EPA
United States
Environmental Protection -
Agency
Office of
• Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R02-85/018
September 1985
Superfund
Record of Decision:
Wide Beach, NY
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions ca t$e rtvtne before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R02-85/018
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Wide Beach, NY
5. REPORT DATE
September 30, 1985
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final ROD Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
800/00
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
18. ABSTRACT
The Wide Beach Development site is a small lake-side community located in ;:he Town
of Brant, in southern Erie County, New York. Between 1968 and 1978 approximately 155
cubic meters of waste oil, some of which was contaminated with Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs), was applied to the local roadways for dust control by the Wide Beach
Homeowners Assocation. The source of the waste oil is being investigated, however,
drums labeled as dielectric coolant were found onsite. In 1980, the installation of a
sanitary sewer line in the development resulted in the excavation of highly contaminatec
soil from the roadways and their vicinity. Because it was not known at that time that
a PCB problem existed, excavated soil was used as fill in several yards and in a com-
munity recreation area. Subsequent sampling revealed the presence of PCBs in the air,
roadway dust, soil, vacuum cleaner dust, and water samples from private wells.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: excavation of soils in the road
way with PCB concentrations greater than 10 mgAg to a depth of approximately 0.5m from
the base of the existing asphalt roadway surface, in the drainage ditch to a depth of
approximately 1m, in the driveways to 30cm, in the yards to a depth of approximately
15cm, and in the wetlands to a depth of approximately 20cm; excavation and disposal of
5-10cm of contaminated asphalt material,retaining uncontaminated material for reuse in
repaving; chemical treatment of the PCB-contaminated soils and reuse as fill in
(see separate page) •
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
:. COSATi Field/Croup
Record of Decision
Wide Beach, NY
Contaminated Media: gw, soil, wetlands
Key contaminants: PCBs
118. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report!
None
21. NO. OF PAGES
96
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
None
22. PRICE
PA form 2MO-1 (R«». 4-77) PKEVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the KPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
- Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if iwil. in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeal the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall cany a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected fi-./t.. Jatt- tif issue. Jo if of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe. J. Robert Doe. etc.). List author's affiliation if it Jitters front the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hircarchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in |turcnihc*c\.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE Of REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGkNCY CODE
Insert appropriate code. '
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with. Translation of. I'rcsoili-il ai conlm-mi- of.
To be published in. Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant informal ion contained in the report. II Hie report i oniams a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of tnginccring and Scientific Terms the proper uulhnri/cU terms llial identity the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDCNTIIIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which'no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI IILLD GROUP -1 icld and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COS ATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary I ield/Croup assignment^) will be specific discipline, urea of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary I u-lil/droup assignments that will follow
the primary posting! s).
IB. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote rrleasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release t-'nlninicil." Ciit any availability i<>
the public, with address and price.
19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES .
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, it any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Perm 2220.1 (R«v. 4-77) (R*v«r»)
-------
Si) OF DECISION .
Wide Beach, NY
the excavated areas; repavement of the roadways and driveways;.treatment of
the perched water in the sewer trench; construction of a hydraulic "barrier
at the end of the sewer trench; conducting a pilot plant treatability study
to determine an effective treatment scheme for chemically neutralizing the PCB-
contaminated soils; and sampling for PCBs in soils from the back, yards, the
sewage lift station, and sediments in the disconnected .septic systems to better
define the extent of the contamination. Total capital cost for the selected
remedial alternative is estimated to be $9,295,000 with no O&M costs; J ;.
-------
Record of Decision
Remedial Alternative Selection
Sitet
Wide Beach Development site. Brant Township, New York
Documents Reviewed*
I am basing my decision on the following documents describing the
analysis of the cost-effectiveness of remedial alternatives at
the Wide Beach Development sites
- Wide Beach PCB Investigation—Groundwater and Soil
Contamination, Erie County Department of Environment
and Planning, February 1982.
- Wide Beach PCB Investigation Sampling Report, Erie
County Department of Environment and Planning, November
1982. • . . , .
- Evaluation of Analytical Chemical Data for Wide Beach
Community, Brant Township, New York, NOS Corporation, August
12, 1983.
- Remedial Action Master Plan, NDS Corporation, November 1983.
- Presentation of,Analytical Chemical Data from Drinking
Water Samples Collected from Wide Beach Community, Brant
Township, New York, NDS Corporation, February 14, 1984.
- Remedial Investigation Report, EA Engineering, Science and
Technology, April 1985.
- Feasibility Study Report, EA Engineering, Science and
Technology, August 1985.
- Responsiveness Summary
- Staff summaries, memoranda, letters, and recommendations
- Summary of Remedial Action Alternative Selection—Wide
Beach Development site.
-------
Description of Selected Remedy;
- Excavation "of the PCB-contaminated soils in the roadways,
/drainage ditches, driveways, yards, and wetlands.
•- 'Disposal of the contaminated asphaltic material, retaining
. uncontaninated asphaltic material for reuse in repaving.
; - "chemical treatment of the PCB-contaminated soils.
- Use of the treated soils as fill in the excavated areas.
• - ^epaviiment of 'the roadways and driveways.
- Treatment of the perched water in the sewer trench.
- Construction of a hydraulic barrier at the end of the
"•••':•-/J'•'-•' sewer trench."-
- Pilot plant treatability study to determine an effective
treatment scheme for chemically neutralizing the PCB-
contaminated soils.
/ - Sampling for PCBs in soils from the back yarJs, sewage
; from the lift station, and sediments in the disconnected
septic systems to better define the extent of the contamination.
Declarations» \j
Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), and the National
Contingency Plan (40 CFR Part 300), I have determined that the
selected remedial strategy for the Hide Beach Development site is
a cost-effective remedy, and that it effectively mitigates and
minimizes damage to, and provides adequate protection of public
health, welfare, and the environment.
I have also determined that the action being taken is appropriate
when balanced against the availability of Trust Fund monies for
use at other sites.
-------
It is anticipated that the treatment associated with the sewer
trench perched water will be a short-term action. The
recommended remedial measure, once implemented, will not require
any long-term operation and maintenance expenditures, other than
monitoring and minimal roadway maintenance. The actions associated
with the sewer trench perched water pumping and treatment will be
considered part of the approved action and eligible for Trust
Fund monies for a period of one year.
The Region has consulted with the State of New York in selecting
the recommended remedial action for this site. The State concurs
that the selected remedial alternative is the most appropriate
remedial measure for the Wide Beach Development site.
Date Christopher J. Dag/Wst
/ A
Regional Administrator
-------
Summary of Remedial Alternatives Selection
Wide Beach Development
Site Location and Description
"Location
The Wide Beach Development site, incorporated in 1920, is a small
lake-side community located in the Town of Brant, in southern
Erie County, New York, approximately 48 kilometers (km) south of
Buffalo (see Figures 1 and 2). Wide Beach encompasses approximately
22 hectares (ha), 16 of which are developed for residential use;
the undeveloped land is largely forest (see Figure 3). The site
is bounded on the south by wetlands and the Cattaraugus Indian
Reservation, on the west by Lake Brie, and on the east and north
by residential and agricultural property.
"Site Description
Until June-July 1985 when EPA performed a drainage ditch/road
paving operation as an immediate removal action (see Site History
section of this document), the Wide Beach Development had
approximately 1.7 km of unimproved roadways, consisting of gravels
and local soils. Grass-lined drainage ditches and a series of
catch-basins, culverts, and unnamed watercourses collected and
conveyed stormwaters^ to a 3-ha marsh, draining to Lake Erie. An
area called "The Grove," located northeast of "The Oval" (see
Figure 2), is community-owned property used for recreation.
"Population
Sixty residences in the Wide Beach community accommodate
approximately 120 people in the summer months. Approximately 45
people reside at Wide Beach year-round. Along the Lake Erie
shoreline, west of Lakeshore Road in the site vicinity, population
is largely seasonal. North of the site, from Lotus Bay to
Evangola State Park, about-1.5 km north-of Wide^Beach; there
•re approximately 60 private housing units. The Synder Beach
Community, at the southern border of Wide Beach, includes approxi-
mately 150 housing units. An Indian reservation community at the
-------
• • • * 3 \h__^^^^^^^^^^^^E9
WIDE BEACH SITE
BASE MAP IS A PORTION OF THE U.S.6. S. SILVER CREEK, NY QUADRANGLE AND THE U.S.G.S.
FARNHAM, NY QUADRANGLE (BOTH 7.5 MINUTE SERIES, BOTH I960) CONTOUR INTERVAL 20'
WIDE BEACH SITE, BRANT TWR.ERIE CO., NY
SITE LOCATION MAP
SCALED I "=2000'
Figure 1
-------
!/
5 I
I
I
I
I
te Plan
igure 2
-------
ip^v 4r~v!™*" •LUU " * ». —
LEGEND*.
D
Land Use
Figure 3
-------
-5-
mouth of Cattaraugus Creek has 50-60 housing units. In addition,
there are approximately 14 housing units on both sides of Lake
Shore Road, just east and south of the Wide Beach Development.
Eleven of these units are on Reservation lands, housing the majority
of the 39 residents estimated to be the year-round population of
the entire Snyder Beach and vicinity, south of Hide Beach. During
the summer season, Snyder Beach is also used by campers.
jHydroqeology :
Wide Beach lies within the Brie-Niagara Basin in the Central
Lowlands Physiographic Province, characterized by flat terrain of
low relief. The Erie-Niagara Basin is underlain by a series
of layered sedimentary rock of Paleozoic Age, striking roughly
eastward, and dipping gently to the south. ^The *aleozic strata,
formed of fine-grained sediment deposited in a shallow sea
which covered the area during the Silurian and Devonian periods,
is overlain by unconsolidated deposits of glacial origin. The
till and glacial lake deposits were formed during the Pleistocene
Epoch, some 2 million years ago. The low relief of the area is
the result of glacial scour and lacustrine deposition. The site
itself is virtually flat, gently sloping southward to the wetland
bordering the site, and then dropping sharply to the beach.
Weathered bedrock at the site, identified as the West Falls
Formation, is described as a black to gray decomposing shale with
interbedded light gray siltstone and sandstone. This formation
very gently dips in a southerly direction. Throughout the formation,
zones of calcareous concretions are found which may also contain
some pyrite and marcasite. The bedrock layer, generally only a
few centimeters thick at the site, is locally as much as 1 meter (m)
thick in the eastern portion of the site.
A discontinuous fracture zone found in the upper surface of the
bedrock consists of shallow tension cracks caused from the movement
of the glacial ice sheet over the rock. Ground-water flows of
several liters per minute can flow through these rock joints and
fractures.
-------
-6-
The overburden at the site, averaging 3 m in thickness, is predo-
minantly till and glacial lake deposits, with the till being
composed of dark gray and brown silty clay with some rounded
rock fragments. In several soil samples obtained at the site
during the remedial investigation, fractures were found with
oxidation staining of the surfaces, associated with the percolation
of surface water through the overburden to the bedrock.
Near the lake edge and immediately next to the wetland area, the
•urficial soil is a silty sand 0.6-1.2 m thick. This soil horizon
was not found elsewhere on the Wide Beach Development site. In
the remaining areas of the development, the surficial 0.15-0.3 m
of soil is composed of dark brown silty clay with large amounts
of varying grain sizes of sand, and some gravel. Figure 4 shows
a generalized stratigraphic cross section.
The surficial soils, underlain by a brown, clayey, fine-grained
sand, are found throughout the site, except for locations near
the wetlands. The thickness of this layer varies up to 1 m.
In some locations, thin lenses of this soil alternate with layers
of a brown silty clay. This brown silty clay (till) is the next
significant soil horizon, containing some small rounded rock
fragments, and with a consistency from stiff to very stiff. A
color change in this soil horizon from brown to dark gray is
attributed to the weathering of the till in the near-surface
layers (EA Engineering). The basal, dark gray till has a higher
content of rock fragments than the brown till.
During the Remedial Investigation, a water table was rarely
rencountered, with saturated split-spoon samples sometimes being
found at 0.15-0.3 m above bedrock. This indicates that, at least
seasonally, the overlying till acts as a confining layer, imparting
on the bedrock aquifer a confined or semi-confined condition. On
this basis, the aquifer of concern at the site is the shallow
bedrock aquifer, including: the basal 0.3-0.6 m of till, locally
where coarser grained; weathered bedrock and the zone of shallow
tension cracks; and the upper few meters of open joints and
fractures. Field observations, indicate that recharge to the
7-25 m deep on-site private wells occurs predominately through
the weathered/fractured zone and open fractures in the shallow
bedrock.
-------
5
5
0' TO 4' THICK LOOSE TO MEDIUM
DENSE SILTY SAND
4* TO 8' THICK MED. DENSE, CLAY-SILT
SOME SAND LENSES
O'TO 4' THICK .SOFT-STIFF SILTY CLAY
1.5 TO 3.0 THICK,SOFT DECOMPOSED SHALE
4'TO 7.0* THICK, MED. HARD SHALE
NUMEROUS BEDDING PLANE BREAKS
HARD TO MED. HARD GRAY SHALE
WIDE BEACH SITE, BRANT TWRt ERIE CO.,NY
GENERALIZED STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 4
-------
-8-
Figure 5 illustrates the potentiometric surface of the shallow
bedrock aquifer in December 1984, when water levels were highest
with regard to measurements taken during this investigation. An
overall average gradient for the site of 0.0009 was estimated
on the basis of these contours. The wetlands at the south of the
site appear to constitute a ground-water-discharge divide between
the site and the land to the south of the wetlands. Based on the
December 1984 contours, roughly 80 percent of the site's ground-
water discharge is via the stream and wetlands, with the remaining
20 percent being discharged directly to Lake Erie.
Site History
Between 1968 and 1978, about 155 cubic meters (m3) of waste oil,
some of which was contaminated with Polychlorinated Biphenyls
(PCBs), was applied by mechanized oil spreader to the local
roadways for dust control by the Wide Beach Homeowners Association.
Reportedly, about twenty-five drums of oil were used two or
three times a year on the approximately 1.7 km of roadway. The
source of the waste oil is still being investigaged, however,
drums labeled as dielectric coolant were found on-site.
In 1980, the installation of 1.5 km of sanitary sewer line in the
community resulted in the excavation of highly contaminated soils
from the roadways and their vicinity. Because it was not known
at that time that a PCB problem existed, surplus excavated soil
was used as fill in several yards and in The Grove.
An Erie County Department of Environment and Planning (ECDEP)
investigation of an odor complaint in 1981 located 19 drums in
the nearby woods, two of which contained PCB-contaminated waste
oil. Subsequent sampling indicated the presence of PCBs in the
air, roadway dust, soil, vacuum cleaner dust, and water samples
from private wells. Based upon this data, ECDEP recommended
closing one well, and advised against planting root crops for
human consumption.
-------
I -r
I \
•o
PJ-. . . i • *.'; I' ^ | • • ^x**" ' >^ . . '. . V
v ' --D **L*lj.*' sS™* •-' ^^ ••..._ —-... \ *>v^
/^-^r^-:.:;-^V .:r-.:^ \r ' i iv«
fa&ffcr ^ ----- •-/—^ x-c" - v-i ^ -^ ->• ; - -r^i3-1
&Htr.- A" • v ' •_ "": /-. - >, **^->4.:^^\-V^\—~-- •- --:«fv,M?- I!
P^^W">fl. -V-S* •^S^5^-'V^Pf 5
:V-A 'X •^*!iB!r* - rV- >* j^~~~>1^|j".«CSrr/ -:%'- • ••-— * —*n^t .•(J£M^ 11^ -.-~ ^V^*>! ' -Vx• C~r. taM •MIMIVM lio tkM* t«*•! k* «•-
I't
MW * MffWdktliC,
Pot«ntlom«trie
Contour Map
-------
-10-
Sampling by the Region's Field Investigation Team (FIT) in April
1983 confirmed the presence of PCBs in both the ground -water and
soils. Testing for dioxin at that time indicated that it was not
present. The FIT returned to Wide Beach in raid-November 1983 to
sample all of the residential wells, detecting only trace levels of
PCBs in several. These concentrations were not deemed an imminent
health hazard to the community.
In February 1984, EPA and the State of New York signed a Cooperative
Agreement to undertake a Remedial Investigation (RI) and Feasibility
Study (PS) at the Wide Beach Development site.
In April 1985, EA Engineering, Science and Technology, the State's
contractor, completed the RI report.
In June-July 1985, in response to the levels of PCB contamination
found in the homes durin$ the RI, EPA performed an immediate
removal action to protect the public until the implementation of .
a long-term remedial measure. This action included: (1) paving* .
of the roadways, drainage areas, and driveways to prevent further
exposure of the public via the dust and runoff routes;
(2) decontamination of the homes by rug shampooing, vacuuming,
and replacement of air conditioner and furnace filters; and
(3) protection of the individual private wells from sporadic
incidents of PCB contamination by the installation of particulate
filters.
* It should be noted that it has been estimated that the asphaltic
paving of the roadways may only last 2-4 years. In order to
have constructed a more permanent roadway, excavation, so as to
allow the installation of an adequate subbase, would have been
required. However, since the roadways are contaminated, the
excavated materials would have had to been disposed of in
compliance with TSCA, magnifying the cost, considerably (by
approximately $2 million).
-------
-11-
In August 1935, EA completed a draft FS which was subsequently
released for public review and comments. The Community Relations
section of this Record of Decision (ROD) provides specific details
associated with the public review period.
To date. Potentially Responsible Parties have been identified,
and have been sent notice and information-request letters, at the
initiation of the RI/FS and notice letters before proceeding
with the immediate removal action.
Current Site Status 7
PCBs, specifically Aroclor 1254, have been found over the majority
of the Wile Beach Development site in all environmental media, with
the major reservoir being the roadway and drainage ditch soils.
Surface water runoff and infiltration, as well as the wind and
pedestrian and vehicular traffic, have transported the PCB-
contaminated soils over much of the site.
•Soils
With regard to the soils, PCB contamination was found in all but
one of the 53 unpaved driveway samples, ranging from 0.18 to .390
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg); in all but one yard and open lot
samples, ranging from <0.05 to 600 mg/kg; in all roadway samples,
ranging from 1.0 to 226 mg/kg, and in all drainage ditch samples,
ranging from 0.2 to 1026 mg/kg. In one catch basin sample, 5300
mg/kg PCB was found. The depth to which PCBs were found in the
soils at concentrations exceeding 10 mg/kg range from approximately
0.15 m in the yards, to approximately 1 m in the drainage ditches
adjacent to the contaminated roadways. Contamination was found to
an approximate depth of 0.5 m in the roadways, 0.3 m in the
driveways, and 0.2 m in the wetlands. Tables 1-7 summarize the
findings of the soil sampling investigations in the driveways-,
yards, open lots, roadways and drainage ditches.
Figure 6 summarizes each occurrence of PCB-contaminated soil or
dust at concentrations greater than 50 mg/kg at the site. This
analysis indicates PCB concentrations greater than 50 mg/kg in
the area of The Oval, north and south outside of The Oval, and
adjacent to the roadways. The eastern portion of The Oval showed
the largest cluster of high PCB concentrations.
-------
RESULTS OF PCB ANALYSIS ON SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM DRIVEWAYS AT WIDE BEACH. NEW YORK AUS 84
Station
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Name of Aroclor 1254
Resident
Heltnich
Morgante
Kalenda
Bortb
Franz
Militello
Miller
Allen
Barton
Plewak
Hickey
Schultz
Holmes
Major
Militello
Taylor
Perhach
Grey
Mason
Gillig
Hockman
Winnert
Aurelio/Mach
Shanahan
Lundberg
Murphy
Oehler
Prince
Ball
Miller
Lojacono
Gajevski
Murphy
Murphy
Plevak
Pronobis
Guerra
Meyer
Rusch
Bel loan
Grabenstatter
Franz
(me/kit)
58
25
180
110
89
11
120
390
16
16
24
11
NSU)
54
390
NS(a)
82
50
2.4
170
230
41
ND
0.18
NS(a)
12
2.8
0.40
13
6.1
130
26
190
84
17
370
87
18
NS(«)
64
26
55
Station
No.
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Station
No.
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Name of
Resident
Roe
Mueller
Bauer
Rogers
Burke
Speck
Han sen
Lyford
Murphy
Nevman
Nosbisch
Zender
Persichini
Militello
Ejner
Canteline
Boven
Aroclor 1254
(ojt/kp)
9.9
12
30
43.0
8.4
4.6
11
70
6.8
12
NS(a)
72
23
MS(a) -
.48
. 10
63
(a) Not sampled because driveway is paved.
Table 1
-------
RESULTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS ON SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM YARDS. WIDE BEACH. NEW YORK. AUGUST 1984
Station
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36A
36B
37
38
39
Name of Aroclor 1254
Resident
Helmich
Morgan te
Kalenda
Horth
Franz
Militello
Miller
Allen
Barton
Plevak
Hickey
Schultz
Holmes
Major
Militello
Taylor
Perhach
Grey
Mason
Gillig
Hockman
Winnert
Aurelio/Mach
Shanahan
Lundberg
Murphy
Oehler
Prince
Ball
Miller
Lojacono
Gajevski
Murphy
Murphy
Plevak
Pronobis(*)
Pronobis(b)
Pronobis
Guerra
Meyer
(ne/ke)
48
23
18
3.4
2.8
6.0
7.0
5.2
39
2.6
1.4
4.9
14
3.0
100
1.5
25
6.1
1.7
13
16
' 14
21
1.1
42
11
3.5
0.05
0.06
1.8
46
230
120
1.1
12
91
0.64
33
600
9.6
Station
No.
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Name of >
Resident
Rusch
Bellman •
Grabenstatter
Franz
Roe
Mueller
Bauer
Rogers
Burke
Speck
Han sen
Lyf ord
Murphy
Nevman
Nosbisch
Zender
Persichini
Militello
Egner
Can t el in e
Bow en
kroclor^^PI
(me/ke)
6.4
65
9.0
57
20
1.9
5.7
2.7
3.0
13
1.8
9.3
7.7
2.1
8.8
1.3
6.3
11
3.7
5.8
1^^^
^^^B
^^^^
(a) Sample collected in field next to Pronobis residence roadvay.
(b) Sample collected in field next to Pronobis residence 65 ft
from roadvay.
Table 2
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS FOR SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED
•- •> «•.••/*«! MM4 vnuit. MAY 1982
FROM YARDS AND OPEN LOTS 1
Station Location ...
Morgan te, 29 Oval
Horth, 38 Oval - E. of house
Militello, 60 Oval
Miller. 50 Oval
Perhach, 81 Oval
Grey, 82 Oval
Hockman, 90 Oval
Hocknan, 90 Oval
Murphy, 124 Oval
Vacant Lot
Meyera, 141 Oval
Ruach, 3 South St.
Grabenstatter, I Oval
Grabenatatter, 1 Oval
LOJJJJLJ^/^'j-P.SLJ^
Collection
, Date . .
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
KR. nm x ?u*.
Sample .
DeH IT":
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SO
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
SU
D
t
Source(b)
Yard-F
Yard-S
Yard-S
Yard-F
Yard-F
Yard-F
Yard-F
Yard-B
Yard-F
Lot
Yard-F
Yard-B
Yard-F
Yard-B
Aroclor 1254
(•fc/kft)
30.5
0.4
7.5
I.-5
110.6
3.6
12.4
0.8
23.8
1.8
6.4
1.8
2.2
<0.05
1.4
2.0
46.8
3.7
77.5
32.5
7.1
1.2
0.14
-------
. . s . _,. Station. Location . _..
Franz, 6 Oval
Rogers, 17 South St.
Burke, 21 South St.
Hanaen, 43 South St.
••
Hanaen, 43 South St.
;
Lyford, 10870 Lakeahore Rd.
i
Neman, 30 Fox St.
Neman, 30 Fox St.
Zender, 26 South St.
Militello, 20 South St.
Wooded Area
Lot Weat
Vacant Lot
Wooded Area
Lot acroaa road
Not Stated
Lot across Pox Rd.
Collection
. . Date . .
19 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
£;$•>
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D(l')
SU
D
Source* b)
Yard-B
Yard-F
Yard-B
Yard-F
Yard-B
Yard-F
Yard-F
Yard-B
Yard-B
Yard-F
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Fill Dirt
Soil
Aroclor 1254
(«R/ke)
0.5
<0.05
10.2
2.8
<0.05
0.9
5.0
14.0
1.8
0.4
20.5
12.0
12.0
3.6
0.9
ND
0.2
<0.05
3.4
1.8
3.6
0.5
8.1
8.1
23.0
2.8
56.0
1.45
28.6
18.2
11.8
11.2
37.0
1.1
Table 3
Continued
-------
SUMMARY OF PCB DETERMINATIONS CONDUCTED ON SOIL SAMPLES
COLLECTED FROM ROADWAYS OF VIDE BEACH AND ERIE COUNTY,
HEW YORK. APRIL 1983
Sample
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Location
A28-31 Center °~* in*
A28-31 South °"6 **•
A28-31 Nortb 0-6 ***•
L01-04 Center °"6 **'
L01-04 We8t °-* **'
L01-04 Ea8t °'6 *"'
E04-07 Center 3~6 in<
E04-07 Center 6~12 in>
E04-07 Center °"3 "'
E04-07 Ea8t °"3 in<
E04-07 Ea8t 3"6 in'
E04-07 East 6'12 in'
E04-07 West °"3 in*
E04-07 Vest 6"12 in'
E04-07 We8t 3"6 in*
^6-39 North °~3 in*
Aj6-j« North 3-6 in.
A>6v39 South 0-3 in.
A-. ,~ South 3-6 in.
A-, -o Center 0-3 in.
A-6-39 Center 3-6 in.
B00-03 We$t °'3 in<
B00-03 Center °"3 in<
B00-03 EMt °'3 "'
C04-07 Center °"3 "*
C04-07 South °"3 "'
C04-07 North °'3 ta'
B00-03 Em8t 3"6 in*
G04-07 Center 3"6 in*
B00-03 Center 3"6 in'
EAB 11 E**t 3~6 in«
Aroclor 1254
(mfi/ke)
4.61
9.07
29.34
5.20
7.41
11.97
4.53
5.48
5.23
7.42
59.44
12.15
6.02
9.42
38.91
53.79
17.89
26.27
1.6*2
30.37
26.37
118.09
24.15
16.19
12.53
119.18
4.52
18.65
11.01
26.32
22.61
Table 4
-------
Sample
Number
^•••^••^•^••^w
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
Location
GA, „ South 3-6 in.
04-07
E08-ll Cen"T 3"6 iQ*
A04-07 Hortb 3~* in*
^4-07 Nortb °'3 "'
A04-07 Center °"3 in'
A04-07 South °'3 in<
A04-07 Center 3'6 in'
K08-ll North 3'6 in'
C04-07 North °'3 in'
E08-ll E88t °'3 in'
E08-ll We$t 3"6 in>
Picnic Grove
K08-ll Centei °'3 in*
Hansen's Yard
A24-27 Center °"6 in*
E08-ll E*8t °'3 in'
C04-07 Center 3'6 in>
K08-ll Center 3~6 in<
K08-ll Soutb °"3 in>
E08-ll Center °"3 in>
K08-ll SoUth 3~6 "' -
C04-07 Soutb 3"6 iUt
A24-27 Soutb °"6 "'
C04-07 Mortb 3-6 in'
A24-27 N°rth °"6 in*
C04-07 Soutb °"3 in<
K08-ll Morth °'3 ln*
C04-07- Center °-3 .*"'
A04-07 Soutb 3'6 in*
C04-07 Nortb 3"6 in*
B00-03 We" 3'6 "•
E00-03 Ea8t 6"U *"'
Aroclor 1254
(me/ke)
107.52
2.94
17.96
6.87
11.34
8.19
4.97
41.05
3.48
2.40
40.13
3.80
46.54
3.73
5.44
69.92
36.36
2.31
77.00
9.85
7.96
58.80
57.54
226.00
31.10
42.24
8.09
39.16
1.57
15.71
59.40
23.09 ^m
Table^P
Continued
-------
Sample
Number
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
>
C7
rEO
• > - IS
Lt3
fte
l-Ell *l
Hal Tu Sell.
_
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
E00-03
>
c«
4
63-j
A 39
4J P
"i S' .If
"
n
Aroclor 1254
Location ^m^/ka). ,
East 3-6 in. 12.37
East 0-3 in. 7.92
West 6-12 in. 4.75
West 3-6 in. 10.14
West 0-3 in. 1.74
Center 6-12 in. 114.48
Center 3-6 in. 123.05
Center 0-3 in. 85.59
*
r
1
ti *
FOI Sn«ti 1 f
A3* A3, A,8.}, s,A,. A, M |
1 *8 KM U
&Ubtll Sl'«fl
• Locttion of toil umpitt coiHmttl ti0Ti
(OWh*av% p 982)
Location Map
Table 4
Continued
-------
SUMMARY OF PCB DETERMINATIONS FOR SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM ROADWAYS
IN WIDE BEACH COMMUNITY
. . . Station/Location ....
Morgante, 29 Oval
Miller, 50 Oval
Grey, 82 Oval
Hockman, 90 Oval
Murphy, 124 Oval
Meyers, 141 Oval
Grabenatatter, 1 Oval
Lyford, 10870 Lakeahore Rd.
Newman, 30 , Fox St.
Egner, South St.
Interaection of Oval
and Fox St.
Interaection of Oval
and Access Rd.
•
Collection
_ .Date ^ .
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
26 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
19 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
18 MAY 82
20 MAY 82
Sample
Type
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Sample »
Depth, *.
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Deep
Surface
Surface
Deep
^ Source.
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road aide
Road
Road
Aroclor 1254
(•R/ke)
60.5
6.0
'71.5
51.0
8.0
2.37
153.6
99.3
78.3
115.6
19.8
44.4
23.2
1.0
(a) Surficial aanplea taken at 0-6 in.; deep samples taken at 3 ft.
Table 5
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS ON SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM DRAINAGE DITCHES AT WIDE BEACH. ERIE COUKTY. NEW YORK. 1981 AND 1982
Collection Sample
f s. f^f Station Location ,. . Date . - Type^,
Hockman, 90 Oval 1 OCT 81 Soil
Grey, 82 Oval 19 NOV 81 Soil
V inner t, Oval 1$ NOV 81 Soil
Plevak, 128 Oval 19 NOV 81 Soil
Grabenatatter. 1 Oval 19 NOV 81 Soil
Newman, 30 Fox St. 19 NOV 81 Soil
Boven. 9 South St. 19 NOV 81 Soil
Boven, Backyard on Fox St. 19 NOV 81 Soil
SE Corner of Fox & South St. 19 NOV 81 Soil
.
»>
SU
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
SU
D
f.« Aroclor 1254
Source10' (m*/k*)
Ditch 91.9
Ditch 1.026
158
Ditch 162
8
Ditch 7.9
217.5
Ditch 28
46.4
Ditch 25
22.5
Ditch 179
125
Ditch 2.0
4.67
Ditch 25.5
5.0
(a) Surficial samples (SU) taken at 0-6 in.; deep samples (D) taken at 3 ft.
(b) Samples taken at drainage ditches located in front of residences.
(c) Sample taken at vaste-oil barrel storage area.
Table 6
-------
Collection Sample Sanpla. ,.*
. Station Location .. . . , , Date , . Type Depth. .„ Source. .
Veat aide of Oval. NE corner 19 NOV 81 Soil SU
D
Genrack Eatate 19 NOV 81 Soil SU
D
Grey. 82 Oval MAR 82 Soil SU
Mil it el lo. 60 Oval 19 MAY 82 Soil SU
D
Miller. 50 Oval 19 MAY 82 Soil SU
D
Hockaan, 90 Oval 20 MAY 82 Soil SU
.,.-•• '...'.-. • D
Plewak, 128 Oval 20 MAY 82 Soil SU
..'..'• •••..'•' ' '•••'..''' &
Hellnan, 2 South St. 18 MAY 82 Soil SU
• • '" ' ' :'•• - . ':. " • I> '
''..'•• Ditch on south aide o£ 18 MAY 82 Soil SU
•"' • • -. ;-.-'•• • FO* Rd. • ';-.--.•. , •••.•• •• ;••• " ' •••.'•' • '• •. • D. /.-
Ditch north aide of Fox Rd. 18 MAY 82 Soil Su
• '•'.'••..•:'.'„ •' '.": •..;' -.';•' .•'.'•. '; ' . •'••»' •••.?•.'..'•.' ' • ". - '';-''; ', •' •'. D
:; '.;•'.- ;• •. ; _: j. '. \r ;!;;'r' ?'••"'•<''.;; V-t .•/'•. ,: •'"-'''. •^•' '..'].' :;-•' •.;'... ..-•.', :;- ;.':'^/ '. '•'•::• . ''•:'-•''.•' ''' . \ '••••!'iy
'* '' • , ; * '- ' V i • ' . . •'_ .'..'•• • ' '. , • ' . ' •.',-• '.'.•'. -.•''•.'•'•/.• '•''.•' '•''''•''''.•'-•'•' '.'''.''
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch
Ditch(c)
i •
Concentration
(mtt/ke)
67.5
340
0104
0.05
121
205.9
59.1
4.4
1.6
236.9
56.0
0.3
0.2
79.0
2.2
114
1.4
487
18.4
Mible 6
ntlnued
-------
Station
Number
OW-1
OU-2
OW-3
OW-4
OW-5
OU-6
OW-7
OV-8
OU-9
OW-10
OW-11
OW-1 2
OW-1 3
Station Location . ,
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai (1-4 in.)
Surficiai
Surficiai (0-4 in.)
Surficiai (0-4 in.)
Surficiai (0-4 in.)
Surficiai (0-6 in.)
Surficiai (0-6 in.)
Catch Baa in 3
Catch Baa in 6
Catch Baa in 7
Catch Baa in 8
Catch Baa in 12
Surficiai Outfall 1
Surficiai Outfall 2
Open Lot 1 (1 ft)
Open Lot 1 (2 ft)
Open Lot 2 (1 ft)
Open Lot 2 (2 ft)
Open Lot 3 (1 ft)
'Open Lot 4(1 ft)
Open Lot 4 (2 ft)
Open Lot 4(3 ft)
Open Lot 4 (4 ft)
SUMMARY OP PCB DETERMINATIONS IN SOIL SAMPLES (SPLIT SPOON AND BORINGS) COLLECTED
AT WIDE BEACH.. TOWN OF BRANT. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK. SEPTEMBER 1984
MW-1
MW-2
Mrf-3
Surficiai (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficiai (0-4 in.)
Collection
.Date . .
4 SEP 84
5 SEP 84
6 SEP 84
6 SEP 84
7 SEP 84
10 SEP'84
12 SEP 84
11 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
17 SEP 84
17 SEP 84
29 NOV 84
29 NOV 84
8 SEP 84
8 SEP 84
8 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
8 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
9 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
17 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
Sample
Type .
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
. Soil
Aroclor 1254
(mjt/ke) . .
18
670
1.5
99
0.45
17
100
22
0.90
5.7
6.7
0.027
0.019
190
5,300
370
64
120
220
120
34
33
5.5
9.1
16
98
1.2
1.4
0.04
13
10
15
Table 7
-------
Station
Number
HW-4
MH-5
MH-5
MU-6
MW-6
>M-7
MW-8
SW-1
JW-2
SW-3
SW-4
SU-5
SW-6
B-l
B-l
B-l
B-2
B-2
B-2
B-3
B-3
B-3
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-5
B-5
B-6
B-6
Station Location . . ._.
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 4 (8.0-8.5 ft)
Sample 5 (10.5-11.0 ft)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-4 in.)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 9 (7.5-8.01 ft)
Sample 10 (9.0-9.5 ft)
Surficial (0-2 in.)
Sample 4 (7.5-8.0 ft)
Sample 5 (9.5-10.0 ft)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 5 (7.5-8.0 ft)
Sample 6 (9.5-10.0 ft)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 4 (7.0-7.5 ft)
Sample 5 (8.0-8.5 ft)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 5 (9.0-9.5 ft)
Surficial (0-6 in.)
Sample 5 (9.5-10.0 ft)
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Collection
Date ,
24 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
25 SEP 84
25 SEP 84
26 SEP 84
29 NOV 84
18 SEP 84
18 SEP 84
19 SEP 84
19 SEP 84
27 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
27 SEP 84
27 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
Sample
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Aroclor 1254
(me/kg) ^
110
0.71
ND
ND
12
0.03
0.014
120
13
0.88
20
34
180
0.13
0.015
0.12
190
0.008
0.005
48
0.008
0.21
240
0.011
0.009
47
0.14
28
0.04
ND
ND
ND
-------
D c
°..^ •
a° '•
a
c?o
da
ao
P
S^ a
'°&tf^ °
"ftP o
Y*W
^-.-.s.tt,
L<'»
'a
o
a
a c5"
cPoCj
T
a
Q
o
A3
L-» K n • j1 * • - - « —"-
swfcjJi^/^ifTft
a-^o-. ffi^Sfc D^ f «•«
(MktMMI
_-#^vO
IfC ""
II
I*
—r^l!
•i .JAx (i.j
a
tacatlmt •( Mtl
ol *C*
tot all •Mf»lln« •»-
to
On-Site Soil Samples Location Hap
figure 6
-------
-25-
Several soil areas in the northeastern portion of the site have
very high PCB concentrations O500 mg/kg), however, these samples
do not reveal a particular pattern.
'Surface Water
Until the covering of the roadways and drainage areas in the
summer of 1985, surface water was the primary transport mechanism
off-site. The PCBs present in stormwater runoff from the site
appeared to be primarily associated with the particulate fraction
in the runoff. The variation in PCB distribution in the runoff
over time indicated erosion, with the highest, concentrations
appearing at the storm'event onset. Surface-water erosion was
most likely responsible for the majority of the contaminant
redistribution observed on-site. High PCB concentrations observed
in the wetlands area to the south have presumably resulted from
stormwater runoff, with the wetland marsh acting as a sediment
trap. The deposited sediment, thus constitutes at least a temporary
reservoir for the transported PCBs. PCBs may be released from
this reservoir by re-equilibration with water or by resuspension
of the sediment during a storm event. The ultimate sink for
waterborne-PCBs is Lake Erie. This whole process in the wetland
would vary seasonally owing to the intermittent nature of discharge
to Lake Erie through the wetland/stream outlet.
j
Sediment cores taken from the marsh area located at the southern
end of Hide Beach (see Table 8) indicate PCB concentrations
ranging from nondetectable to 126 mg/kg. Generally, PCB levels
were higher in the top sections of sediment cores with the only
significant concentrations being found in the immediate vicinity
of the storm drain outfalls.
The PCB loading to the stream/wetland system, and to Lake Erie,
prior to the road paving was established based on estimated
runoff volumes -and'-PC-B-concentrations; - -Since the concentrations
reported for the outfalls in Table 9 would be typical of runoff,
PCB concentrations in runoff were calculated to be 19.34 and
0.86 nicrogram/liter (ug/1) for the particulate and dissolved
fraction, respectively, with a total value of 20.20 ug/1. With
a total site area of 22 ha, drainage to the stream/wetland system
was estimated to be 19 ha. Additionally, 1.5 ha appear to
drain off-site to the north.
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS ON MARSH SEDIMENT CORES
COLLECTED ATWIDB BEACH SITE. ERIE COUNTY.. NEW YORK
Number
Cl
C2
C3
C3
C4
C4
C4
C5
C5
C5
C6
C6
C7
C7
C8
C8
C9
C9
CIO
CIO
Cll
C12
C12
C13
C13
Station
Location . . . .
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Wide Beach Wetland
Collection
.Date .
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
30 AUG 84
Overall
Core Length
(in.) .
4.25
2.87
14.0
18.75"
17.37
13.87
14.12
10.75
10.87
11.37
6.75
9.63
14.63
Segment
Length
.(in.)
4.25
2.87
7.0
7.0
6.25
6.25
6.25
5.87
5.87
5.87
6.94
6.94
7.06
7.06
4.37
4.37
5.44
5.44
5.69
5.69
6.75
4.81
4.81
7.31
7.31
Segment
Designation
All
All
Top
Bottom
Top
Middle
Bottom
Top
Bottom
Middle
Top
Bottom
Top
Bottom
Top
Bottom
Top
Bottom
Top
Bottom
All
Top
Bottom
Top
Bottom
Aroclor 1254
. (mfc/kR)
0.08
0.02
0.07
0.13
0.17
ND
ND
2.4
0.02
0.01
70
1.8
3.7
0.01
13
0.70
1.4
0.12
6.4
0.40
200
5.5
0.09
2.2
0.02
Table 8
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF TOTAL AND DISSOLVED PCB
AROCLOR 1254 DETERMINATIONS ON STORM-WATER SAMPLES
COLLECTED 30 AUGUST 1984. WIDE BEACH. NEW YORK
Station
Outfall 1
Outfall 1
Outfall 1
Outfall 1
Outfall 1
Outfall 1
Marsh 1
Marsh 1
Marsh 1
Marsh 1
Catch Basin 1
Catch Basin 1
Catch Basin 1
Catch Basin 1
Collection
Tine
1135
1205
1235
1335
1435
1530
1215
1315
1415
1515 .
1215
4
1315
1415
1515
Dissolved Total
Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1254
(ue/1) (ue/1)
0.92
0.46
0.47
0.78
1.0
1.4
0.08
0.30
ND
0.04
0.51
0.95
1.4
1.5
93
8.0
6.4
5.2
4.0
4.6
0.28
2.9
0.26
0.20
14
13
11
11
Table 9
-------
-28-
In a worst case scenario assuming that all of the storm runoff,
estimated at 62 centimeters/year (cm/yr), is surface flow, the
average surface water flow was estimated to be 7.2 x 106 and
8.5 x 107 liters/year to the lake and stream/marsh, respectively,
representing a maximum potential loading of 0.14 and 1.7 kg of
PCBs to the lake and stream/marsh systems, respectively. Assuming
that the total PCBs discharged to the stream/marsh will reach
Lake Brie, a loading of 1.8 kg/yr to Lake Erie would be expected
via stormwater runoff. An estimated 0.13 kg/yr of PCBs would be
transported off-site to the north in storm runoff.
"Ground water
Ground-water data indicate that one of eight monitoring wells,
and all six sewer trerr-h wells were contaminated with Aroclor
1254 (see Tables 10 and 11). Based or* the drinking water sampling
studies, twenty-one of sixty residential wells have been contaminated
at some point in time (see Table 12). Levels of Aroclor 1254 in
residential wells, however, are both low and sporadic in occurrence.
The sewer trench well samples had the highest values of all
ground-water samples.
The surficial soils from the sewer trench wells are also
contaminated, although there is no correlation between levels in
the soil and those in the wells.
PCB contamination of the ground water may have occured either by
PCB leaching from the surficial soils via infiltration, or by
migration from disturbed soil where contaminated surficial soils
have been buried at deeper levels. This may have occured during
the sewer installation or excavation activities associated with
gas and other pipeline repair.
-------
SUMMARY OF PRIORITY POLLUTANT COMPOUNDS DETERMINED IN AQUEOUS SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM
MONITORING tfELLS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE TOWN OF BRANT. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK
AUrln
Alpbi INC
lrl> MIC
Chloral**
«.*--DDk
4.V-DOK
DUUtU
Moral !*• I
KmUralUn SnlUl*
RwlrU
AMcbyJ*
Nclhoiycbl**
rci lou
rci IDI
re» mi
re* me
rci i»4
rci i MO
j>njt
«t/l
•I/I
«W/I
«l/l
•I/I
•l/l
•I/I
•8/1
•I/I
•Hi/I
«*/!
OR /I
•n/l
n/i
t/i
«t/i
•K/l
«|/l
•I/I
•I/I
•I/I
«|/l
MR/I
!!tl
Ml
Ml
ND
Ml
Ml
NO
ND
NO
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
ND
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
MI
NO
ND
"M.-J
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
NO
ND
NO
NO
NO
Ml
NO
ND
Ml
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ml
Nil
NO
11=)
Ml
Ml
NH
Ml
Ml
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
NO
0.1
ND
!*-.»
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
Ml
ND
Ml
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
SL-5
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
Ml
ND
ND
NO
ND
NO
ND
Ml
Ml
Ml
ND
m
Ml
ND
NO
Ml
Htf
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
M
Ml
Ml
ND
Nn
Ml
NO
Ml
Nil
ND
ND
NO
Ml
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
ND
fltl
ND
NO
NO
NO
MI
Ml
M
NO
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Ml
Ml
Ml
!•».-!
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
NO
Nl-
Ml
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
NO
ND
NO - Net 4«t*cl*4 «t r*t»Mith»d 4«t*cti«*
le 10
-------
SUMMARY OP PCB CONCENTRATIONS DETERMINED IN AQUEOUS SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM SEWER TRENCH WELLS. WIDE BEACH. TOWN OF BRAflT. NEW YORK
Station. Location
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SU-4
SW-5
SH-6
1016
(Uft/l)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1221
(UR/I)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1232
(UR/I)
ND
ND
NDk
ND
ND
ND
PCB
1242
( UR/ 1 )
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1248
(UR/D
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1254
(UR/I)
2.5
4.3
1.4
2.6
5.7
1.5
1260
(UR/I)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Table 11
-------
SUMMARY OP ALL SAMPLING EFFORTS CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE PCB CONCENTRATIONS (ug/1)
IN RESIDENTIAL WELL WATER
HJMC of
Res id tnt
Orlnich
HnrRmile
Ralemla
llnrlh
Frant
Hililello
Miller
Allen
••lion
Mewak
Ilickry
Slmllt
llolaca
Ha (or
Hilitello
Taylor
Perhaeh
C,e,
Hatun
ciliig
llockitan
Winner I
Anrelio
Shanahan
Utndbcrg
Station
No. 3 SKf 81
1 0.66
2
3
4
J
6
1
B
9
10 0.6)
II
12
13
U
1)
16
17
18
19
20
21 4.i6
22
23
24
2)
r.rie Cminjjf D*pt , of Environment i f fanning, . ..__
\1 SKI-. 81 1 OCT 81 19 HAY 02
O.JO NO 0.0ft
NO
NO
0.06
NO
NO
NO
o.o;
NO
NO ND NO
NO
HO
--
—
—
NO
NO
ND
0.69 NO ND
ND
NO
ND
2_l JUL H2
NO
Nil
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nil
NO
0.16
0.10
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
—
ND
ND
1) Stl' 82
NO
NO
0.12
Nil
NO
0.10
ND
NO
--
ND
O.OB
0.16
NO
—
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
—
NO
NO
KPA Beg ion II KA
,riT Sanplint Engineering
6 ATR 8) 8-11 NOV 83 AUC 84
NO
no
ND
Beach vel I:NN
Drilled well:ND<«)
NO Nil
0.61 NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nll<«>
NO
0.7VMI NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
ND
I
ND
NO
0.06
...
NO
—
NO
0.16
—
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
--
ND
NO
NO
(•) No I'CHa were delecti-d in pre- or nnit-trnalvd vMer
(h) W«lrr imp If collected poal-f it t eritl.
le 12
-------
HIM* of SIM ion
Ke»iJ<-tU , Ho.
Murphy
Oehler
Pr ince
Rail
Nil lee
l.ajieono
Cijewtki
Murphy
Murphy
Pl«v*k
Pronubii
Cueir*
Meyer
Rufch
fein
Crobbenitctlcr
Vrani
Roe
Mueller
Riuer
Roftert
Ruck*
Sp*efc
Hunirn
l.yl ord
Hiiiptiy
N.-MMI,
No ih itch
7. null- c
Pertichini
Nilitrllo
KRner
Ctnlel ine
H..»rn
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3)
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
4)
46
47
48
49
iO
M
J2
iJ
)4
ii
56
5>
58
59
60
Erie Count* Uept. ot f.nviron»fnl_J>_P!•"!• jfli
EPA Ri-Riun II
MT SMM.III
KA
Nil
Hit
NU
1.32
Nil
i; SM> 81 1 OCT 81 19 MAT H2
Nil
Nil
HO NU NU
» *•
Nil
Nil
NU
HO HO NU
Nil
Nil
NU
HU
NU
0.06
ND
HII
O.I
0.70 HD NO
Nil
Nil
0.21 NU
Nil
ND
NU
Nil HI) NU
i\ JUI. 82
0.08
Nil
110
0.80
Nil
ND
HU
NU
Nil
Nil
Nil
0.06
Nil
Nil
HD
ND
Nil
0.14
Nil
Nil
nn
NU
NU
.0.05
1> StP 112
HO
NO
NO
—
ND
NO
ND
ND
—
HII
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
NO
0.11
HD
0.06
NO
NU
NO
• NO
NU
6_APR_8) R-ll NUV BJ
HO
HU
H0(«)
HO
HO
2.0
HO
HII
HUU)
HII
Hll<«)
NO
HO
HO
NO
HO
HD
HO
NO
HU NO
NU
h»(b)
NU* • '
mi
m...- - - •••*»
AH: 84
Nil
NU
__
i
Nil
0.06
HU
—
HII
HO
HU
HD
HU
ND
NU
Nil
NU
Nil
NO
HII
0.06
0.12
HO
HU ,
Nil
Nil
--
Nil
—
HI- Table 12
Continues
Nil
Nil
-------
-33-
Following application of the PCB-contaminated oil to the ground
surface, it is believed that the PCBs migrated through the un-
saturated zone toward the water table. Initially, this movement
nay have been in the bulk oil phase, however, as PCBs move into
the soil, they become tightly bound to the soil particles. This
generally appears to have happened within the top 18 cm of soil
at the Wide Beach site. Further migration of the PCBs probably
occurred via solubization in water infiltrating through the
vadose cone. The factors controlling solubilization typically
are the soil organic carbon - water partition coefficient (4.25
x 10* for Aroclor 1254) and the soil organic content (approximately
1.3 percent at Wide Beach).
As water moves through the soils, PCB are adsorbed and desorbed
by organic matter, resulting in a slowing or retardation of the
PCB movement. The PCB concentrations in the ground water associated
with soils can be estimated by calculating the equilibrium state
of a soil/water mixture from soil PCB concentrations, the partition
coefficient, the soil organic content, and the soil/water content.
Using typical and high soil PCB concentrations of 50 and 500
ug/1, respectively, the resulting ground-water concentration of
PCBs can be expected to be from 3.2 to 32 ug/1 at equilibrium.
Although it is very difficult to fix a precise value to the PCB
migration rate through the unsaturated soils on-site, it is
possible to draw the following conclusions:
t
1. PCBs have migrated downward through the vadose zone.
2. The surficial soils will act as a long-term (possibly
thousands of years) source of PCBs.
3. Migration via this route may have resulted in low level
ground-water contamination in the saturated zone.
4. The potential exists for more significant ground-water
contami"n-ati-on~'Via"-t'his~ route:"in.-the~ f uture.-•-.-•• - — —• .
Installation of the sewer system in 1980 resulted in backfilling
of the sewer trench excavation with PCB-contaminated soils removed
from the surface of the trenches. As a result, another potential
transport mechanism may be these sewer system trenches. The
sewer trench construction includes a bedding material of Number
1 stone, without any flow blockage. The low specific surface
area and organic carbon content of the backfill will result in
relatively little retardation of PCB transport. .7:.
-------
-34-
Therefore, the sewer trenches represent a potential conduit for
rapid PCB transport, either into the bedrock or off-site to
Lotus Point to the north. The results of ground-water analysis
of samples from the sewer trench wells (refer to Table 11) confirm
the presence of PCBs, and reinforce the theory of high transport
potential in the sewer trench. This theory is further substantiated
by the relatively high level of PCBs found in monitoring well
SW-3 (1.4 ug/1) (see Figure 7), situated approximately 43 m
north of The Oval in an area of low surficial PCB contamination
(0.88 mg/kg). The PCBs found in the SW-3 water sample probably
migrated through the bedding from a point near the road.
Migration of PCBs to saturated ground water is possible through
other pathways, as well. Since high levels of PCBs have been
detected in house dust, it is possible that PCB-contaminated
soils and other materials may have been disposed of in the now
inactive septic systems through general house cleaning, as well as
laundering and bathing, allowing transport to the ground water via
the septic leach field. Also, many drinking water wells may not
be properly grouted, potentially resulting in a rapid conduit
from the surface for surface water carrying PCB-contaminated soil
particles. Compared to the other more obvious transport pathways,
migration via these pathways is difficult to quantify.
Saturated zone contaminant migration is primarily in a horizontal
direction, with retardation of PCB movement in the saturated
overburden being the same as in the unsaturated zone. In the
fractured bedrock, however, transport is far less likely to be
retarded, due to lower surface area and organic matter available
for adsorption. In bedrock, the PCB velocity is highly dependent
on the nature of the fracturing. It is conceivable that in some
fractures, water velocities in the meter per day range are possible,
and little if any PCB retardation is occurring. Under such a
condition, transport of PCBs would be quite rapid.
With the exception of the potential for some movement to the
north through the sewer trench bedding, migration of ground
water from the Wide Beach Development site appears unlikely.
Based on estimates of area of ground-water drainage from the
site into Lake Erie and the stream/wetland system (4 and 19 ha,
respectively), an average annual ground-water discharge of 4
million liters directly to Lake Erie and to the stream/wetland
system can be calculated. Assuming an average PCB concentration
of 50 mg/kg across the site, the ultimate maximum PCB ground-water
discharge would be approximately 0.014 and 0.059 kg/yr to Lake
Erie and stream/wetland, respectively, for a total of 0.073 kg/yr.
-------
>M n
LJ — Font Main
feinty Stw«r
limin ol Influent*
Baxd on Ground Surfac*
Sm> Urn locMkxn in ih*
loutk>m
I«dicin4 by itimlw. tftom "Hhc«n
difftctmn of flow.
limit! ol Influence
Ground Surfacl
sewer trench
Sample
-------
-36-
*Dust and Air
Vacuum cleaner dust samples from forty-seven of the sixty residences
showed PCB levels ranging from 0.25 to 770 mg/kg (see Table 13).
Ambient air particulate samples indicated PCB levels ranging from
0.040 to 0.307 mg/m3. Table 14 lists total suspended particulate
levels, which reflect the quantity of roadway dust particles in the
atmosphere that could be PCB-contaminated.
Based on the ambient dust measurements and meteorological conditions,
the concentrations of airborne PCBs, both in the vapor and sorbed
phase, were modeled for conditions prior to the roadway paving
activities. For a worst case scenario, the on-site concentration
was 0.29 ug/m^, and the concentration at Lotus Point was 6.3 x
10~3 ug/m3. For an average case scenario, the concentration on-site
was 4.6 x 10~3 ug/m3j at Lotus Point, 1.7 x 10~3 ug/m3. Because the
road surfaces are now paved, the ambient dust concentrations would
be significantly less.
Based upon a review of the data, no apparent PCB distribution
pattern was observed at this site. Linear correlation analysis
for vacuum cleaner dust, yard soil, driveway soil, and roadway
soils revealed no statistically significant associations.
"Biota
Live-trapping of small mammals was conducted at three on-site and
two off-site locations to collect liver tissue for PCB determinations.
Table 15 summarizes PCB Aroclor 1254 concentrations in mammal
liver tissue and percent lipids. PCB values were normalized for
percent lipids. Normalized values ranged from 6.7 to 69.6 mg/kg
for on-site samples.
*PCB Chemistry
PCBs are not subject to hydrolysis, oxidation, or thermal degradation
at environmentally significant rates (EPA 1980; Callahan 1979),
leaving photolysis and biodegradation as the only chemical routes
for decay. Most PCB congeners will undergo photolysis to some extent,
but the rate of this process is very clow. Considering the fact
that sorbed PCBs may not be available for absorption of solar energy,
photolysis will probably not be important at Wide Beach. Additionally,
photolysis does not result in complete degradation of the PCB molecule
and reaction products may be more toxic than PCBs themselves.
-------
SUMMARY OF REtJLTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS ON VACUUM DUST
SSffLES COLLECTED FROM RESIDENCES, WIDE BEACH, NEW YORK,
Station
Nuaber
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
g
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
•> 4
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
Residence
Helnich
Morgante
Kalenda
Hortb
Franz
Militello
Miller
Allen
Barton
Plevak
Hickey
Schultz
Holmes
Major
Militello
Taylor
Perbach
Grey
Mason
Gillig
Hockman
Winnert
Aurelio
Shanahan
Lundberg
Murphy
Oehler
Prince
Ball
Miller
Lojacono
Gajevski
Gajevski
Murphy
Murphy
Plevak
Pronobis
Guerra
Meyer
Rutch
Helloan
Aroclor 1254
(me /Ice)
I9S2 19B4
22
35
(a)
24
(a)
20
6.0
21
(a)
3.3
(a)
3.6
(a)
4.0
0.87
(a)
0.60
6.4
3.4
41.0 3.5
4.0
(a)
2.0
2.2
25
1.6
460
770
(a)
(a)
1.6
5.8
3.5
-------
SUMMARY OP RESULTS OF TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE COLLECTED
AT WIDE. BEACH. NEW. YORK, AUGUST, 1984,
. . Date r .
31 AUC 84
1 SEP 84
2 SEP 84
3 SEP 84
3 SEP 84
5 SEP 84
6 SEP 84
7 SEP 84
8 SEP 84
9 SEP 84
10 SEP 84
11 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
Unit
mg/*3
ng/«3
Bg/n3
ng/ffl3
og/«3
wg/m3
«g/«3
Bg/m3
mg/n3
mg/m3
ng/m3
ng/n3
»g/«3
mg/n3
Station 1
(Field. Off ice)
0.107
—
0.116
0.057
0.050
0.075
0.085
0.128
0.153
0.111
0.103
0.045
0.085
0.073
Station 2
(Plevak)
0.182
0.216
0.254
0.107
0-.117
0.108
0.147
0.301
0.453
0.247
0.211
0.086
0.198
0.149
Station 3
(Prince)^
0.307
0.099
0.125
0.056
0.064
0.061
0.046
0.121
0.127
0.092
0.093
0.047
0.089
0.071
Station 4
.(Rush).
0.100
0.090
0.128
0.056
0.040
0.056
0.041
0.102
0.125
0.091
0.093
0.044
0.079
0.067
Station 5
(Crabbengtatter)
0.175
0.132
0.135
0.060
0.104
0.165
0.110
0.145
0.187
0.117
0.096
0.044
0.102
0.066
Table 1«
-------
SUMMARY OP RESULTS OF PCB DETERMINATIONS ON ANIMAL TISSUE COLLECTED
AT WIDE BEACH. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK
Number(b)
, x Collection Sample of
Station Location Date Type Subsamples
1 Roadside shrub 28 AUG 84 Liver 8
tissue
t.
2 Backyard 28 AUG 84 Liver 8
tissue
3 Wetland 30 AUG 84 Liver 9
* tissue
4 Wetland, Control 29 AUG 84 Liver 5
: t i s sue
5 Roadside, Control 30 AUG 84 Liver 4
tissue
I
Concentrations
Concentration Normal iced
Aroclor 1254 Z for Z Lip ids
(mE/kE) Lipids (me/ke)
15.0 1.64 9.2
220.0 3.16 69.6
9.5 1.42 6.7
0.27 2.72 0.1
ND(c) 2.12 ND
,'
(a) Refer to Plate 1 and Figure A-2 (in Appendix A) for actual locatibn of trap lines.
(b) Liver samples from organisms captured vere composited.
(c) ND - not detected.
le 15
-------
-40-
PCBs with four or fewer chlorines are biodegradable, however, at
a slow rate. Tucker (1975) found that only 19 percent of Aroclor
1254 was degraded in 48 hours of treatment with activated sludge.
Under controlled conditions, Aroclor 1254 can be degraded 'by soil
microorganisms, with the rates for biodegradation in sediment
ranging between 10*"10 to 10~13 nanograms/miliimeter-hour
(ng/ml-hr) (HAS 1980). Thus, although it is unlikely that bio-
degradation will be significant at Wide Beach, there may ultimately
be some removal of congeners with four or less chlorines.
The by-products of PCB metabolism by soil microorganisms are
largely unknown. However, studies of mammalian metabolism (Matthews,
1983) and aquatic microorganisms (Shiarls and Sayler, 1982) have
identified several classes of metabolic products. Extrapolation
from these studies to soil systems gives the best indication of
potential soil metabolites. The major chemical classes of
metabolites are chlorinated benzole acids, hydroxylchlorobiphenyJs,.
and dihydrodichlorobiphenyls. Shiarls and Sayler identified
chlorobenzoyl formic acid (chlorophenylglyoxylic acid) as a
product of aquatic degradation, thus substituted glyoxylic acids
may also be a soil metabolite. Because the chemical characteristics
and toxicities of these compounds are not well defined, the fate
and effects of the metabolites are very difficult to predict.
4
PCB metabolites will be more mobile in ground water than PCBs due
to their greater water solubilities and diminished lipophilicity.
Thus, it is likely that if microbial degradation is occurring at
the site, the ground water could become contaminated with
metabolites. Generally, the higher water solubilities and
biodegradability of the monochlorobenzoic acids suggest that they
will not pose an environmental threat or health hazard (EA
Engineering).
While dichlorobenzoic acids appear to be more acutely toxic than
Aroclor 1254, there is no information to indicate their chronic
toxicity, mutagenicity, or carcinogenesis relative to PCBs. A
potential problem associated with the environmental fate of PCBs
is the formation of polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs).
Converted from PCBs by heat or photolytic processes, PCDPs
have been found to be considerably more toxic than PCBs (Bardiera
1984). PCDPs, however, were not detected at Wide Beach.
-------
-41-
*0ther Contaminants
In addition to PCS Aroclor 1254, relatively low levels of several
organic priority pollutants were found at the site, including
methylene chloride, acetone, tetrachloroethene, fluoro-
trichloromethane, xylene, trihalomethane, chrysene, fluoranthene,
pyrene, benzo (a) anthracene, benzo (a) pyrene, bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, di-n-butylphthalate and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (see
Tables 16 and 17). A typical Aroclor 1254-based transformer
dielectric contains tri- and tetra-chlorobenzenes in addition
to 45 percent PCBs and organic stabilzers (NIOSH 1977). Phthlates
and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene have been used in dielectric fluids.
Trichlorobenzenes have been used in conjunction with PCBs in
transformers. Methylene chloride and acetone are probably
laboratory or sampling artifacts, and the Bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate is a common plasticizer and rather ubiquitous in the
environment.
The presence of organics at the site is significant because the
mobility of the PCBs is not only related to the nobility of the
carrier oil, but to other organics present, as well.
Table 18 illustrates the metals found in the on-site soil samples.
Mo evidence of significant inorganic contamination, however, was
found in water samples' at Wide Beach (see Tables 19 and 20).
Nickel was somewhat elevated as compared to national averages,
however, this is probably naturally occurring (EA Engineering).
Other metals were within average values for U.S. soils. With
respect to semi-metals, selenium, the origin of which is unknown,
was found at soil levels beyond the range of typical values.
"Human Health
It may be concluded that some degree of contamination exists over
the entire Wide Beach Development site. The most significant
levels of contamination were found in the sewer trench well
samples, soils adjacent to the roadways, and wetlands sediments.
Soil contamination is primarily surficial. The distribution of
PCBs indicates that transport may have occurred by pedestrian
and vehicular traffic, by stormwater runoff, by atmospheric
dispersion, and by previous excavation and relocation activities.
Although much of the contamination has been covered, it is not
necessarily contained by the roadway, driveway, and drainage
ditch paving. Possible exposure to PCBs are generally analyzed
by routet ingestion, inhalation, or dermal exposure.
-------
SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANICS DETERMINATIONS (ug/kg) FOR SOIL SAMPLES
COLLECTED AT WIDE BEACH. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK. SEPTEMBER 1984
Location
Outfall 2
-1
-2
-4
-5
-5
-6
-6
MW-5
MU-5
MU-6
Collection
Date
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
12 SEP 84
13 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
27 SEP 84
27 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
24 SEP 84
25 SEP 84
Sample
Depth
0-6 in.
9-9.5 ft
7.5-8 ft
7-7.5 ft
0-6 in.
9-9.5 ft
0-6 in.
9.5-10 ft
0-6 in.
8-8.5 ft
0-4 in.
Sample
Type
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil
Methylene
Chloride
60
160
60
H ».
260
40
300
230
200
350
260
Tetra-
chloroethene Acetone
27
260
.
—
—
— —
—
-- —
__ —
—
—
Fluoro-
trichloromethane
—
-_
12
48
*•••
—
—
—
—
—
—
Note: A dashed line indicatea that compound vaa not detected in the sample.
le 16
-------
SUMMARY OF BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS DETECTED IN SOILS COLLECTED FROM MONITORING WELLS
AND BORINS LOCATIONS. HIDE BEACH. NEW YORK
Di-n-lral?)
B»nro(«) Urntod) Ri>nto(| ,h. I)
HU-6
HM-ft
B I
*-1
B-*
• -i
B-6
SnrlicUl
llrcp
Deep
Drtp
Ottf
SurficUl
Surf Ic 1*1
O.I
1.4
8.5
O.I
O.I
O.I
*-°
0.2 O.I
O.I O.I
O.J
Table 17
-------
SUMMARY OF METAL. PHENOL, AND CYANIDE CONCENTRATIONS DETERMINED IN SOIL SAMPLES
COLLECTED FROM THE VICINITY OF THE TOWN OF BRANT. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK
SI •Ij.MiJjK •« Jew. „_
S»tfi-».* Ill
l«.rl» 10 If.O ».» II)
U.Vi.O II)
(f.t-IO.O II)
ll.l-I.O II)
:».«-».» ii)
i.o-s.J H)
tO-4 ll)
S«.»l* J If.t-f.J II)
S«*
.«*4
.Ulf
.»r.
.«»•»
.114*
.«!>•
.011
.«in
.IIW
.1147
.I'VI
.II\O
.«%%
.UM>
.nv>
M
)l
II
40
40
41
44
II
11
10
)l
I)
41
41
II
0.01
0.01
»Mr
..<-r./»i:>.
•«.K4
•ii.n*
•n.lil
•n.ii*
• » «l
• n.«*
•n.ul
• e.in
-------
SUMMARY OP METALS, CYANIDE, AMD PHENOL DETERMINATIONS (mg/l) OF AQUEOUS SAMPLES
COLLECTED PROM MONITORING WEILS. WIDE REACH.. ERIE COUNTY. NEW YORK
^ Parameter ^
Total Cyanide
Ant loony
Araenie
•eryllinai
CaiUiiM
Total CliroaitM
Copper
Lend
Mercury
Nickel
SeleniiMB
Silver
Thallium
7. inc
Plicuola
Siwple
.!ȣ_
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
.fltJ-
2
0.002
0.001
0.004
<0.0002
1.21
<0.002
-------
SUMMARY OP METAL CONCENTRATIONS DETERMINED IN AQUEOUS SAMPLES COLLECTED
FROM RESIDENCES OF THE TOWN OF BRANT. ERIE COUNTY. NEW, YORK
*
Hrlljt ^
M 0«al
H 0»a 1
101 Oval
fo iival
tl Oval
tt Uval
tO Oval
to (Hal
* S«fk
41 Oval
* VUr track
1 11 Uval
inifo Ukcahor* M
II Sntlk
llf lr.il
tt llval
Uval
'1 Oval
II Oval
111 Oval
10 Srwlk
11 Oval
M tnalk
If Ovil
10 rm
If rival
11 Vval
• 1 Oval
1 14 Oval
•'• !.»!•• lay 14
•? l-ataa lay M
It* Col Ufa
II r.r.v«l M
II Cravrl M
•1 Oval
11 Oval
ft Oval
•1 Oval
tf Oval
If Smlk
41 few Ik
It Smlk
tl Oval
lOf llval
101 Oval
lot Uval
III Oval
141 Oval
1 Oval
II r.a
II Oval
1 Smlk
1 SbMtk
f SflMlk
14 l.«l«i lay M
lOflo OU l.itxkara
MrU klan^^^bx
^^^^^^^^k
rarakaa ^^^H
^^^^^
IfffKlJfV
C III la.
Ikaaakaai
lm*Jkfi|
•factm*
rtrv.k
Hickrr
MililrlU
HililrlU
•nirr
f rant
tmirff*
rr*n.4>la
I'VloiO*
tvikc
fttrpky
Allrii
Ml Ire
N>|ar
Ca|r«ikl
rirvak
Nililrt la)
rtarpky
IrH^vr
ItnrftiaU
•rnua
Currra
lot Ik
frtkick
"»rpky
l.niM* lay
laiMi lay
Saydtr Icacfc
Sny4rr laacb
StiyaVr track
Haaoa
•rl-ick
HililrlU
Crre
Sclwllt
•nfr,l
Mm.ra
IpTCk
A«rrl la/Mark
OrkUr
IStipfcy
l.«)itaa*.
f line a
Mrycri
Ccakraal allot
Caairliaa
•»r
•.rll.ua
Inick
IWMrr
LnlMi l.iy
l.nlvl lay
DA
ri.r n.n
Cdllrcliait lanpl*
—SvfttX..*. ..J»»l.« — ..-Ur«.^
Ritrkrn up 11 MU 14 Valrr
lltckcn tap 11 MU t4 Vain
Illckva tap 11 MU 14 W.lrr
telaMa Up 11 MU 14 Valrr
Kiirt.ru lap It MU 14 Wilrr
lilrkra lap II MU 14 W.lrr
liarvrnl lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
Kllckra lap 11 MU 1.4 Valrr
Ritckrn lap 14 AIU 14 Valrr
Illckra lap 14 MU 14 Valrr
Illckan lap 14 MU 14 W.lrr
O.|il4« Up tt AIU 14 Valrr
Itlrkra lap It MU 14 Vatrr
Rilchca tap 11 MU 14 W.lrr
Rilckan Up 14 MU 14 Valrr
Ritckca lap 14 MU 14 W.lr,
O..lli4* lap 14 AIU 14 W.lrr
KllckM lap 14 AIU 14 W.lrr
RltckcB lap 14 AIU 14 Wilrr
tllrkca. lap 14 MU 14 W.lrr
Tank It MU 14 W.lrr
(tlckra Up 11 All: 14 Vatrr
litckvn lap It MU 14 W.lrr
(llckrn lap It MU 14 Valrr
Rilckrn lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
Illckra lap tf MU 14 Valrr
Illckr*) lap If AIU 14 W.lrr
(Itch™ lap It AtC 14 Valrr
Illckra up 4 »* 14 Valrr
litcfcr* lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
laarwul lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
Rllckan lap 11 Alt; 14 Valrr
0»l.l4r Up II AIU 14 Valrr
ONtiUa lap 11 MU 14 Viirr
liickca lap 11 AIR 14 V.trr
Illckra lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
Rilckra Up 11 MU 14 Valrr
Kllcfccn Up 11 MU 14 Valrr
Vnkiaoa lap 11 MU 14 Vatrr
litcfcra lap II AIU 14 W.lrr
Rltckra Up 11 AIU 14 W.lrr
Rilckra lap 11 AIU 14 Valrr
•iirawMil lap 11 MU 14 Vatrr
lilckro tap 11 MU 14 Valrr
litrkr* lap 11 AH: 14 Valrr
Illckra lap 11 AIU 14 Valrr
Illckra lap 11 AIR 14 Valrr
lilckra Up 11 AIU 14 Valrr
Tavk 11 AIU 14 Valrr
T»k 11 AIU 14 V.trr
Ritckea Up 11 MU 14 Valrr
Rllckrn lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
UMtaUa lap 11 MU 14 Valrr
OntaUa tap H MU 14 W.lrr
Illckra Up H MU 14 Wilrr
tilckra lap 11 AIU 14 W.lr,
N/A N/A »r|.initr4
v.lrr
Hi thro Up 1) AIR 14 Wilrr
t •
Antlavtfiy
.J"*/.!-)^
•
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
4]
41
41
J
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
41
1
4}
1
41
41
1
41
1
1
41
1
1
1
)
1
1
1
1
Araralc Iriyllivw TaAiiM rki««i«« t-*prrf l.ra« Nrrrary Nlckrl Irlralw Illvrr Ikalllao) tl«c
.Jl"t/!-) _^trr./i-)» .t«f./i.) .t«R/i't. Nr./i-> H.
41 <0.t 1.0 41 40.11 It 41 0.1 '1 O.tl
4f 'O.I O.f ft 40.11 11 41 40.1 4| 0 04
41 'II. 1 0.4 . 10 '0.11 j] <} «o.l 4| o!ot
41 40.1 O.I If 40.11 11 41 4I|. | «| 0 It
4i 'u.i 0.4 n 4Q.li n 4i o.i 4| o.H
41 40.J O.4 f 40.11 1.1 41 0.1 4| O.4V
•I <0.1 II. 1 IM 1 40.11 41 41 0.1 4| 1.1
<> «1
1 <0.1 II. t 11 4(1. 11 Jl <1 0_| . j ,
41 40.1 11.1 Utl 14 40.11 11 41 O.I 4| 0.10
41 / 1 '0.11 If 41 <0.| 4| i |
41 O.t II. 4| 1 40.11 11 41 0.1 4| 0.04
41 '1.1 «. • 4 «O.M l» 4] ol 4i mi
41 'II. 1 0. « 1 40.11 11 41 O.I til. 14 40.11 41 41 40 | 4| O*I4
41 II. t 0. »l 40.11 40 <1 40.| 4| 0 If
» "•» '••• « H < 40.11 11 41 01 4| o'of
1 0.1 O. 41 | 40.11 | } o| ,| B'JJ
» «»•» «• *• 40.11 11 41 o!l 4| 0 It
1 40.1 40. I 40.11 If 41 0.1 4| 0 HI
41 -0.1 »0. 10 40.11 M 41 0.1 4| o'llf
" '»•» <»• •» <0.1i 44 41 ' 0.1 | o'ol
«' f«'-» <•»• 1* 40.11 4] • 41 40.1 4| 001
41 «0.1 4(1. 1«0 4 40.11 41 41 0.1 1 0 11
1 411.1 0. *f 40.11 It 41 01 4| 0 14
«! <».t 0. II 40.11 10 41 o.i 4| 0*01
«1 «0.1 0. f II 40.11 41 41 0.1 41 o If
1 <«.! '». / Iff 11 40.11 10 41 O.t | ll'ol
1 .i o.f M it i <».7i r ti ^^^^1 4i ooi
^K
-------
-47-
There are two potential routes for ingestion of soil-borne PCBs,
through contaminated food stuffs and through direct consumption
of soil. Research has shown that plant tissues accumulate PCBs,
however, the association between PCBs and plant tissues is
primarily a surface phenomenon. Fries and Marrow (1981) concluded
that plants grown in PCB-contaminated soil were not contaminated
by root uptake and translocation, but foliar contamination via
vapor sorption. Although no standards for PCB levels in root
crops exist, the Hide Beach community has been advised against
consuming any locally-grown root crops.
Direct ingestion of soil by children either habitually (Pica) or
casually, may be a significant route of exposure. Nahaffey (1977)
estimated that 6 to 50 percent of young children showed evidence
of the Pica syndrome with an average ingestion of 0.5 grams
of soil per day.
Absorption in the gastrointestinal tract is important pharmaco-
kinetically. Albro and Fishbein (1972) studied Intestinal absorption
of PCBs in rats and concluded that at least 90 percent was absorbed,
reflecting the high lipophilicity of PCBs.
PCBs may be inhaled either directly from the vapor phase or sorbed
onto inhalable particles. The problem of inhalation is compounded
by the occurrence of a substantial background of atmospheric
PCBs. In the Lake Erie area, the median atmospheric PCB concentration
is 2.0 ng/m3 (Eisenreish & Johnson 1983).
The pulmonary system is highly efficient with respect to PCB
absorption (EPA 1980, NIOSH 1977). Since the respiratory epithelium
behaves like a lipoid-pore-type membrane, the uptake of hydrophobia
compounds is related to their octanol-water partition coefficients
(Lubawy 1982). Partition coefficients for Aroclor 1254 range
between 1.3 x 106 and 6.3 x 106 (Mackay 1983), which accounts
for the rapid and efficient absorption. Based on data measured
by Benthe (1972) for exposure of Wistar rats to atmospheric PCBs,
calculations reveal an air-liver partition coefficient of 3.0 x
10-2 during exposure. Following exposure, the liver concentration
increased until a partition coefficient of 0.15 was reached.
This facile transport supports environmental and occupational
studies of pulmonary absorption.
-------
-48-
Prior to roadpaving, based upon PCB atmospheric respiration rates
derived by the International Commission on Radiological Protection
(1975)* -ind an ambient air-concentration of 0.22 ug/m3, the
average male adult at Wide Beach would have been exposed to 120 mg
and the average female to 110 mg, over a 70-year lifetime.
Although skin absorption of PCBs is veil documented, its magnitude
cannot be quantified due to the interference of simultaneous
inhalation. Since the majority of PCBs bind to the soil, its
bioavailability is probably decreased.
Scientific literature indicates that Aroclor 1254 is carcinogenic
in laboratory animals, and is classified as a possible human
carcinogen. As a result of the current and future potential
exposure to PCBs, based upon a risk assessment, there is an
elevated cancer risk for Wide Beach residents as compared to the
genera: rural population.
The bis(2 ethyl hexyl)phthalate, chloroform, 3,4-benzofluoro-
anthrene, and 1,1-dichloroethane in the soil do not represent
a threat to public health at the concentrations detected. The
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene is a low to moderately toxic solvent,
lubricant, and insecticide. This compound does not represent
a significant threat to the community because it shows weak
toxicity by respiration or ingestion. The arsenic, lead and
selenium detected in'the site's soils are toxic and also bio-
accumulative in some cases.
'Biota Toxicity
The database regarding the effects of PCBs on aquatic plants is
relatively small. Inhibition of plant growth due to PCBs has
been documented mainly for algae. EPA (1980) reports toxic
effects to unicellular plants at concentrations of Aroclor 1254
as low as 0.1 ug/1. Phytotoxicity has been described in the
literature to occur at PCB soil concentrations as -low as 100 '
mg/kg. Concentrations greater than 100 mg/kg were found in soils
at the site.
Numerous effects have been noted on terrestrial macrophytes grown
in soils containing PCBs. Effects on plants are probably due to
interference with photosynthesis and respiration.
-------
-49-
In addition to toxic effects on plants themselves, there is the
problem of plant contamination and subsequent transfer to higher
trophic levels. PCBs in soils have been demonstrated to contaminate
plant roots. Absorption seems to be related to the water and
oil content of the plant's root and, subsequently, its ability
to accumulate lipophilic xenoblotics (Iwata 1974). Contamination
of the foliage and stems is attributed primarily to adsorption
to the leaves and stems from the air, and subsequent movement
through the epidermal layers (Buckley 1982).
EPA (1980) recommends a criterion of 0.014 ug/1 as a 24-hour
average for protection of aquatic life. During a storm event,
the concentrations of Aroclor 1254 released into the wetlands
south of The Oval could be high enough to pose a threat to aquatic
life.
Studies concerning effects of PCBs on birds have shown reduced
hatchability, teratogenic effects, decreased eggshell production,
and shell thickness reproductive impairment. Avian .toxicity has
been demonstrated at feed PCB levels as low as 5 mg/kg. Mammalian
toxicity has been demonstrated at feed PCB levels as low as 0.64
mg/kg. Soil PCB concentrations at Wide Beach could potentially
produce feed levels at this magnitude.
Despite the implementation of an immediate removal action to
prevent the exposure of the public to the high levels of PCBs
present in the roadways and drainage areas, the 120 residents
of Wide Beach may still be exposed to lower concentrations of
PCBs remaining in their yards, open lots, and the wetlands.
In addition, the existing storm system cannot accommodate the
increased flow resulting from the paved surfaces, and ponding
occurs on several yards after storm events.
Since the roadway pavement may only last 2 to 4 years, and
since the public is still exposed to PCBs in the unpaved areas,
'it is imperative that action be taken to prevent exposure.
-------
-50-
Enforcement
Five Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) have been identified
to date. It is EPA's intention to offer the PRPs the opportunity
to implement the remedy. If it appears that the PRPs are not
willing to implement the remedy, or if negotiations are fruitless,
then EPA may consider the issuance of a CERCLA SI 06 Administrative
Order for the implementation of the remedial action, or EPA may
initiate a cost recovery lawsuit at a later date.
Alternatives Evaluation
The primary objective of the FS was to evaluate remedial
alternatives to identify a cost-effective approach consistent
with the goals and objectives of CERCLA. A cost-effective
remedial alternative as defined in the MCP (40 CFR 300.68j) is
•the lowest cost alternative that is technologically feasible
and reliable and which effectively mitigates and minimizes
damage to and provides adequate protection of the public health,
welfare, or the environment." The MCP outlines procedures and
criteria to be used in selecting the most cost-effective alternative,
The first step is to evaluate public health and environmental
effects and welfare concerns associated with the problem. Criteria
to be considered are outlined in 40 CFR Section 300.68(e) of the
NCP and include such factors as actual or potential direct contact
with hazardous material, degree of .contamination of drinking
water, and extent of isolation and/or migration of the contaminant.
The next step is to develop a limited list of possible remedial
alternatives which could be implemented. The no-action alternative
should be included on the list.
The third step in the process is to provide an initial screening
of.the remaining alternatives. The costs, .relative effectiveness
in minimizing threats, and engineering feasibility are reviewed
here. The no-action alternative may be included for further
•valuation when response actions may cause greater environemental
or health damage than no-action responses. A no-action alternative
may also be included if it is appropriate relative to the extent
of the existing threat or if response actions provide no greater
protection.
-------
-51-
From the evaluation of existing data and information on the nature
and extent of the contamination associated with the Wide Beach
Development site, the following remedial response objectives were
established:
1. to protect the public from exposure to PCB-contaminated
soils via inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact.
2. to maintain an adequate, safe drinking water supply for
the population that could be affected by ground water
contamination.
The remedial response levels employed in the FS evaluation included:
soil < 10 mg/kg (EPA/NYSDBC »oi- removal criterion)
air < 1.67 ug/m3 (NY State Ambient Air Level)
ground water < 1.00 ug/1 (NYSDOH advisory level)
surface water < 7.9 X 10-5 ug/1 (Clean Water Act
ambient water quality criteria for 10"^
lifetime cancer risk)
With these objectives and response criteria in mind, a list of
feasible remedial technologies was developed (see Table 21).
Technologies identified as having the potential to meet the
remedial response objectives were subjected to a two step evaluation
process. The first step consisted of an initial screening of
the candidate remedial alternatives based upon relative present
worth cost, environmental impacts, and engineering considerations.
-------
Summary of Remedial Alternatives
Source control' alternatives for remediating the contaminated
roadways, driveways, yards, drainage ditches, storm drains, and
wetlands:
1. No action
2. Excavation, landfill, and soil replacement
3. Excavation, on-site treatment, and soil replacement
4. In-situ biological treatment
5. In-situ chemical treatment
6. Immobilisation
Measures for protecting residential wells from contamination:
1a. No action
2a. Alternate water supply
3a. Public water supply
Table 21
-------
-53-
Based upon the results of this initial screening, several source
control alternatives were quickly screened out, including:
Alternative 4, in-situ biological treatment; Alternative 5, in-
situ chemical treatment; and Alternative 6, immobilization. Also
screened out were measures to protect the individual private wells.
Alternative 2a, alternative water supply and Alternative 3a,
public water supply. The results of the initial screening process
are described below and are summarized in Table 22.
'Alternative 1
Alternative 1, no action, consists of leaving the site as it
currently exists while continuing to monitor site conditions.
The roadway installed under the immediate removal action would be
maintained for the duration of the 20-year planning period, as
well. Because this alternative offers some measure of protection
to the public by reducing exposure to PCB-contaminated dust and
surface runoff, and because this alternative is feasible, it was •
retained for further consideration.
"Alternative 2
Because Alternative 2, excavation and disposal, employs one of
the most often used ,and technically feasible means of remediation
at hazardous waste sites, it has been retained for further
consideration.
"Alternative 3
Alternative 3, excavation and on-site treatment, utilizes treatment
systems that generally parallel standard wastewater treatment
unit operations. Because this alternative offers a feasible
means of treating wastes on-site rather than relocating them, it
has been retained for further consideration.
•Alternative 4
Alternative 4, in-situ biological degradation was eliminated from
further consideration.
-------
Summary or Initial Screening of Remedial Alternatives
Alternative
1. Mo action
2. K«c«»«t« and
dlspoae
1. fi»c»vate and
treat on-slte
4. In-sltu
biological
t reatment
Engineering feasibility
Source control Measures
Roadway maintenance feasible.
One of the most often used
and technically feasible
alternatlvea for hatardoun
waste site remediation.
Preliminary studies Indicate
a promising ne» and
Innovative chemical treatment
technology.
Bloloqlcal treatment too month
detention time In reactor
negatively Impact* feasUiillty.
Required envlrnnmontal
controls severely affect
feasibility.
environmental Effects
Doea little to protect
environment.
Oust and noise during
Implementation.
Hauling lost potential.
Noise and dust during
excavation.
Chemical reagent* could
cause safety/environ-
mental problems.
By-products potentially
harmful.
Coata
lea«t costly alternative.
Moat costly alternative.
Moderate coat.
Coatly considering
questionable feasibility.
'., tn-sltu chemical
tr»atment
«. InmobllItatlon
I
Required envIronmentn I controls Chemical reagents could
severely afft>rt (Risibility. cause saf ety/envl ron-
m<*ntal problems.
Feasible, but reiutri>il
application nt** onHno
Required tilling could
qenerate significant level*
of dust.
Coatly considering
questionable feasibility.
Costly considering
questionable feasibility.
HI ter Safj)ly^ Protect Inn Mrasurea
1.i. Ho action •sFe
7-1. Alternate water
supply
»i. Public water
supply
nottl<*d water and ot
means feaslbto.
Source available In
nolihhor I n
-------
-55-
In-situ biological degradation, Alternative 4, has been employed
to enhance biochemical decomposition of PCBs In contaminated
soils. However, there has been only limited application of the
technology to Aroclor 1254, and only limited data are available
on laboratory studies in providing treatment of Aroclor 1254.
The transferability of the technology to field conditions is
crucial in considering the applicability of in-situ biological
treatment, since the viability of the organisms depends on soil
conditions, including moisture content, organic content, oxygen
content, pH, nutrient content, and temperature, as well as the
indigenous microbial population.
The time required for the PCB degradation is expected to be on
the order of several months. Therefore, the soil environment
must be managed during that period to provide favorable conditions
for treatment. To maintain optimal field conditions for that
length of time would be extremely difficult, and would require
an irrigation and drainage system. In addition, the treatment
could only be applied during the summer months. Retilling and
reapplication will most likely be required, as well.
In addition, the environmental effects of biological treatment
are not well known, and it is also not clear what by-products
would result from biological degradation. Available literature
suggests that the resultant constituents could include chlorinated
benzoic acids and dibenzofurans, and would likely be more soluble
and mobile, and perhaps more toxic than the PCBs.
Because of the questionable nature of engineering feasibility of
this alternative, it was deleted from further consideration.
'Alternative 5
Alternative 5, in-situ chemical treatment, can also be screened
out.
A new chemical in-situ treatment procedure was developed
recently under a research program sponsored by EPA. In general,
the technology is based on the process of using a sodium-or
potassium-based reagent to remove chlorine from the PCB molecules.
-------
-56-
The engineering feasibility of providing in-situ chemical treatmen
of PCBs depends upon successful completion of chemical, reactions
in a soil environment. Control of that environment can be
engineered to a certain degree. It is not clear, however, if the
environment can be controlled to the degree required for in-situ
chemical treatment. Past studies (Brunell and Singleton) have
'indicated that soil moisture is a major impediment to in-situ
PCB treatment by chemical methods, and in fact* soil moisture
nay have to be maintained at 2-3 percent. In field applications,
this requirement necessitates the application of an artificial
heat source to remove most of the soil moisture.
Because of the questionable nature of the technology to provide a
heat source and to design the overall system, in-situ chemical
treatment was deleted from further consideration.
'Alternative 6
Alternative 6, immobilization, was also eliminated. Immobilization
would immobilize the PCBs by the addition of activated carbon to
the soil. Activated carbon is a strong sorbent and has been
proven effective for Aroclor 1254 treatment. Powdered activated
carbon is the preferred medium, because it can be readily incor-
porated into the soil, enables uniform distribution, and provides
maximum adsorptive capacity per gram of material.
j
Since carbon degrades more .readily than PCBs, a release of PCBs
during carbon degradation is anticipated. Therefore, to
maintain the immobilzation, reapplication is required. Of greater
concern with carbon addition to the soil is the additional carbon
requirements for the organic material currently present in the
soil. It is expected that the carbon requirements for soil,
especially that in the wetlands where there is a large amount of
humus material, would be substantial.
Because the quantity of, carbon required to meet all' of- the
adsorptive requirements of the soil is expected to be substantial,
because of the need for reapplication at least annually, and
because of the costs associated with these application requirements,
the alternative was deleted from further consideration.
-------
-57-
'Alternatives 2a and 3a
PCB-contamination found in residential wells have been .low and
sporadic in occurrence. Since the implementation of a source
control measure will effectively prevent further releases to the
ground water, and since during EPA's immediate removal activities,
particulate filters were installed on the private wells to protect
the public in the interim, no action will be required to protect
the water supply.
After the completion of the initial screening of the alternatives,
a further evaluation was conducted in order to recommend a
cost-effective remedial alternative. The alternatives undergoing
the final evaluation included:
1. No action
2. Excavation, landfill (incineration for soil >500 rag/kg), and
soil replacement
3. Excavation, chemical on-site treatment, and soil replacement.
This narrowed list of remedial alternatives was evaluated further
according to the following criteria: technical feasibility,
environmental effects, public health effects, and institutional/permit
requirements.
According to the NCP, a total cost estimate must also be considered
for remedial actions and must include both construction and annual
operation and maintenance costs. These costs are estimated for
the alternatives under consideration. A present worth value
analysis was used to convert the annual operation and
maintenance/monitoring costs to an equivalent single value.
These costs were considered over a 20-year period at a 10 percent
discount rate and 5 percent inflation.
-------
-58-
'Alternative 1
In the summer of 1985, EPA performed an immediate removal action
at the site, including the asphaltic paving of all roadways, drainage
ditches, paths, driveways, and parking spaces. The existing
gravel road bed was regraded and presently serves as the base
course for a 10 cm layer of asphalt. The asphalt was installed
as two 5 cm lifts with a geotextile liner between. The driveways,
paths, and parking spaces were covered with a 5 cm asphaltic
layer. In addition, home decontamination by vacuuming and rug
cleaning, air conditioner and furnace filter replacement, and
dual cartridge particulate filter installation on each water
supply well was also performed. Under Alternative 1, no additional
action would be performed at the site.
A reasonable natural mechanism for the rapid environmental
degradation of PCBs at Wide Beach does not exist. Photolysis
and biodegradation, two degradation mechanisms, occur at very slow
rates and may yield harmful reaction by-products. Therefore, if
no treatment or removal actions are taken at the site, natural
degradation processes are likely to occur; but the rate and
results are relatively unkown.
While the roadpaving activities have significantly reduced the
amount of PCB-contaminated dust and surface runoff associated
with the roadways, driveways, and drainage ditches, contamination
of the yards, open lots, and wetlands would remain.
The RI determined that the levels of PCBs found in the front
yards do not substantially differ from the levels found in the
roads, and driveways. In fact, over 40 percent of the front
yards have PCB-contamination at levels greater than the soil
response level of 10 mg/kg, with levels up to 600 mg/kg.
In addition, the existing" stornrsewer system can rnot accommod'ate
the increased stormwater runoff from the newly paved surfaces
after storm events, resulting in ponding of water in the yards,
as well as possible overland transport of PCB-contaminated soil
particles to the wetlands and Lake Erie.
-------
-59-
Because the reservoir of PCBs will not be diminished under the no-
action alternative, water infiltrating the yards and through the
bedding of the paved areas can lead to off-site transport of PCB-
contaminated soil particles via the bedding of the sanitary sewer,
gas, and other pipelines. Contaminated ground-water samples from
the sewer trench support this potential transport theory.
Because of the inability to construct an adequate subbase and
because of the resulting inability to resist freeze-thaw stresses,
it has been estimated that the surfaces paved under the immediate
removal action will deteriorate very quickly, possibly lasting
only two to four years. Although the roadways can be maintained,
approximately $4 million (present worth) would be required to
maintain the roadways, as well as to perform extensive monitoring
to insure that the public is being adequately protected. Over a
twenty year planning period, roadway replacement would be required
5-10 times.
Consideration was given to improving the existing roadway so as
to lengthen its estimated lifespan. However, this can only be
accomplished by removing the asphalt and excavating to a depth
of 0.15-0.3 m to construct an adequate aubbase. Since an average
depth of 0.5 m would be excavated under Alternatives 2 and 3, it
would be more reasonable to excavate the additonal 0.20.35 m
and remove the contaminated soil and reconstruct a roadway over
it than to just improve the roadway subbase.
Also, consideration was given to leaving the roadway, drainage
ditches, and driveway paving installed during the summer of 1985
in place, and implementing remedial action at only the contaminated
yards, open lots, and wetlands. However, as was indicated above,
because of the 2-4 year life expectancy for the asphalt, a present
worth cost of approximately $3.9 million would be required to
maintain the roadway and to monitor the site for a 20-year period.
Added to the $4.3 million for excavating and chemically treating
the contaminated yards, open lots, and wetland soils and sediments,
the net present worth cost would be approximately $8.2 million;
for off-site disposal of excavated yard, open lot, and wetland
•oils and sediments and leaving the existing roadway in place,
-------
-60-
approximately $12.4 million would be required. Compared to a
present worth cost of $8.8 million for site-wide excavation and
chemical treatment, and $16.3 million for site-wide excavation
and disposal, there would be a cost savings of either $0.6 million
or $3.9 million, respectively, if the paved areas are left intact.
While leaving the existing paved surfaces in place and excavating
and disposing of the unpaved areas is significantly less costly
than site-wide excavation and disposal/incineration, considering
the level of accuracy in the cost estimates, site-wide excavation
and chemical treatment, and excavation and chemical treatment of
the unpaved surfaces while leaving the paved surfaces in place*
are close in cost. (Figure 9 summarizes this cost comparison
analysis.) However, in terms of long-term protecton of public
health and the environment, leaving the paved surfaces in place
would not be the preferred solution.
'Alternative 2
Unde* Alternative 2, (soil removal, landfill, and replace)
removal of PCB-contaminated soils requires that the PCB-
contaminated soils and pavement material be transported to an
approved landfill, and that all excavated areas be replaced/
rebuilt to minimize'infiltration and to maintain adequate runoff
patterns.
The removal and disposal of contaminated soil, provides source
elimination with a permanent remedy to prevent or mitigate the
migration of a release of PCBs to the surrounding environment.
This alternative is one of the most often used and technical1v
feasible alternatives for remediation at a hazardous waste site.
The primary environmental effects associated with this alternative
are related to mobilization of PCBs during the excavation and
removal process. Earth moving operations associated with excavation
may result in significant quantities of PCB-contaminated dust
being released into the air. The erosion of PCB-contaminated
•oils during construction is also of concern. There is also the
possibility of hauling losses from dump trucks enroute to the
secure landfill.
-------
20 I
18 H
16 ""
14 -
I
•H
| 12-
8 10 —
«
1
t&
c 8
ft)
£
6 -
••
2 -
—
n
S 3.9
Tr » • -^
Maintain
Paved
Surfaces.
No Other
Remedial
Action.
$ 16.3
4
Excavate
and
Dispose.
$ 8.8
Excavate
and
Chemical
Treat.
$ 12.4
Maintain
In Place
Paved
Surfaces.
Excavate
and
Dispose
Unpaved
Areas.
$ 8.2
Maintain
In Place
Paved
Surfaces .
Excavate
and
Chemical
Treat
Unpaved
Areas.
Alternatives
Cost Comparison of Maintaining In Place Paved Surfaces and Other Remedial
Alternatives, and Cctttoinations
Figure 9
-------
-62-
Other effects of excavating the contaminated soils will result
from direct removal of the associated vegetation, especially
from the wetlands area. Removal of trees and shrubs will result
in the loss of habitat.
Removal of soil contaminated with PCBs to the >10 ag/kg level
will meet the public health, welfare, and environmental objectives
of remediation, it will not, however, result in ultimate destruction
of the PCBs.
•Alternative 3
Alternative 3, (soil removal, treat on-site, replace) includes
technologies that could be applied on-site to excavated soil and
to remove the PCBs. Following application of the technologies*
the treated soil would be used as fill in the excavated areas.
In general, the treatment technologies applicable to this procedure
are those in which reaction times are sufficiently short to
permit complete treatment in a reaction vessel or continued
treatment once soils are returned. The technologies include
biological and chemical treatment.
On-site biological ,and chemical treatment require similar
operational processes. In general, system requirements for
on-site treatment parallel wastewater treatment unit operations.
It is assumed that to meet mixing requirements the soil and
chemical or biological reagents would be combined to form a
Boil/water/reagent slurry which could be pumped, mixed, and
handled as a liquid material.
-------
-63-
On-site biological treatment of PCB-contaninated soil has been
investigated. One of the problems associated with biological
treatment systems is the reaction/degradation products. A possible
result of PCB degradation is the formation of polychlori'nated
dibenzofurans (PCDPs). In addition, it is apparent that on-site
biological reactors can only be used for the mixing during the
initial phase of the treatment. Since the detention time
in a reactor is expected to be on the order of two months, in
order for the technology to be feasible, the biological degradation
would have to continue after soil replacement as fill in the
excavated areas. Therefore, the soil environmental parameters
which affect the biological activity would have to be managed to
allow the treatment to continue. it, therefore, is not practical
to consider complete treatment of the PCBs with an on-site,
biological treatment unit.
On-site chemical treatment technologies can be applied to PCB
degradation, and result in accelerated reactions with less
environmental restrictions than biological systems. A chemical
degradation process has been demonstrated to be applicable to PCB
compounds (Brunelle 1985). This process requires a 2-step
procedure. The first step involves the extraction of PCBs from
the soil utilizing solvents. The solvents are then treated with
a potassium-based reagent to remove chlorine atoms from the PCB
molecule, yielding mainly phenols. Detention time in a chemical
treatment reactor is expected to be on the order of several
hours, significantly shorter than the several months required
for biological treatment.
The limiting factor in the engineering feasibility of on-site
chemical treatment is the ability of potassium polyethylene
glycol to neutralize Aroclor 1254. Although in the developmental
stage, the engineering feasibility of this technology appears
promising. On-site chemical treatment is significantly more
feasible than in-situ chemical treatment, which was deleted from
consideration in the initial screening because the application
of heat to maintain the soil moisture content at 2-3 percent so
that the reaction will work, is technologically more feasible in
a reaction vessel than in-sltu. To date, the extraction process
-------
-64-
has been demonstrated + > be the limiting process in PCB treatment,
and extraction and treatment can be accomplished in 2 hours with
a reagent of sufficient concentration (Brunelle 1985). -To optimize
extraction, the solvent requirements are substantial. To reduce
solvent costs, a recovery and reuse system may be employed. The
reactor capacity for the contaminated soil/reagent slurry must
provide adequate volume to allow a sufficient detention period
for the chosen feed rate.
The majority of the environmental effects associated with on-site
chemical treatment are similar to those resulting from removal,
landfilling, and replacement, including dust generation and
erosion during excavation, as well as removal of vegetation and
loss of habitat. In addition, on-site treatment will require
considerably more heavy equipment and chemical process equipment
present at the site for long periods of time. Additional problems,
both to workers and the public, could result from contact with
chemical reagents which are associated with on-site treatment.
In addition, the end products of on-site chemical treatment have
not been adequately characterized.
A pilot-scale treatability study would be required to determine k
design parameters such as physical dimensions, operation tempera
and detention timesi
On-site chemical treatment of soils contaminated with >10 mg/kg
PCB will meet the objectives for protection of public health,
welfare, and the environment. Chemical treatment for soil PCBs
is an attractive method for remediation, as it results in the
ultimate destruction of the contaminants, avoiding the hazards
associated with transportation. Chemical treatment is also more
cost-effective as compared to disposal. In addition, off-site
disposal site capacities are severely limited. As a result, new
technologies addressing the^contamination"problem "'
rather than relocating it are encouraged by EPA.
Table 23 summarizes the results of the evaluation of the remedial
alternatives surviving the initial screening. Table 24 shows
the implementation time and the capital, operation and maintenance,
and present worth costs for the alternatives considered in the
final screening.
-------
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION MATRIX
Evaluat ion Factors/A Iternat ives
COST FACTORS
Capital Costs
Operation and Maintenance Costs
Monitoring and Postclosure Costs
TECHNICAL FACTORS
Feasibility
Implementability
Time to Accomplish
Reliability
HEALTH, WELFARE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Reduction in Health Risk
Onsite Public Health Effects
Offaite Effects
Occupational Health Effects
Reduction of Environmental Impact
Environmental Effects
Institutional Factors
OVERALL SCORE
No
Act ion
7.8
6.8
4.0
7.8
5.5
8.5
5.5
1.2
1.8
5.0
7.2
2.2
2.8
3.5
Removal
Chemical
Treatment
8.0
9.0
7.0
5.2
5.5
6.5
5.8
8.2
6.8
9.6
6.5
8.0
7.0
6.2
Retnova 1
Landfill
2.8
9.0
7.8
9.0
7.8
6.5
9.0
8.2
8.0
6.0
6.0
8.5
7.0
7.5
70
99
103
Table 23
-------
Implementation Time, Capital, Operation and Maintenance,
and Present Worth Costs for Alternatives
Considered in the Final Screening
Alternative
Implementation
Time
(years)
Capital OtM* Present Worth*
($ Billion)
1. No action
2. Excavate &
dispose •
3. Excavate &
treat
>20
1-2
1-3
0
16.33
8.8
0.85
0.002
0.002
3.9
16.36
8.82
* 20-year planning period, 10% discount rate 0 * M is assumed to
escalate approximately 5% per year over the lenght of the plannin
period.
Table 24
-------
-66-
Community Relations
Throughout the Field Investigation Team's investigation, the ill,
fS, and the immediate removal action, all data and repor'ts have
been submitted to the president of the Homeowner's Association,
who maintains a public repository.
After publicly releasing the draft RI report, an April 8, 1985
meeting was held to brief the public on the findings of the
field investigation and to solicit public comment. The meeting
was attended by 30 people. A three week public comment -period
ended on April 29, 1985. -""7:
After publicly releasing the draft PS a public meeting was held
on August 29, 1985 to brief the public on the findings and to
solicit public comment. The meeting was attended by 22 people.
A three week public comment period ended in September.
The above meetings were held in the Brant Township Community
Building. A responsiveness summary is attached as Attachment 1.
This document includes the meeting notification documents and
summarizes the comments on the FS.
Consistency with OttHsr Environmental Laws
The recommended remedial alternative complies with all substantive
requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the
Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Toxic Substances
Control Act.
Recommended Alternative
According to 40 CFR part 300.68 (j), cost-effectiveness is
described as the lowest cost alternative that is technically
feasible and reliable and which effectively mitigates and minimizes
damage to and provides adequate protection of public health,
welfare, and the environment. Six source control alternatives
were evaluated, three of which survived the initial screening.
-------
-67-
The no-action alternative was found to provide inadequate protect
of public health and the environment in addressing the. threat
iron the contaminated soils and sediments at the site. However,
since source removal will prevent releases to the ground water,
and since particulate filters were installed in July 1985 on the
private wells to protect the public in the interim, no further
action will be required to protect the ground water. The perched
water in the sewer trenches, however, should be treated. The
excavation and landfill alternative is not recommended because
not only is it significantly more costly than the excavation and
chemical treatment alternative, but it will, for the most part,
only relocate large quantities of PCBcontaminated soils.
The recommended source control alternative, on-site chemical
treatment, provides a means of actively and significantly reducing
the amount of contamination that remains on the site in a relatively
simple and expeditious manner. In selecting this alternative,
EPA has weighed the advantages and disadvantages of this approach,
as well as the technical concerns associated with applying this
remedy to the site. The primary concerns associated with this
technology include the ability to attain the 10 tag/kg PCB level,
as well as the potential formation of toxic end products.
While EPA recognizes these concerns and uncertainties associated
with this remedy, the Agency feels there is sufficient reason to
proceed with chemical treatment as the source control method
because the potential benefits of this waste reduction method
offset the potential disadvantages.
Should the proposed treatability study demonstrate that the selected
remedy is ineffective in meeting the remedial response objectives,
the Regional Administrator would, of course, be able to reconsider
his selection of a remedy at this site.
The recommended alternative, the extent of which is illustrated
in Figure 10, includes the following activities:
As a result of the pavement of the roads, ditches, and driveways
at the site, an excavation of 5-10 cm of asphalt will be required.1*
Rotogrinders, jack hammer, scrappers or similar equipment can be
used to remove the pavement. The asphalt will be reduced to a
size convenient for efficient loading and as required by the
ultimate disposal area, or will be reused if not contaminated.
* See Site History section of the ROD for an explanation as to
why this roadway was installed.
-------
Remedial Alternative Site Plan
Figure 10
-------
-69-
Soil excavation in the roadway will be conducted using a crawler
dozer and a rubber-tired loader with a large volume (2-3 n3)
bucket. To remove all PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations
greater than 10 mg/kg, excavation will be to a depth of .approximately
0.5 m from the base of the existing asphalt roadway surface,
yielding approximately 5600 m3 of soil. Continuous soil sampling
and on-site analysis will take place to determine the final
depth of excavation.
t>ue to the proximity of the roadway drainage ditches to the
oiled roadways and the prevailing drainage patterns* to remove
soil contaminated with PCB concentrations greater than 10 mg/kg
the depth of contaminated soil is expected to require drainage
ditch and storm drain excavation to a depth of approximately 1
m, yielding approximately 8500 m3 of soil. Figure 11 shows the
extent of the excavation activities required for the roadways
and drainage ditches.
Thirty centimeters of soil, or 1500 m3, will be removed from the '
4300 m2 of driveways to excavated all PCB-contaminated soils
with concentrations greater than 10 mg/kg. Figure 12 illustrates
the excavation activities proposed for the driveways.
To excavate all PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations greater
than 10 mg/kg, the front yards and limited portions of the
backyards and open lots will be excavated to a depth of approximat
15 cm, yielding approximately 13,000 m3 of contaminated soil.
Trees and shrubs in the yards will be removed only when absolutely
necessary to reduce contamination. Removal in certain areas will
require clearing and grubbing. Large stumps, which are expected
to retain a large percentage of soil on their root structures,
will be excavated with a bulldozer and disposed of.
The removal of various lengths and sixes of drainage pipe is
also anticipated. These pipes are to be considered contaminated
and can be excavated and removed with the bulldozer and loader.
-------
Ditch
Existing Roail Bed Varies 18 to 22 Feet
1 Ft. Win.
18 inch Excavation Depth
36-inch Excavation Depth
•36 inch Excavation Depth
Not to scale.
Excavation depth for roadways and ditches.
Figure
-------
Not to scale.
Vai ies
—Oiiginal Grade
— Bank Run Gi avcl
L- 2 Inch Asphalt
I—12 Inch Excavation Depth
Excavation depth for driveways.
Giass
Figu
-------
-72-
The existing sanitary sewer in the Wide Beach site consists of
approximately 1380 r of gravity line and a 150-n section of force
main. Due to the higher porosity of the fill material around
the sever, the sewer trench area represents a possible conduit
for leaching contaminated water off-site. The perched water in
the sewer trench has been found to have PCB concentrations up to
10 ug/1. The water will be extracted utilizing the shallow
wells installed in the trench, and subsequently will be treated
using granular activated carbon. The soil surrounding the sewer
line will be extracted and treated. A hydraulic barrier will be
constructed in the sewer trench to prevent the future off-site
transport of any residual contaminated ground water.
The wetlands do not contain large areas of contaminated soils.
Areas identified as having contamination are those found at the
storm drain outlets, the discharge points for much of the sitewide
roadway runoff. By excavating to a depth of approximately 20 cm*
approximately 150 n>3 of contaminated sediments with PCB concen-
trations greater than 10 mg/kg, will be removed. Clearing and
grubbing may be necessary prior to excavation.
The excavated soil from the roadways, drainage ditches, driveways,
yards, open lots, and wetlands would be fed into a continuous
chemical treatment reactor (see Figure 13). A heat source would
remove any inhibitory water from the slurry during detention and
accelerate the reaction. Soil would be continuously charged to
a mixer by a backhoe. In the mixer, the contaminated soil would
be slurried with reagents and then would be pumped to a rotary
kiln where it would be heated to about 100*C for a detention
time of two hours. After reacting, the decontaminated solids
would be separated from the reagents by sedimentation. The
solids would then be water-washed and separated. Water washings
would be combined with used solvent, and the solvent separated.
The purified solvent would be recycled to the mixer while the
bottoms would go to waste. The treated soils would then be
fertilized and returned as fill for the excavated locations.
The roadways and driveways would be regraded and paved and the
excavated storm drains would be replaced.
-------
riiwr OMSO
OMSO i/'~~>\« PE°
PEO \^J
1
c
r .. 1 c
KOH KOH /-xU^ *-|
OMSO OMSO Vx*X_7
PEG PEG
SOU --, MIXFR .
INERTS KHO '
PCB SLURRY: OMSO
OIRT PEG
KOH INERTS^
OMSO PCB f
PEO (
1^ INERTS V
SLUHHY/^APCB
PUMP "^ )
70° C. *» * 2 hrs. V J
f\\ \ \ '/
ROTARY KILNV / ' fH f**\ ,/KOH \ /
1 | 11 DMSO \ /
P^tiHTe YSEDIMENT
Lv-o BASIN
r \jO
DIRT
H20 WASH
H,0
DfRT
"" SOLVENT
k SEPARATION
D
-1 BOTTOMS
KOH
PEO ('r-B
INEHTS H2°
'PCB
JPUMP V^
KOH
OMSO
PEG
INERTS
PCB
\ )
-A I—
) WASTE
JPUMP
H2O
\/*
\ /SEDIMENT
V BASIN
^^^^KU<
DIRT
EAHTII
is KPEG process.
Fig
-------
-74-
Because the excavation activites will generate significant levels
of dust over the site, house decontamination, including the same
cleaning activities undertaken under the immediate removal action,
would be undertaken once the remedial activities have been completed.
Table 25 represents cost estimates for the recommended remedial
actions. The total required amount for the treatability study
and design ($500,000) and the construction ($8,795,000) of this
measure is $9,295,000, of which EPA will fund $8,415,500.
Operation and Maintenance
Upon completion of the chemical treatment remedial alternative
proposed for this site, other than maintaining the new road
surfaces the only operation and maintenance requirement will be
continued monitoring of the site to evaluate the effectiveness
of the remedy. This monitoring will include periodic sampling of
the ground water, surface water, and residential vacuum cleaner
dust. It is anticipated that the treatment associated with the
sewer trench perched water will be a short-term action.
Two vacuum cleaner samples will be collected at random, annually.
Twelve drinking water samples will be collected annually so that
all of the homes are sampled during a 5-year period. Ten catch
basin samples will be collected each time they are emptied (every
three years). Runoff .samples will also be collected.
Schedule
Activity Date
- RA Approval of ROD September 30, 1985
- Amend Cooperative Agreement for Design September 30, 1985
- Solicit Design/Treatability Study
Proposals (State) November 30, 1985
- Award Contract for Design/Treatability
Study (State) March 31, 1986
- Start Pilot Treatability Study April 1, 1986
- Complete Pilot Treatability Study August 31, 1986
- Start Design September 1, 1986
- Complete Design March 31, 1987
- Solicit Construction Proposals (State) June 1, 1987
- Award Contract for Construction (State) October 1, 1987
- Start Construction April 1, 1988
- Complete Construction April 1, 1990
-------
CAPITAL COSTS FOR EXCAVATION. TREATMENT. AMD REPLACEMENT
loads
Driveways
Ditches /storm drains
Front yards
Back yards
Pill areas
Wetlands
Subtotal |
Additional mediation
(cleaning, perched water treatment)
Excavat ton
309,000
Disposal
Treatment Replacement
Total
> 40,000
10,000
100,000
150,000
3,000
3,500
2.500
$ 380,000
98.000
10,000
0
0
0
0
$ 980.000
132,000
2,310,000
2,900,000
25,000
146,000
60.000
$ 200,000
50,000
130,000
350,000
2,000
10,000
2.500
$ 1,600,000
290,000
2.600,000
3,400,000
30.000
160,000
65.000
488,000 6,553,000
744,500 8,145,000
650.000
$ 6,795,000
-------
-76-
Future Actions
In order to design a viable treatment scheme for addressing the
PCB-contaminated sediments and soils that will be excavated under
the recommended alternative, a pilot plant treatability study will
be undertaken to determine an effective treatment scheme for
neutralizing the PCB-contaminated soil.
Other future actions include sampling and analysis of the backyards
during design, since only limited data are available from these areas.
The community was required to connect to a sanitary sewer system in
1980. Because the septic tanks would have received PCB-contaminated
soils from laundry, bathing, and house cleaning activities, any overflow
or releases from the systems may pose a threat to the aquifer. Tank
sediments from 20 of these septic tanks will be sampled for PCBs.
Two 24-hour composite samples will be taken from the sewage lift "station
to determine whether laundry, bathing, and house cleaning, as well .as
infiltration, is contributing contamination to the sewage systea.
-------
REFERENCES
from EA Engineering Science and Technology
Feasibility Study for the Wide Beach Development Site
August 1985
Albro, P.W. and L. Fishbein. 1972. Intestinal absorption of
polychlorinated biphenyls in rats. Bull. Environ. Contain.
Toxicol. 8:26.
Benthe, H.P. et al. 1972. Absorption and distribution of poly-
chlorinated biphenyls after inhalatory application. Arch.
Toxicol. 29:85.
Brunelle, D.J. and D.A. Singleton. 1985. Chemical Reaction of
Polychlorinated Biphenyls on Soils with Poly (Ethyleneglycol)/KOH.
Chemosphere 1 4 (2 ): 1 73-181.
Eisenreich, S.J. and T.C. Johnson. 1983. PCBs in the Great Lakes:
sources, sinks, burdens, in PCBs: Human and Environmental Hazards
(F.M. D'ltri and M.A. Kamrin, eds.). Butterworth, Boston.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1980a. Ambient Water Quality for
Polychlorinated Biphenyls. U.S. EPA Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Office, Washington.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1980b. TSCA Chemical Assessment
Series: Chlorinated Benzenes. EPA-560/11-8-014.
Fries, G.F. and G.S. Marrow. 1981. Chlorobiphynyl Movement from
Soil to Soybeal Plants. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2941:757-759.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). 1975.
Report of the Task Group on Reference Man. Pergamon Press, N.Y.
Mackay, D., W.Y. Shiu, J. Billington, and G.C. Huang. 1983.
Physical chemical properties at polychlorinated biphyenyl, in
Physical Behavior at PCBs in the Great Lakes (D. Mackay, ed.).
Ann Arbor Science.
Mahaffey, R.R. 1977. Quantities of Lead Producing Health Effects
in Humans: Sources and Bioavailability. Environ. Health. Perspect
19:285-295.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1977.
Criteria for a Recommended Standard. Occupational Exposure to
Polchlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). DREW (NIOSH) Pub. No. 77-225.
223 pp.
-------
Responsiveness Su
Attachment 1
nuri^^^^V
-------
York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001
COPIES OF THIS1ETTER SENT TO THE ATTACHED LISTING Henryo w,ii,am»
" ' " Commissioner
August 3, 1984
Dear
A contract has been signed between the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation and EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc.
of Middletown, New York to conduct "a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
at Wide Beach. This activity will result in a plan to correct the current
presence of PCB's in your soil which was verified some three years ago by
Erie County.
A meeting to fully explain what the consultant will be doing during
the study, why he will be doing it, and how you can assist in their effort
will be held on Thursday, August 9, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. in the Brant Town Park
Community Center on the Brant/North Collins Road (Route 249). Your input,
thoughts, and assistance on this project are sincerely desired.
Yours very truly,
Charles H. Kollatz
Citizen Participation Specialist
Region 9
bcc: P. Buechi
B. Bentley
C. Kollatz
F. Ricotta
G. Kerzic
-------
^ A ^
-------
-------
nr.
-------
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Woll Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001
Henry G. Williams
Commissioner
March 15, 1985
Dear Interested Party:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation will be
holding a public informational meeting on April 8, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. at the
Brant Town Park Community Facilities building. The purpose of the meeting
is to summarize the findings of the remedial investigation performed, to
determine the extent of hazardous waste contamination at the Wide Beach
Development.
All interested persons are invited to attend to express their concerns
or questions.
Sincerely,
Gary T. Kerzic
Project Engineer
Bureau of Eastern Remedial Action
Division of Solid & Hazardous Waste
-------
11'06 '•'•'•'• S-1'.E.C. RKIOH S
»* ******
1 /*»>/ ^ xi >,' £..i*&u^
-------
•/• ><*• ,
2
7%.
t? ^ r>
+
L
ev
-------
*..sponsiveness Summary
Wide Beach Development Site
Draft Remedial Investigation
April 1985
This summary is fn response to comments and questions raised by the public
at an informational meeting held on April 8, 1985 at the Brant Community Building.
The meeting was held to present the findings of the Draft Remedial Investigation
prepared by EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc. (EA) for the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). Enclosed is a-copy
of the handout which was distributed to all those attending the meeting. It
summarizes the major findings of the Remedial Investigation. Also enclosed is
a pamphlet prepared by the New York State Department of Health on PCB's.
The following is a summary of the comments and replies that were discussed
at the meeting.
COMMENT: How much contamination did you (NYSDEC) find?
RESPONSE: Levels of contamination were found to be the same as those from
studies done in previous years by the Erie County Department of
Environment and Planning and the United States Environmental
Protection Agency.' TJris study *a$ rr.ort- ciYcerripuSSmg than the
previous studies, so contamination was found to be more widespread.
COMMENT: How can PCB's still be present at Wide Beach?
RESPONSE: PCB's are very stable compounds. They are not readily broken down
under normal environmental conditions (i.e. sunlight, heat,
moisture, etc.) so they tend to linger in the environment for long
periods. Additionally, PCB's have a strong affinity to soil, whic
means they tend to adhere to soil particles and are not readily
broken away.'
COMMENT: What is the health hazard to living at Wide Beach?
RESPONSE: There is not definitive information available on human health
effects due to PCB exposure. Exposure to the PCB levels present
at Wide Beach is probably not an acute situation. It is uncertain
as to what, if any, will be the effect of long-term chronic
exposure.
PCB exposure is an additional-burden to the human body. Any such
burden is undesirable and should be minimized as much as possible.
Due to the uncertain human health effects from PCB exposure, the following
actions will be taken to minimize exposure until a long-term remedial action plan
can be developed and implemented.
1. Roadway Dust Control - This will involve the -application of a dust
suppressant to prevent the movement of PCB contaminated soil from the
roadways, driveways-and drainage-ditehes. -
2. Residential Cleaning - Thorough commercial cleaning of the interiors
of all homes and garages.
3. Drinking Water Filters - Installation of particulate filters on all
drinking water supplies.
-------
4. Educational Program - Instruction in ways to minim-.,
and to reduce further contamination to personal prc
human exposure
,-ty.
The implementation of these interim remedial measures will take place in
the near future, as early as May 1985. The first three actions will be undertaken
by the USEPA. The educational program will be developed by EA and will be
implemented during the summer months when the majority of Wide Beach residents
are present.
COMMENT: Where is the money coming from to pay for all the work being done
at Wide Beach?
RESPONSE: Funding is being made available through the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA). The Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study will cost
approximately 5350,000 when completed. The interim remedial
measures stated earlier will also be CERCLA funded. The cost for
this is unknown at this time.
Following completion of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study, the NYSDEC will undertake a detailed remedial design followed
by remedial implementation. Funding for these steps will also
come from CERCLA, provided funding is authorized by the U.S.
Congress in future fiscal years.
Using the findings of the Remedial Investigationj~EA" Ts~presently developing
a feasibility study. This study will identify and evaluate all possible
long-term remedial action options. The feasibility study will be available for
review in July 1985. A public informational meeting will be held to discuss the
feasibility study. Public input to the feasibility study as well as the remedial
investigation is welcomed and encouraged. If you have any questions or concerns
which were not addressed, please contact Gary Kerzic, Project Engineer, at
518/457-5677 or call our toll free telephone line 800-342-9296.
- 2 -
-------
New York Stele Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001
Henry G. Williams
Commissioner
July 1, 1985
COPIES OF LETTER SENT TO ATTACHED LISTING
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation will be
holding a public informational meeting on July 8, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. at
the Brant Town Community Building.
The purpose of the meeting is to provide residents with instruction
on preventing unnecessary exposure to soils containing PCBs at Wide Beach.
The presentation will be given by EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc.
who will be available on July 9 at Wide Beach for individual discussion
with interested residents.
Sincerely,
Gary T. Kerzic
Project Engineer
Bureau of Eastern Remedial-Action
Division of Solid & Hazardous Waste
GTK/bhy
-------
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001
Centennial i'5'V'.
Henry G. Williams
Commissioner
August 21, 1985
COPIES OF LETTER SENT TO ATTACHED LISTING
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)
will be holding a public informational meeting on August 29, 1985 at
7:00 p.m. at the Brant Town Park Community Building.
•
The purpose of this meeting is to present the results of the
Feasibility Study performed by EA Engineering, Science and Technology Inc.
for the NYSDEC regarding the hazardous waste contamination at the Wide
Beach Development.
A copy of the draft Feasibility Study is available for public review
at the home of Arthur Mason, 65 Wide Beech Oval and at the NYSDEC Regional
Office, 600 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo.
Sincerely,
Gary T. Kerzic
Project Engineer
Bureau of Eastern Remedial Action
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
GTK/bhy
GTK/bhy
bcc: F. Ricotta
J. Feron, Region 9
C. Kollatz, Region 9
\JSr. Kerzic
-------
/ *• •• / * f 7^
-------
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
Wide Beach Development Site
Feasibility Study
September 1985
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (-NYSDEC)
held a public informational meeting on August 29, 1985 at the Brant
Community Building to present the results of the Feasibility Study prepared
for the NYSDEC by EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc. This summary
is in response to comments and questions raised by the public regarding
the Feasibility Study.
Before the question and answer period, a presentation was given to
briefly summarize the Feasibility Study. The Feasibility Study shows that
the most cost-effective and environmentally acceptable means of remediating
the site is to chemically destroy the PCBs on site. This will involve
excavating the contaminated soil, processing it through a treatment plant,
after which the soil will be returned to its original location.
The following is a summary of the comments received as of
September 20, 1985 and the response to those comments.
Comment: With the time and money spent to date, what has been accomplished?
Response: The studies performed to date have defined the extent of PCB
contamination within and leaving the site. The Remedial
Investigation compiles all the information gathered to date
and gives an evaluation of this information.
Comment: How deep is the PCB contamination? How deep will you excavate?
Response: The PCB contamination is mainly in the upper 6 inches of soil
in the roadways, driveways and yards. The contamination in
the sewer trench is on the order to 2 to 3 feet deep. The
excavation of soil in the roadways will be to a depth of 18
inches, the driveways to 12 inches and the drainage ditches
to 36 inches. The sewer trenches will be excavated to the depth
of the sewer line to remove all contaminated soil that was used
to backfill the trench during sewer installation.
Comment: If the drinking water wells were not found to be contaminated,
why were filters placed on the wells?
Response: The filters were placed as a precaution. The cost of the filters
was minor and worth the expense for the benefits received.
Comment: How are you going to test for PCBs under the road? .
Response: The soil under the newly placed roadway pavement has been sampled
previously. The pavement will be removed, and the soil excavated
for treatment. Sampling will be done after the specified depth
of soil is removed to determine if more should be removed.
- 1 -
-------
Comment: Must the soil be removed in order to treat it?
Response: We have investigated processes for in place or in situ treatment.
The effective destruction of the PCBs requires the application
to heat to remove excess water and to enhance the reaction.
The addition of heat to the soil while it is in place would
be very difficult, therefore, we plan to construct a treatment
plant. The soil will be brought to the treatment plant, tested
and then replaced.
Comment: During removal of the soil, dust will be kicked up, will we
be in danger from the contaminated dust?
Response: Precautions will be taken to minimize dust. The dust suppression
steps to be used will be decided during the design process.
Air monitoring will be done during this removal action. The
necessary steps will be taken to protect the public health.
Following the removal and treatment of the soil, your homes
will again be cleaned as they were recently, following the paving.
Comment: How long will this removal action take?
Response: Two to three years.
Comment: Wouldn't it be less expensive for the government to just buy
our homes?
Response: Buying your homes and relocating all Wide Beach residents would
not achieve our ultimate goal of removing the contaminants from
the environment. The contamination is not extensive enough
to warrant cbmplete encapsulation of the site. The levels of
contamination are not high enough to create an acute health
hazard. We believe that chemical destruction of the PCBs is
feasible and cost effective.
Comment: Can we save our garden plants and replant them after the soil
is treated?
Response: All vegetation has the potential for being contaminated. As
a precaution, the vegetation will have to be removed and treated
as if it is contaminated. Following treatment of the soil,
the site will be revegetated to as near its original state as
possible.
Comment: Articles in the newspaper say that there is no Superfund money
available for Wide Beach.
Response: It's true that the Federal Government has not appropriated funds
for the next fiscal yearr' We don't'expect the delay to be too
long. It is a matter of the President and Congress coming to
an agreement on Superfund legislation.
- 2 -
------- |