJoroethaac
l,l-Dic&JoraetBeae
cavlJ-Dicalofoetbcac
B»n»-l,3-D*nloroet*eBe
DieUoredtfluoroaethtae
EtbytbcazeM
ItopropylbeBzeDe
4-boprDpyttoluenc
Metbylene Chloride
Nipbihtlcac
a-Propylbeazeae
1,1,1-TrichJoroeihanc
Thrbloroethcnc
TrichJorofluoromethiac
U>Thmeinytbtazene
U>Tnmethyftxttient
Vinyl Chloride
Xyknet
AJumiBum
Antimony
Ane nic
Bihum
Beryllium
Cadmium
Omnium
Copper
Uad
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Tin •
Zwc
Cyanide
MAXCONC
<««/l)
U
1
2
A3
2
160
2
2
12
1
12
«9
23
22
13
190
19
11
tl
33
14
95300
4SJ
20.4
911
O
55J
1540
1200
146
54
•02
102
16.1
1110
994
GROUND
WATER
ARAR(l)
.v: :••::: .•:::-•..; ORGAKJCS ,. .. •
Standard
Standard
Standard
Suadutf
Suadutf
Sundud
SuDdwd
Sundu4
Studu4
SuiJutf
Sttftdifd
Sundiitf
Sandud
Sundiid
Sundird
Sundaid
Sundtrd
Sundird
Sundifd
Sundiri
Sundird
1NORGA>OCS
NA(3)
3 Cyidum Value (4)
25 Sundud
1000 Sundird
3 Cuidinec Value (4)
10 Sundird
50 Sundird
200 Sundird
25 Sundird
2 Sundird
100 Tcauiivc Pfopaed MCL (4)
JO Sundird
ZlpOO Chronic RID (4)
~JOa Sundird
100 Sundird
SOURCE (2)
NYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (5/91)
NV$DEC(9/90)
NYSDEC (9/90)
NYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (9/90)
_ •
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (9/90)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC (5/91)
USEPA (5/90)
KYSDEC (5/91)
USEPA-HEAST (1991)
KYSDEC (5/91)
KYSDEC(5/91)
MAX CONG
IS GREATER
THANAJUR
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
_
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
NOTE&
0)
(2)
Wbce BO ARAR bat bc«B etublithed, aa appropriate
fuidinei or other bealib^aied vtluc • lifted, at
•oted.
a. KYSDEC 1991. Reviiion of Water
Quality RcfuUtiOBS for Surface Water aid
Crouad Watcn. May.
k. KYSDEC 1990. Drvuioc of Water •
TacBBJea! and Opentional Cuidanet
Strict (1.1.1) • Afflbitm Water Quality
Siaadirdi aad OuJdinet Valuct.
September.
c USEPA. 1991b. Healtk Effent
Aaestmcat Summary Tablet (HEAST).
January.
«. USEPA, 1990a. Fact Sheet - Drinkin|
Water Re|ulationt vndcr the Safe
Drinkini Water AA. May.
(3) No ARAR or fccalin-oaKd toaciiy vilue tvtiUbJe.
RA did Ml identify aluminum at a chemical of
concern. Therefore, ao remcdiatic* goal at
developed.
(4) No ARAR available at denned in USEPA. 19t9a.
Therefore, aa acceptable concentration wat derived
•tin| tkc USEPA oral chronic reference dote (RfD)
and the nandird expoture astumptioru of 2 liten/day
infection rate and 70 k| average body wtijht.
-------
Citation
NYS; 6 NYCRR 736
NYS; 6 NYCRR 757
NYS; TOGS 1
NYS; TOGS 2
NYS; 10 NYCRR 5
NYS; 10 NYCRR 170
FEASIBILITY STUDY
PUROLATOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
Pescriotiop . TVDC
Stile pollutant discharge elimination system action
State pollutant discharge elimination system action
Technical and operational guidance for action
pollutant discharge elimination system
Technical and operational guidance for ground action
water
State public drinking water standards
chemical
State public drinking water source standards chemical
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
Reason for Listing
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to on-iite
treatment of wastes.
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to remediation
of ground water.
May relate to remediation
of ground water.
May relate to remediation
of ground water.
ARARi • Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
CAA • dean Air Act
OVA . Clean Water Act
OSHA • Occupational Safety and Health Act
RCRA • Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SDWA • Safe Drinking Water Act
TBCs • To Be Considered
TSCA • Toxic Substances Control Act
-------
TAULt
POTENTIAL ARARS AND TBCS
FEASIBILITY STUDY
PUROL4TOR PRODUCTS COMPANY
pUtJOD
OSHA, 29 CFR 1910
CAA;40CFR50
CAA;40CFRS2
CAA;40CFR60
CAA; 40 CFR 61
CWA, 40 CFR 122
CWA;40CFR136
SDWA; 40 CFR 141
RCRA; 40 CFR 261
RCRA; 40 CFR 262
RCRA; 40 CFR 263
RCRA; 40 CFR 264
Description Type
Guideline* and requirements for worker* at actioa
hazardous waste site* (subpart 120) and
ataodards for air contaminants (subpart 1)
National Ambient air quality standards chemical
National ambient air quality standards location
attainment areas
New source performance standards action
National emission standards for hazardous air action,
pollutants chemical
Treatment system discharge standards action,
chemical
Approved lest methods for discharge action
monitoring
National primary drinking water standards chemical
Determination of whether action,
a waste is hazardous chemical
Hazardous waste generator requirements action
Hazardous waste transporter requirements action
TSDF standards
action,
chemical,
location
Reason for Listing
May relate to remediation
of all areas.
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to on-site
treatment of wastes.
May relate to ground
water remediation.
May relate to ground
water remediation.
May relate to remediation
of ground water.
May relate to remediation
of all areas.
May relate to off-site
disposal of wastes.
May relate to off-site
disposal of wastes.
May relate to remediation
of all areas.
-------
APPENDIX IV
STATE LETTER OF CONCURRENCE
-------
Now York State Department of Environmental Conservation
60 Wolf Road, Albany, New Yortc 12233
Thorns* C. Jorilng
CommlMloner
JUN 30 I992
MB. Kathleen C. Callahan
Director
Emergency & Remedial Response Division
USEPA, Region XX
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Dear MB. Callahan:
R«: Facet Enterprises Site/ Chemung Co, MY
Record of Decision
The purpose of this letter is to confirm the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation's concurrence with USEPA 'a Record of Decision for the
Facet Enterprises NPL site in Elmira Heights, NY. The selected remedial measure
will remove a significant source of groundwater contamination in the Newtown Creek
Aquifer.
The ROD notes that EPA will evaluate the need for further action in areas
1,2, and 3 based on the results of confirmatory sampling performed after the drum
removal. NYSDEC must have the opportunity to review and concur with this decision
when it is made.
We greatly appreciate USEPA' s efforts to have as much contaminated material
as possible removed from the site for proper treatment and disposal. However, as
mentioned in the ROD, some hazardous substances will remain on- site, we support
efforts to restrict access to this site in the future to prevent inadvertent human
exposure to these substances. A deed restriction would be the most effective means
to accomplish this. If this option is unavailable, then NYSDEC and NYSDOH retain
the option of filing a deed notification letter with the appropriate local
authorities.
Sincerely,
Michael J. O'Toole, Jr. P.E.
Director
Division of Hazardous Waste Remediation
GC/kp
cc: A. Carlson
Post-It" brand fax transmffial memo 76H
TOTflL P. 01
------- |