United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R02-92/175
September1992
v°/EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
North Sea Municipal Landfill,
NY
-------
NOTICE
The appendices listed in the index that are not found in this document have been removed at the request of
the issuing agency. They contain material which supplement, but adds no further applicable information to
the content of the document All supplemental material is, however, contained in the administrative record
for this site.
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R02-92/175
3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Tine and Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY
Second Remedial Action - Final
5. Report Date
09/28/92
7. Authors)
8. Performing Organization Rept No.
9. Performing Orgamization Name and Address
10. Pro|ectfTask/Work Unit No.
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C)
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
800/000
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
PB93-963811
16. Abstract (Limit 200 words)
The 131-acre North Sea Municipal Landfill site is an active landfill that is owned and
operated by the Town of Southampton in Suffolk County, New York. Land use in the area
is predominantly residential, with approximately 15 homes located within a one-quarter
mile radius of the site. The site overlies a fresh water aquifer, which overlies a
deeper saltwater aquifer. Most of the adjacent homes obtain their drinking water from
private domestic wells, which tap into the fresh water Upper Glacial aquifer. Fish
Cove, a body of saltwater with marshes connected via a tidal inlet to the North Sea
Harbor, is located 1,500 feet northwest of the landfill. In 1963, a landfill was
constructed for the disposal of municipal solid waste, refuse, debris, and septic system
wastes from residential, industrial, and commercial sources. There are three main
landfill areas: a 13 acre area encompassing Cell #1 and related septic sludge lagoons,
which received septic system sludge in the early 1960's in addition to municipal solid
waste; Cell #2, which is 7 acres in size and was closed in 1990; and Cell #3, which is
currently active, and accepts 80,000 tons of municipal waste annually. In 1986, the
septic sludge lagoons were decommissioned, and sludge and 2 feet of soil were removed.
(See Attached Page)
17. Document Analysis a Descriptors
Record of Decision - North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY
Second Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Media: None
Key Contaminants: None
b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
c. COSATI FieloYGroup
18. Availability Statement
19. Security Class (This Report)
None
20. Security Class (This Page)
None
21. No. of Pages
54
22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.13)
See Instructions on Reverse
OPTIONALFORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)
Department of Commerce
-------
EPA/ROD/R02-92/175
North Sea Municipal Landfill, NY
Second Remedial Action - Final
Abstract (Continued)
A ground water monitoring program, which has been conducted by the Town of Southampton
since 1979, revealed a large ground water plume containing heavy metals that was
migrating from Cell #1 toward Fish Cove. As a result, several drinking water wells were
closed in 1981, and the town connected all residents in the area to a public water
supply. A 1989 ROD addressed onsite source contamination as OUl and provided for capping
Cell #1 to reduce the potential threat to human health and the environment by reducing
the risk of contaminant migration. This ROD addresses onsite ground water, as OU2.
Studies conducted during the risk assessment for OU2 confirmed that the risks to human
health are within EPA's acceptable risk range; therefore, there are no contaminants of
concern affecting this site.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action, with air and ground
water monitoring. There are no costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS: Not applicable.
-------
ROD FACT SHEET
SITE
Site name: North Sea Municipal Landfill
Site location: Southampton, Suffolk County, New York
MRS score: 33.74
ROD
Date Signed: September 28, 1992
Selected remedy: No Action for Groundwater remediation
Capital cost: None
O & M cost: None
Present-worth cost: None
LEAD
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Primary Contact Caroline Kwan, (212) 264-0151
Secondary Contact Melvin Hauptman, (212) 264-7681
Main PRPs: The Town of Southampton
WASTE
Waste type: heavy metals (lead, chromium, cadmium, manganese, iron)
Waste origin: landfill activities
Estimated waste quantity: 1.3 million cubic yards in Cell #1
Contaminated medium: groundwater
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
NORTH SEA MUNICIPAL LANDFILL
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION II
NEW YORK
-------
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
Site Name and Location
North Sea Municipal Landfill, Town of Southampton, Suffolk
County, New York
Statement of Basis and Purpose
This decision document presents the selected remedial action for
the North Sea Municipal Landfill Operable Unit Two site (the
Site), located in the Town of Southampton, Suffolk County, New
York, which was chosen in accordance with the requirements of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675, as amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP), 40 CFR Part 300. This decision document explains the
factual and legal basis for selecting the remedy for the Site.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC) concurs with the selected remedy. A letter of
concurrence from NYSDEC is attached to this document (Appendix
IV) .
The information supporting this remedial action decision is
contained in the administrative record for the Site. The
administrative record index is attached (Appendix III).
Description of the Selectefl Remedy; No Further Action
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) bases the
no action decision for the Site ground water contamination and
its impact on Fish Cove on the results of the Operable Unit (OU)
I and II remedial investigations conducted at the Site from 1987
to 1992, the OU II risk assessment dated May 1992, and the OU I
source control activities at Cell #1 that are scheduled to be
implemented at the Site in 1993. Confirmatory sampling of the
decommissioned sludge lagoons was conducted in January 1992 and
no additional sludge was found. Furthermore, the OU II risk
assessment determined that the risks to human health are within
EPA's acceptable risk range. The source control action of
capping Cell #1 will reduce the potential threat to human health
and the environment by isolating the landfill and reducing the
risk of contaminant migration from Cell #1 to Fish Cove which
results from leachate generated by surface precipitation. Thus,
"No Action" is the selected remedy for the second operable unit
for the Site.
-------
Declaration
In accordance with the requirements of CERCLA, as amended, and
the NCP, it has been determined that no further remedial action
is necessary to protect human health and the environment at the
North Sea Municipal Landfill Site. Source control activities
conducted in accordance with the OU I Record of Decision will be
implemented in 1993.
The EPA, in consultation with the State of New York has
determined that the North Sea Municipal Landfill OU'II does not
pose a significant threat to human health or the environment and,
therefore, further remediation of the ground water on and off the
landfill property is not appropriate.
Although a five year review will be conducted at the landfill
pursuant to the OU I ROD, no five-year review is required for OU
II because no hazardous substances have been identified in this
OU above health-based levels.
__
onstantine Sidamon-Eristof
Regional Administrator
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 3
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION . 5
SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION 5
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS 6
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 11
DESCRIPTION OF THE "NO ACTION" REMEDY 14
DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 15
ATTACHMENTS
APPENDIX I. FIGURES
APPENDIX II. TABLES
APPENDIX III. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
APPENDIX IV. NYSDEC LETTER OF CONCURRENCE
APPENDIX V. RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-------
SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The North Sea Municipal Landfill is located on eastern Long
Island at the intersection of Majors Path and Old Fish Cove Road
in the Township of Southampton, Suffolk County, New York (see
Figure 1). The 131 acre Site is an active landfill owned and
operated by the Town of Southampton.
The area between the Site and the nearest point of surface water
(Fish Cove, about 1500 feet northwest of the Landfill) is
moderately populated. There are approximately 15 homes within a
one-quarter mile radius from the landfill and approximately 100
homes within a one-half mile radius. Most of the residents are
located north, northwest and west of the landfill and are
hydrologically downgradient of it. (see Figure 2)
The Town of Southampton lies 2.4 miles to the south of the Site.
There are no major population centers to the east. This area is
predominantly wooded. Land use within a one-half mile radius of
the Site generally consists of private homes. A junkyard is
located on the east side of Majors Path/ approximately 0.6 miles
south of the landfill entrance. A sand/gravel borrow pit is
located west of Majors Path, between the landfill and Fish Cove.
The North Sea Municipal Landfill is located in glacial till
deposits north of the Ronkonkoma moraine. North of the moraine
are kame deposits. These deposits reach a maximum altitude of
about 100 feet and mark areas of disintegrated, stagnant ice from
the last glacial period.
The landfill is south of the southern shore of Little Peconic
Bay, in an area with extensive ponds, coves and wetlands. The
terrain is generally flat with elevations less than 100 feet
above mean sea level. Slopes drop north to the bay. Soils in
the area are sands and gravels, and ponds are surface expressions
of ground water. The landfill cells and lagoons are unlined.
The sandy soil allows rapid movement of contaminants through the
soil to the ground water.
The landfill is situated above fresh water aquifers which overlie
deeper salt water aquifers. The unconsolidated deposits of
Cretaceous and Quaternary Age rest unconformably on the
Precambrian-Upper Paleozoic basement complexes. The Upper
Cretaceous deposits include, in ascending order: (1) the Raritan
Formation consisting of the Lloyd sand member and an overlying
clay member; (2) the Magothy Formation-Matawan Group,
undifferentiated; and (3) the Monmouth Group. Except for the
Monmouth Group, these units are continuous throughout the North
Sea study area. The Cretaceous deposits are overlain by
Pleistocene and Holocene (recent) deposits. The Pleistocene
deposits consist of glaciofluvial deposits of the Upper Glacial
aquifer. The North Sea Municipal Landfill is situated above two
-------
fresh water aquifers: the Cretaceous Magothy aquifer and the
Upper Glacial aquifer.
The Magothy aquifer is the deepest fresh water bearing zone. The
top of the Magothy occurs at a depth of about 150 to 180 feet
below mean sea level at the study area. The Magothy is a water
transmitting aquifer consisting of clay, sandy clay and silty
clay.
The Upper (water table) Glacial fresh water aquifer is estimated
to be about 200 to 300 feet thick in the area of the landfill.
It directly overlies the Magothy aquifer. It is primarily
composed of Pleistocene sands and gravels. Like the Magothy
aquifer, .it also contains numerous silt and clay units. Most
wells in the area are completed in this aquifer.
Ground water is replenished primarily from recharge via
precipitation and lateral underground flow of fresh water. The
precipitation which reaches the main aquifer continues to flow
vertically through the zone of saturated gravel of the Upper
Glacial aquifer .at a rate of movement proportional to the slope
of the water table and the permeability of the soils.
Most of the homes obtain their drinking water from private
domestic wells tapping the highly permeable Pleistocene deposits
of the Upper Glacial aquifer. A plume of contaminated ground
water in this aquifer, moving northwest from the landfill, has
resulted in the closure of several drinking water wells. Public
water supplies have been extended to serve residents of the area.
Ground water in this area ultimately discharges to Fish Cove, an
arm of Peconic Bay. The plume is contaminated with low levels of
heavy metals.
*
Surficial soils associated within and surrounding the landfill
are the Plymouth-Carver Association Sands and "made" land. The
soils of Suffolk County were deposited as a result of glaciation
during the Wisconsin Age. The glacial outwash consists of sorted
sand and gravels. The Plymouth-Carver Association soils are
found on rolling moraines and side slopes of drainage channels of
outwash plains. These soils consist of deep, excessively
drained, coarse textured soils that are not suitable as a source
of topsoil. "Made" land consists of concrete, bricks, trash and
wire; anything but natural soil. This defines the landfill area.
Fish Cove is a body of saltwater with marshes connected via a
tidal inlet to the North Sea Harbor. The low marshes are
relatively stable and productive, supporting a variety of marine
invertebrates, juvenile fish species and water fowl. The
intertidal marsh is dominated by salt marsh cord grass (spartina
alterniflora). The marsh area is about 45,000 square feet
consisting of both intertidal and high marsh.
-------
The North Sea Municipal Landfill is located in the general
vegetative biome referred to as an oak-dominated forest. Oaks
are the dominant species. No surface water bodies (except
puddles created by rain water accumulation) exist on the landfill
property. The landfill is located near several naturally
occurring surface water bodies. These are Fish Cove, Big Fresh
Pond and Little Fresh Pond. The latter two are fresh surface
waters.
The following rare, threatened, and endangered species are
identified by New York State for the North Sea area: 1) bird
species: least tern and piping plover, 2) rare plant species:
Bushy Rockrose, Hairy Woodrush and Lespedeza stueri 3) rare
butterfly: Hessel's Hairstreak. Floral and faunal species which
are present are typical of the respective habitats. There are no
identified federal endangered or threatened species in the
vicinity of the Site.
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
The North Sea Municipal Landfill, owned and operated by the Town
of Southampton (Town), was initially constructed in 1963 for the
disposal of municipal solid waste, refuse, debris and septic
system wastes from residential, industrial and commercial
sources. Significant features of the Site include landfill Cell
#1 (inactive, partially capped, unlined); excavated/filled
scavenger lagoons; landfill Cell #2 (capped); and Cell #3
(active). See Figure 3 for relative locations of these cells.
A ground water monitoring program, conducted by the Town of
Southampton since 1979 has revealed a plume containing heavy
metals migrating from Cell #1 toward Fish Cove. As a result, the
Site was investigated and proposed on the EPA's list of priority
hazardous waste sites known as the Superfund National Priorities
List (NPL) in June 1984.
Cell #1 consists of two earlier landfill areas and totals
approximately 13 acres. It received septic system sludges in the
early 1960's in addition to municipal solid wastes. The total
quantity of wastes in Cell #1 is estimated to be 1.3 million
cubic yards.
As a result of the Site (Cell 1 and former scavenger lagoons)
being placed on the NPL list, Cell #1 was subsequently closed in
1985. Closure of the cell consisted of capping the top flat
portion (about eight acres) with a 20 mil polyvinyl chloride
membrane to minimize infiltration into the mound and covering it
with a thick protective layer (two feet thick) of silty sand on
top of the geomembrane. A layer of topsoil was placed over this
to maintain vegetative growth and prevent soil erosion.
The Town of Southampton also installed a storm water diversion
-------
and collection system to aid drainage. Manholes and a piping
collection system along the haul road were installed before the
recharge basin. The manholes, as provided for, were utilized as
collection inlets with the runoff being transported into a
separate recharge basin, located west of the landfill in virgin
ground. This system is currently still in operation and actively
collecting storm water and recharging it. As a result of the
steepness of the side slope, the sides of Cell #1 were not
capped. Infiltration of rainwater.into the landfill is minimized
as a result of the steepness of the side slopes. Also,
vegetation has taken root along a good portion of the landfill
side slopes. Absorption of water by this plant growth further
minimizes infiltration.
Since the collection inlets were installed above the synthetic
membrane, which is kept in place by a protective layer of sand,
rain water falling on the top surface of Cell #1 is directed and
recharged into virgin ground as noted above. Surface runoff from
the relatively steep slopes is conveyed to the adjoining land
surrounding the cell where it then follows existing contours and
eventually recharges into the ground.
In the late 1960's, a series of 14 scavenger lagoons,
approximately 50 feet long, 10 feet deep, 25 feet wide and 50
feet above the water table were constructed at the southern
portion of the landfill property. The lagoons accepted septic
system wastes from both commercial and residential sources.
Sludge was allowed to drain and dry, and was subsequently
disposed of in landfill Cell #1. Throughout the active life of
these lagoons, it is estimated that they received a total of 11
million gallons of septic waste.
The sludge lagoons were decommissioned in 1986. After this
removal, an additional two feet of soil was excavated. The
excavated material was dried out, then mixed with sand prior to
disposal. The sludge lagoons were refilled to grade with sandy
loam.
Cell #2 is approximately seven acres in size and constructed
about 20 feet above the water table with a leachate collection
system. An underground fire destroyed the cell's leachate
pumping system in 1987. However, a new well and pump has been
installed to handle leachate. The new system is designed to pump
leachate to a truck for off-site treatment. Cell #2 was closed
pursuant to an administrative order on consent executed between
the Town and the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.(NYSDEC) in 1990. Cell #3 is currently active.
The cell accepts approximately 80,000 tons of municipal waste
annually. Seasonal disposal rates are approximately 400 tons per
day in the summer months and 100 tons per day in the winter.
In December 1985, the EPA sent a letter to the Town of
-------
Southampton informing the Town that it was considered a
potentially responsible party (PRP) under Superfund for the Site
and, as such, may be liable for funds spent by the EPA for
addressing conditions at the Site. The letter explained to the
Town that they may participate in or undertake the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) if they wished.
The Town of Southampton entered into an Administrative Order on
Consent with EPA which was issued on March 31, 1987. Under this
order, the Town took responsibility for conducting the RI/FS,
which began on August 18, 1987. A Record Of Decision (ROD) was
issued for OU I in September 1989 for the source control of Cell
#1. This ROD calls for capping of Cell #1 pursuant to the NYSDEC
Part 360 requirements and conducting confirmatory sampling on the
decommissioned sludge lagoons. The Town entered into a Consent
Decree with EPA in February of 1990 to implement the.OU I ROD.
Confirmatory sampling of the former sludge lagoons was conducted
in January 1992 and no sludge was found. The remedial design is
expected to be completed by the Fall of 1992 and the remedial
construction will commence in the Spring of 1993.
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
The RI report, Risk Assessment and the Proposed Plan for the Site
were released for public comment on July 22, 1992 pursuant to the
requirements ser forth in CERCLA Sections 113(k)(2)(i-v) and 117.
These documents were made available to the public in the
administrative record file at the EPA Docket Room in Region II,
New York and the information repositories at the Southampton
College Library in the Town of Southampton. All Site files are
also located in the EPA Docket Room, the Southampton College
Library and the Southampton Village Library. A public notice
was published on July 22, 1992 in the New York Newsday, Suffolk
edition, announcing EPA's proposed no action plan, the
availability of these documents for review and notice of the
August 5, 1992 public meeting. The same notice was also
published in the Southampton Press, a local newspaper.
A public participation meeting was conducted by EPA on August 5,
1992, at the auditorium of the Southampton Town Hall,
Southampton, New York to discuss the summary of the RI report and
the Risk Assessment and to provide an opportunity for interested
parties to present oral comments and questions to EPA.
A summary of the significant comments relating to the selection
of the remedy received during the public meeting and public
comment period and EPA's responses to these comments are
presented in the Responsiveness Summary (see Appendix V).
SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION
The primary objective of this second operable unit was to
5
-------
determine the nature and extent of Site ground water
contamination and its impact on Fish Cove.
This is the second and final operable unit planned for the Site. .
Under the Consent Decree for OU I, the Town of Southampton will
cap Cell #1 pursuant to the NYSDEC Part 360 requirements to
reduce leachate generation. This Consent Decree also calls for
confirmatory sampling of the former sludge lagoons. Confirmatory
sampling of the decommissioned sludge lagoons was conducted in
January 1992. No additional sludge was found. Cell #1 is
scheduled to be capped by the fall of 1993. Post-closure
monitoring of air and water will be implemented. The following
will also be included in this post-closure monitoring: five
homes on the periphery of the plume will be monitored and/or
connected to public water supply; ammonia flux measurements and
benthos and hard clam recruitment will be conducted at Fish Cove.
This source control action will reduce the threat to human health
and the environment by isolating the landfill and reducing the
risk of contaminant migration from Cell #1. Currently, a water
quality monitoring program is being implemented pursuant to
NYSDEC's Administrative Order for closure of Cell #2 and
potential future expansion of the North Sea Landfill.
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Several investigations have been conducted to characterize ground
water quality near the North Sea Municipal Landfill. These
studies were performed by both the Suffolk County Department of
Health Services (SCDHS) and the Town of Southampton. In 1979,
SCDHS established the presence of a leachate plume emanating from
the landfill. As part of its study, SCDHS installed 14
monitoring wells on-Site and downgradient of Cell #1. The result
of the study indicated that a plume was migrating in a
northwesterly direction away from Cell #1. The plume contained
primarily elevated levels of iron and manganese.
The Town hired H2M Group in 1979 to conduct its own study. H2M
Group sampled 16 private residential wells downgradient of the
landfill for various water parameters. The results showed that
several wells has been impacted by the ground water plume (i.e.
iron and manganese). The Town connected these homes to the
public water supply in 1981.
In September 1981, the Town initiated a quarterly sampling and
analysis program to determine the approximate extent of leachate
migration ..from the landfill. This, was required pursuant to the
NYSDEC Part 360 Solid Waste Management Facility Permit.
In 1987, the Town commenced the OU I RI. Eleven ground water
monitoring wells were installed. Surficial and subsurface soils
were sampled and analyzed. Surface water and sediment were
-------
sampled and analyzed from Fish Cove. Results of the OU I RI
indicated that heavy metals were contained in a plume emanating
from Cell #1. Results of the surface water samples showed
ammonia, iron, and manganese detected at all sample locations.
The Site was then separated into two OUs. The OU II remedial
investigation commenced in July 1989. Two additional wells were
constructed northwest and downgradient of Cell #1; all of the
RI/FS wells were re-surveyed and re-sampled; residential wells
were sampled; baseline air emission rates for the Site in its
undisturbed state were calculated; flux measurements, surface
water and clams were sampled and analyzed and a benthic survey
was also performed in Fish Cove. The results of the RI are
summarized below.
Ground water
The eleven original and the two newly installed (12A and 12B)
monitoring wells (MW) (see Figure 3) were sampled for the total
analyte list of metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Leachate parameters and phenols.were included in the analysis.
Table 1 (unfiltered) and Table 1A (filtered) show the results of
June 1991 sampling for inorganics. Table 2 shows the results of
VOCs detected in the June 1991 sampling event. Table 3 shows the
results of inorganics for MW 12A and 12B in the September 1991
sampling round and Table 4 shows the results of VOCs in MWs 12A
and 12B.
In the June 1991 sampling event, an unfiltered concentration of
37 parts per billion (ppb) of arsenic was detected in MW#3b. This
is slightly higher than the NYSDEC drinking water standard (25)
but below the Federal drinking water standard (50)(also referred
to as a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)). The other sampling
events showed arsenic was detected below the NYSDEC drinking
water standard.
Chromium (Cr) was detected in seven out of twelve MWs including
upgradient wells. The ranges were from 53 ppb to 1310 ppb. The
highest concentrations were detected at MW 12A and 12B which are
immediately downgradient of Cell #1. Cr was detected in only one
well downgradient of the landfill (4C) at 53 ppb which is
slightly higher than the NYSDEC drinking water standard and the
MCL (50 ppb).
Lead was detected above EPA's Action Level for lead in ground
water at Superfund sites (15 ppb) in two upgradient and two on-
Site wells during the OU 1 sampling events. During the OU 2
sampling e'vehts, lead was detected at 37 ppb in MW12A, 25 ppb in
MW12B (which are both located immediately adjacent to the
landfill) and 26 ppb in a upgradient well. This is higher than
the NYSDEC drinking water standard (25 ppb) and EPA's Action
Level for lead in ground water. All filtered samples and
-------
residential well samples that were taken during both OU
investigations were below the EPA's Action Level for lead.
Both iron and manganese were detected in the ground water
monitoring wells at levels which exceeded the NYSDEC drinking
water standards. However, these standards are based on aesthetic
qualities rather than health concerns.
Five VOCs were detected in MW12A on one sampling event. They are
chlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, 1,4- dichlorobenzene, benzene and
1,1,2-trichloroethane. The concentrations ranged up to 8, 10,
11, 4 and 16 ppb respectively. The other sampling event showed
non-detectable levels of these contaminants. The NYSDEC drinking
water standard is 5 ppb for each of these compounds with the
exception of benzene (0.7 ppb). There are no MCLs for these
compounds except benzene which is 5 ppb. Methlene chloride was
detected at 14 ppb in MW12B on one sampling event. The NYSDEC
drinking water standard is 5 ppb and there is no MCL for this
compound.
In September 1991, residential wells utilized for potable water
were sampled in the vicinity of the Site to ensure that the water
met the Federal and State drinking water standards. Results of
the sampling indicated that no contaminants above Federal and
State drinking water standards were detected with the exception
of iron and manganese which exceeded the NYSDEC drinking water
standard slightly. As stated previously, these standards are
secondary MCLs established for aesthetic qualities and public
acceptance of drinking water (e.g. taste and odor) and/or not
based on health or hazardous effects. See Table 5.)
BASELINE AIR EMISSION RATES
Baseline air emissions were calculated in the OU II RI using soil
gas vapor concentration data collected during the first operable
unit RI. The "worst case scenario" emissions were calculated
using the highest concentration of contaminants detected. The
actual annual impact, maximum potential annual impact, and
maximum short-term impact were calculated using baseline
emissions estimates for each contaminant. These values were
compared to EPA's contaminant specific Ambient Guideline Concen-
tration (AGC) and Short-term Guideline Concentration (SGC).
Comparison of the calculated downwind concentrations with each
respective guideline concentration indicated that ambient concen-
trations of all contaminants evaluated were within acceptable
levels. Table 6 shows the results of the Baseline Emissions
Estimates .and Table 7 shows the results of the Ambient Air
Impacts.
FISH COVE STUDY & BENTHIC SURVEY
An initial study of Fish Cove was conducted with the State
8
-------
University of New York, Stony Brook Marine Science Research
Center (MSEC), in coordination with the Town's consultant, H2M
Group in the Summer of 1989. The purpose of this investigation
was to determine the impact of leachate discharges at the Site on
water quality, to determine the movement (or flux) of leachate
solutes across the sediment-water interface in the ground water
discharge area at Fish Cove and to determine the mortality and
chemical content of the hard clam, Mercenaria mercenaria. in Fish
Cove.
Twenty-two surface water samples were collected in Fish Cove and
analyzed for iron, manganese, hydrogen phosphate, chloride and
ammonia. Five sediment core samples were collected for measure-
ment of flux across the sediment-water interface. Short and long
term bioassays on the larvae of hard clams were conducted. (See
Figure 4.)
As a result of this study, elevated concentrations of ammonia,
iron and manganese were identified in the southeast region of
Fish Cove. The results of the bioassays that were done for this
study, suggested that hard clam larvae that spawned in or were
transported to the southeast region of Fish Cove would not
survive. In addition, no live adult clams were recovered by MSRC
from the southeast region of Fish Cove although numerous dead and
articulated shells were discovered. The results of the flux
study showed a consistent trend of decreasing solute flux across
the sediment/water interface with increasing distance from the
southeast area of Fish Cove. Data from the dissolved oxygen and
carbon dioxide flux measurements indicated that a source area of
decomposing manmade materials should exist. (See Table 8.)
As a result of its location upgradient of the southeast portion
of Fish Cove, MSRC considered the North Sea Landfill as the most
likely candidate for causing the high organic matter
decomposition rates necessary to yield elevated carbon dioxide
fluxes. However, high iron and manganese fluxes from the Fish
Cove sediments may be indirectly related to organic matter
decomposing in the North Sea Landfill and at the bottom of Fish
Cove as a result of natural processes. It was not clearly
demonstrated that the high iron and manganese fluxes recorded in
the Fish Cove sediment were caused entirely by the activities at
the North Sea Landfill.
Based on comments received from EPA and NYSDEC, additional
analyses were performed on surface water, sediment and shellfish
samples from Fish Cove by H2M, consultant to the Town, during
July 1989. A total of six surface water/sediment samples were
analyzed for priority pollutant purgeable organics, metals,
phenols, iron and manganese. In addition, sediment samples were
analyzed for base neutral compounds. In the surface water
samples, all priority pollutant organics were within the
standards, with the exception of acetone. Acetone was found both
-------
inside and outside of the impacted area, and is most likely a
laboratory contaminant. Concentrations of copper, iron,
selenium, silver and zinc were measured in the surface water
samples and cadmium, copper, iron, and zinc were measured in the
background samples. Low levels of 1,1,l-trichloroethane were
detected in the sediment samples and in the background sample.
It is possible that the presence of 1,1,1 trichloroethane may be
attributed to cesspool cleaning fluids which are commonly used in
cesspools, many, of which are located around Fish Cove. Priority
pollutant metals that were quantified in the sediment samples
included arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead,
manganese, nickel, thallium and zinc. The majority of these
metals were also present in the background sample. (See Tables 9
and 10.)
As a result of the uncertainty related to the conclusion drawn by
MSRC as to the mortality of the hard clam within the southeast
section of Fish Cove, additional investigatory activities were
conducted in January 1992. Specifically, in an attempt to assess
the nature of the ecosystem within this "impacted zone", the Town
performed a benthic survey.
A total of 336 hard clams were harvested in 2 hours and 3 minutes
from the southeast region of Fish Cove using conventional
harvesting methods along predetermined transects. Additionally,
16 other aquatic species representing the classes of pelecypoda,
gastropoda, Crustacea, annelida, elasmobranchiomorphi,
osteichthyes, porifera, merostomata and echinodermata were
incidentally caught. Finally, much of the bottomlands found
within the southeastern region of Fish Cove were found to support
extensive stands of sea lettuce and other aquatic flora.
The benthic study conducted in January 1992 revealed that commer-
cial quantities of hard clams, representing different size and
age classes were present in the southeast region of Fish Cove.
In addition, numerous other aquatic species were also discovered
existing in the southeast region of Fish Cove. The reported
diversity of these species suggests that the ecosystem in the
southeast region as a whole has not been affected significantly.
However, a small area within the southeast region does appear to
have been more impacted than the region as a whole. This area
did not yield any clams during sampling conducted by NYSDEC and
NYSDOH on August 5, 1992.
During the August 1992 sampling event, the NYSDOH in conjunction
with the NYSDEC and EPA, collected nine (9) composite samples of
hard clams, throughout Fish Cove. The nine composite samples were
analyzed for priority pollutant metals. The results indicate
that clam samples from Fish Cove contain levels of metals
generally within the range of those collected from New York State
waters and do not appear to present any significant increase
health risks to consumers. (See Appendix II)
10
-------
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
A baseline risk assessment was conducted for the OU I RI. The
baseline risk assessment estimates the human health risk which
could result from the contamination at the Site if no remedial
action were taken. The OU I risk assessment examined the
following scenarios: ingestion of ground water, ingestion of
chemical in soils, dermal contact with chemicals in soils,
inhalation of volatile organic compounds from soils, inhalation
of fugitive dust generated from Site soils, ingestion of
contaminated fish tissue, incidental surface water ingestion and
dermal absorption of surface water. At the time of the OU I risk
assessment, it was determined that without implementing source
control action at Cell #1, a significant riaks to human health
and the environmental would exist. The identified risks to human
health from these exposure scenarios as examined in the OU I risk
assessment have been addressed in the OU I ROD and are currently-
being implemented by the Town.
For the OU II RI, EPA conducted a baseline Risk Assessment to
evaluate the potential risks to human health and the environment
associated with the Site in its current state. The Risk
Assessment focused on contaminants in the ground water and
surface water which are likely to pose significant risks to human
health and the environment. Additional data had been collected
since the OU I risk assessment was conducted and these data were
incorporated into the OU II risk assessment. The summary of the
contaminants of concern (COC) in sampled matrices is listed in
Table 11.
The ground water contaminant screening process for OU II
identified 14 chemicals of concern: 13 metals and ammonia. The
chemicals of concern chosen for this risk assessment were
ammonia, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(III and VI), iron, lead, manganese, nickel, vanadium, and zinc.
The compounds or elements were selected because of their
toxicological properties, potentially critical exposure routes,
and higher concentrations present in comparison to other
contaminants.
The OU II baseline risk assessment evaluated the health effects
that could result from exposure to contamination at the Site
under current and future use scenarios. Four possible exposure
scenarios were evaluated: (1) residential ingestion of
contaminated ground water from future off-site wells (potential
future), (2) ingestion of contaminated fish from adjacent ponds
and streams .(potential current), (3) accidental ingestion of
surface water during recreational activities in on-site and
adjacent streams (potential current)., and (4) dermal absorption
of contaminated surface water during recreational activities at
local streams and ponds (potential current).
11
-------
Populations who may be exposed to contaminants migrating from the
Site include future residents who may use ground water for their
potable water supply (e.g., drinking), residents who presently
use the surrounding surface waters for recreation and residents
who presently consume fish caught in the surface waters
surrounding the Site.
Total body burden rates were computed based on all potential
exposure routes using an average adult body weight of 70 kg and a
child body weight of 15 kg. It was assumed that ingestion of
ground water from on-site would occur for 30 years for adults and
6 years for children. The noncarcinogenic exposures were
averaged over a 6-year period for children. For adults, the
noncarcinogenic exposures were averaged over a 30-year period.
An exposure period of 70 years was used for carcinogenic
compounds.
Under current EPA guidelines, the likelihood of carcinogenic
(cancer causing) and non-carcinogenic effects as a result of
exposure to Site chemicals are considered separately. It was
assumed that the toxic effects of the site-related chemicals
would be additive. Thus, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks
associated with exposures to individual compounds of concern were
summed to indicate the potential risks associated with mixtures
of potential carcinogens and non-carcinogens, respectively. Non-
carcinogenic risks were assessed using a hazard index ("HI")
approach, based on a comparison of expected contaminant intakes
and safe levels of intake (Reference Doses). Reference doses
("RfDs") have been developed by EPA for indicating the potential
for adverse health effects. RfDs, which are expressed in units
of mg/kg-day, are estimates of daily exposure levels for humans
which are though to be safe over a lifetime (including sensitive
individuals). Estimated intakes of chemicals from environmental
media (e.g., the amount of a chemical ingested from contaminated
drinking water) are compared with the RfD to derive the hazard
quotient for the contaminant in the particular medium. The
hazard index is obtained by adding the hazard quotients for all
compounds within a media that impact a particular receptor
population.
A hazard index greater than 1 indicates that the potential exists
for non-carcinogenic health effects to occur as a result of site-
related exposures. The HI provides a useful reference point for
gauging the potential significance of multiple contaminant
exposures within a single medium or across media. The reference
dose for the compounds of concern at the Site are presented in
Table 12. A summary of the non-carcinogenic risks associated
with these chemicals within/across various exposure pathways is
found in Table 13. All hazard indices for adults under current
and future use scenarios were below the threshold level of one
indicating that noncarcinogenic health effects are not likely to
occur based on potential exposures to surface and ground water.
12
-------
All hazard indices for children, except for potential future
ground water ingestion, were also below the threshold level of
one. The ground water hazard index for children is 1.29, with
antimony, arsenic and cadmium contributing the majority of the
hazard. These metals chiefly affect different target organs;
therefore, the hazards would not be additive. The hazard
quotients for these individual metals are below the threshold
level of one and would not be expected to result in deleterious
effects. Table 11 shows the summary of Site carcinogenic and
noncarcinogenic health effects for the exposure scenarios
evaluated.
Potential carcinogenic risks were evaluated using the cancer
slope factors developed by EPA for the contaminants of concern.
Cancer slope factors (SFs) have been developed by EPA's
Carcinogenic Risk Assessment -Verification Endeavor for estimating
excess lifetime cancer risks associated with exposure to
potentially carcinogenic chemicals. SFs, which are expressed in
units of (mg/kg-day), are multiplied by the estimated intake of a
potential carcinogen, in mg/kg-day, to generate an upper bound
estimate of the excess lifetime cancer risk associated with
exposure to the compound at that intake level. The term "upper
bound" reflects the conservative estimate of the risks calculated
from the SF. Use of this approach makes the underestimation of
the risk highly unlikely. The SF for the compounds of concern
are presented in Table 12.
For known or suspected carcinogens, EPA considers excess upper
bound individual lifetime cancer risks of between 10"4 to 10"6 to
be acceptable. This range indicates that an individual has
approximately a one in ten thousand to one in a million chance of
developing cancer as a result of site-related exposure to a
carcinogen over a 70-year period under specific exposure
conditions at the Site. Estimated carcinogenic risks under
current and future use scenarios are within or less than EPA's
acceptable risk range for both adults and children. The carcino-
genic risk for the potential future ground water ingestion
exposure pathway is 5.9 x 10~5 for adults and 2.2 x 10~5 for
children. The major contaminants contributing to this potential
carcinogenic risk are arsenic and beryllium.
Uncertainties
The procedures and inputs used to assess risks in this
evaluation, as in all such assessments, are subject to a wide
variety of uncertainties. In general, the main sources of
uncertainty include:
- environmental chemistry sampling and analysis
- environmental parameter measurement
- fate and transport modeling
13
-------
- exposure parameter estimation
- toxicological data.
Uncertainty in environmental sampling arises in part from the
potentially uneven distribution of chemicals in the media
sampled. Consequently, there is significant uncertainty as to
the actual levels present. Environmental chemistry analysis
error can stem from several sources including the errors inherent
in the analytical methods and characteristics of the matrix being
sampled.
Uncertainties in the exposure assessment are related to estimates
of how often an individual would actually come in contact with
the chemicals of concern, the period of time over which such
exposure would occur, and in the models used to estimate the
concentrations of the chemicals of concern at the point of
exposure.
Uncertainties in toxicological data occur in extrapolating both
from animals to humans and from high to low doses of exposure, as
well as from the difficulties in assessing the toxicity of a
mixture of chemicals. These uncertainties are addressed by
making conservative assumptions concerning risk and exposure
parameters throughout the assessment. As a result, the Risk
Assessment provides upper bound estimates of the risks to
populations at the Site, and is highly unlikely to underestimate
actual risks related to the Site. More specific information
concerning public health risks, including a quantitative
evaluation of the degree of risk associated with various exposure
pathways, is presented in the Risk Assessment Report.
State Acceptance
«
The State of New York concurs with EPA's selected no action
alternative. Their letter of concurrence is attached as Appendix
IV.
Community Acceptance
All comments received during the public comment period from July
22, 1992 to August 21, 1992 are summarized in the attached
Responsiveness Summary. Although most comments favored the no
action decision, several comments disagreed with the decision.
DESCRIPTION OF THE "NO ACTION" REMEDY
Based upon the review of all available data and the findings of
the RI conducted at the Site, a no action decision is protective
of human health and the environment. The no action decision
complies with Federal and State requirements that are legally
applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action,
and is cost effective.
14
-------
The OU II Risk Assessment indicates that the levels of contami-
nants present in the ground water at the Site present risks which
are within EPA's acceptable risk range. In addition, although
ground water sampling results indicate the infrequent occurrence
of contaminants exceeding MCLs, the majority of contaminants do
not exceed primary (health-based) MCLs in the ground water. In
addition, capping of Cell #1 will reduce the risk of contaminant
migration from Cell #1 which results from leachate generated by
surface precipitation. Furthermore, monitoring of air and water
will be conducted to ensure that the cap is effective at reducing
the risk of contaminant migration. This monitoring will include
sampling of five homes on the periphery of the plume and/or
connection to the public water supply. Currently, all homes
within the plume have been connected to the public water supply.
In addition, ammonia flux measurements and benthos and hard clams
recruitment will be conducted at Fish Cove.
Although a five year review will be conducted at the landfill
pursuant to the OU I ROD, no five-year review is required for OU
II because no hazardous substances have been identified in this
OU above health-based levels.
DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
There are no significant changes from the preferred alternative
presented in the Proposed Plan.
15
-------
APPENDIX 1
-------
:'.v«s%—>< .
.vmtf?.?
st-'* '**->-?
-------
FIGURE JL
5esider.ces 3cwngr3Gie~5 or Ceil *l
m * • S«isrir.c Public /Jatar Mair.
POOR QUALITY
CPJGSNAL
-------
FIGURE 3
Stainless Steel
Monitoring Well
H Existing PVC Well
^.Landfill Supply Well
\
NORTH SEA
MUNICIPAL
LANDFILL
Southampton, NY
6> V"&
/* V
W\.
I
.vVC°
^
k\V*°
^c^^^
vsv*
(drawing not to scale)
-------
FIGURED
NORTH SEA PHASE II R« *l$; > OCVE STUDY AREA
North Sea
Harbor
FISH
COVE
F + 40855I
?- 'Study
' Site
Long Island
t
• SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS (SUNY)
A SEDIMENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS (SUNY)
A SURFACE WATER/SEDIMENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS (H2M)
x CLAM SAMPLING LOCATIONS (H2M)
THE STIPPLED REGION INDICATES THE AREAL EXTENT OF THE
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE AREA, INFERRED FROM THE PRESENCE
OF IRON-STAINED BOTTOM SEDIMENTS.
TRANSITION ZONE
\\\\ IMPACTED ZONE
H2MGROUP
• AftCHlltCTS
M.Y.
PLANNERS * SOCNUCTS
N.T.
r*«nao.
3.
-------
APPENDIX II
-------
TABLE
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS - TOTAL
JUNE, 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
MW1A
.40 N
U
U
.089 B
U
U
8.5
0.3
U
.029
2.41
.008
6.06
2.48
U
.031 B
1.68 B
U
U
8.06
U
U
.031
MW1B
.30 N
.40 B
U
.026 B
U
U
4.48 B
.020
U
.043
1.68
.026
1.48 B
.041
U
.040
1.06 B
U
U
7.39
.002 B
U
.088
HW1C
.50 N
U
U
.032 B
U
U
8.99
.180
U
.090
2.65
.014
1.87 B
.032
U
.036 B
.764 B
U
U
6.94
U
U
.101
MW2
2.90 N
U
.003 BW.
.166 B
.004 B
.011
194
16.7
.162
.302
179
.160
55.20
5.61
.0016
9.55
8.95
U
U
2630
.024 B
.112
.203
JW3A :;
2.10 N
U
U
.032 B
. <.001 B
U
4.25 B
.114
U
.016 B
7.89
.008
2.45 B
.063
U
U
.814 B
U
U
19.5
U
.007 B
.056
; MW3B
.30 N
U
.037
.258
.001 B
U
32.4
.031
.008 B
.036
47.6
.005
14.2
2.88
U
.032 B
31.2
U
U
41.6
U
.008 B
.060
-------
TABLE I COKT'D
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS - TOTAL
JUNE, 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
. SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
MW3C
.50 N
U
U
.05 B
.001 B
U
44.2
.211
U
.042
3.66
.013
6.80
.161
U
.309
1.31 B
U.
U
11.9
U
U
.114
MW4A
.50 N
U
U
.036 B
<.001 B
U
6.04
.034
U
.016 B
1.29
.002 B
3.02 B
.489
U
U '
1.52 B
U
U
15.7
U
U
.049
HW4B
.20 N
U
U
.186 B
.001 B
U
19.3
.035
U
.024 B
3.37
.004
10.2
1.45
U
.03 B.
12.4
U
U
37.7
U
U
.085
MW4C
U
U
U
.001 B
<.001 B
U
6.63
.053
U
.027
1.2
.003
2.89 B
.024
U
.036 B
.582 B
U
U
6.93
U
U
.198
MW6A
.40 N
U
.007 B
.108 B
<.001 B
U
29.8
.020
.009 B
.068
6.41
.015
9.35
.418
U
.068
2.49 B
U
U
17.1
U
U
.068
MW12A
5.20 N
U
.015
.299
.002 B
U
82.9
1. 0
.031 B
.104
51. 5
.037
23. 9
.484
U
. 09
55
U
U
48.5
U
.047 B
.069
-------
H2MGROP
TABLE
CONT'D
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS - TOTAL
JUNE, 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
MW12B
1.80 N
U
.009 B
.043 B
<.001 B
U
19.40
1.31
U
.086
21.8
.025
4.92 B
.279
U
.066
7.36
U
U
15.2
U
U
.167
I MW13*
.30 N
U
U
.03 B
U
U
8.36
.13
U
.074
2.10
.011
1.83 B
.029
• U
.058
.812 B
U
.005 B
6.51
U
U
.079
FIELD .
BLANK 1
U
U
U
U
<.001 B
U
U
U
U
.015 B
U
.001 B
U
U
U
U
.709 B
U
U
.628 B
U
U
.039
FIELD
BLANK 2
U
U
U
U
<.001 B
U
U
U
U
.013 B
.025 B
U
.043 B
U
U
U
.499 E
U
U
.673 B
U
U
.022
EPA
NA
NA
.05
2
NA
0.005**
NA
.10**
NA
1
0.3
.05/
.015**
NA
.05
.002
NA
NA
.01
.10**
NA
NA
NA
5
NYSDEcW
NA
NA
.025
1
NA
.01
NA
.05
NA
.20
0.3
.025
NA
0.3
.002
NA
NA
.01
.05
20
NA
NA
0.30
U - Undetected
B - Entered if reported value is less than the Contract Required Limit
(CRDL) but greater than or equal to the Instrument Detection Limit (IDL)
N - Matrix Spike not within limits
(a) - USEPA Drinking Water Standards, Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL),
40 CFR 141, February, 1992
(b) - NYSDEC Water Quality Regulations 6 NYCRR Part 703, September, 1991
NA - Not Applicable
* - Blind Duplicate
** - The USEPA cleanup level for lead in groundwater is 15 ppb
The USEPA MCL for cadmium, chromium and silver become effective July,
1992.
-------
TABLE
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS-DISSOLVED
JUNE 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
•CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
MW1A
U
U
U
.083 B
U
U
8.12
.071
U
.009 B
.324
.005
57.7
2.03
U
.053
1.75 B
U
U
8.50
.002 B
U
.025
MW1B
U
U
U
.017 B
U
U
3.72 B
U
U
.014 B
.072 B
.001 B
1.46 B
' .021
U
1.14 B
U *
U
7.67
.002 B
U
.058
«W1C
U
U
U
.015 B
U
U
4.64 B
.07
U
.016 B
.297
U
1.6 B
.015 B
U
.042
.765 B
U
U
6.67
U
U
.042
HW2
.40 N
U
U
.140 B
.003 B
.009
187
11.6
.180
.362
80.2
.059 S
52
5.59
U
10.3
8.37
U
U
25.2
.028 B
.016 B
.189
MW3A .
0.70 N
U
-u
.022 B
<.001 B
U
4.83 B
.095
U
.009 B
2.37
.005 B
2.46 B
.032
U
.030 B
.833 B
<.001 B
U
20.8
U
U
.046
MW3B
0.20 N
U
.017
.227
<.001 B
U
31.0
.023
.006 B
.011 B
41.2
.005 B
13.6
2.82
U
.032 B
30.6
U
U
41.0
U
.009 B
.067
-------
TABLE
CONT'D
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS-DISSOLVED
JUNE 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
MW3C
.2 N
U
U
.041 B
<.001 B
U
36.3
.028
U
.010 B
.632
.006
6.57
.124
U
.237
1.49 B
U
.020
10.9
U
U
.07
MW4A
.2 N
U
.003 B
.027 B
<.001 B
U .
5.9
.015
U
.005 B
.200
.006
2.38 B
.268
U
U
1.22 B
U
U
11.9
U
U
.055
MW4B
U
U
.003 B
.225
.001 B
U
22.8
.019
U
.009 B
2.71
.001 B
11.9
1.67
U
.026 B
15.1
U
.020
44.3
U
U
.091
MW4C
U
U
.003 B
.011 B
<0.10 B
U
7.38
.079
U
.021 B
.890
.006
2.89 B
.035
U
.054
.706 B
U
U
6.83
U
U
.310
HW6A
.20 N
U
.006 B
.092 B
<.001 B
U
23
.009 B
U
.018 B
5.22
.007
9.54
.400
U
U
2.91 B
U
U
18
U
U
.164
MW12A
4.3 N
U
.013
.184 B
.001 B
U
75.1
.318
.023 B
.046
11
.010
22.1
.354
U
.222
52.1
U
U
50.4
U
.021 B
.046
-------
H2MGROUP
TABLE JA CONT'D
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
METALS-DISSOLVED
JUNE 1991
MG/L
PARAMETER
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
VANADIUM
ZINC
12B
.50 N
U
.008 B
.022 B
U
U
28.6
.091
U
.035
.795
.003 B
3.62 B
.059
U
.061
13.2
U
U
23
U
U
.035
i HW13*
U
U
U
.011 B
U
U
3.97 B
.016
U
.012 B
.055 B
U
1.63 B
.007 B
U
.021
.645 B
U
U
.654
U
U
.039
FIELD
BLANK 1
U
U
U
U
<.001 B
U
U
.095
U
.008 B
.599
U
U
.010 B
U
.088
1.22 B
U
U
.384 B
U
U
.039
FIELD
BLANK 2
U
U
U
U
<.001 B
U
U
.020
U
.009 B
.088 B
.002 B
U
U
U
U
.753 B
U
U
.276 B
U
U
.011 B
EPA (a)
NA
NA
.05
2
NA
.005**
NA
.10**
NA
1
0.3
.05/
.015**
NA
.05
.002
NA
NA
.01
.10**
NA
NA
NA
5
{ *
NYSDEC !{b)
NA
NA
.025
1
NA
.01
NA
.05
NA
.20
0.3
.025
NA
0.3
.002
NA
NA
.01
. 05
20
NA
NA
0.3
U - Undetected
B - Entered if reported value is less than the Contract Required Limit
(CRDL) but greater than or equal to the Instrument Detection Limit (IDL)
(a) - USEPA Drinking Water Standards, Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL),
40 CFR 141, February, 1992
(b) - NYSDEC Water Quality Regulations 6 NYCRR Part 703, September, 1991
* - Blind Duplicate
** - The USEPA cleanup level for lead in groundwater is 15 ppb
The USEPA MCL for cadmium, chromium and silver became effective July
1992
-------
TABLE
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
VOLATILE ORGAN1CS
JUNE 1991
ARMICTEM
OLAT]| If ORGAIIICS
to.
HLOROM ETHANE
ROnONETHANC
INYL CHLORIDE
HLORO ETHANE
ETHYLENE CHLORIDE
CETONE
AMON DISULTIOE
. I-DICHLOROCTHENE
. I-DICHLOROCTHAME
,2-DICHLOROETHENE
(TOTAL)
HLOROrORM
. 2-OICHLOROETHAMB
-BVTANOME
, 1, t-TRICHLOROCTHANI
ARBOM TETRACMLOKIOE
JtOMODICHLOROHZTHANE
. 2-DICHLOROPROPAMC
le-1. J-DIC«LOItO-
PROPANE
mCMLORtOETHENE
HBROHOOaOIKMrnUMZ
. i . 2-nucHUMoETMAjn
ICMZENE
rana-1 . 1-DIOUMtO-
PROPAME
IROMOroRM
.-HETHYL-2-PEMTAJIOM*
-HEXANONE
tTRAaiLOROmiEME
, 1 , 2 , J-TETHAOILOfcO-
ETHANt
OLUENE
«U>W>BENZENE
, 1 , l-TRICHLORO-122
T*I rLUOROETHAMI
CTANE ISONE*
THYLBEMSBME
•TYRCNE
:*LCME (TOTAL)
, J-DICHLOROBENIEHE
.,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
. 2-DICHLOROBENZEME
. , J-DIBHOttO- J-CHLORO-
PROPANE
.,2-oiBiTOMoETHAME
KM LA
U
u
o
o
0
D
U
U
a
u
u
0
0
a
o
a
o
D
0
0
D
0
U
0
a
o
u
o
o
u
D
D
U
a
u
u
0
u
NHIB
u
u,
u'
u
ti-
ll
u
u
u
2
u
u
II
0
D
. a
u
u
0
a
o
n
o
o
0
a
u
u
u
n
a
0
D
o
u
a
a
u
u
mm
u
u
a
u
a
u
a
u
u
2
U
D
U
U
U
U
O
U
1)
0
a
D
o
o
o
o
u
II
0
o
o
o
a
u
0
0
u
u
u
HH2
u
u
u
4
U
o
u
u
2
U
u
u
2
U
a
D
o
u
o
a
0
o
a
a
a .
u
a
u
u
o
u
u
o
a
0
u
u
u
u
HU1A
u
u
u
0
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
o
a
u
a
o
o
u
u
o
a
D
a
u
n
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
o
u
u
u
u
HMJB
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
a
u
u
. u
0
1
u
u
u
u
u
u
o
4
o
u
u
u
u
u
II
II
u
u
HHIC
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
o
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
II
0 .
u
u
u
a
D
u
II
u
0
a
u
u
u
D
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
NM4A
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
II
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0
u
D
u
u
II
u
u
u
u
1)
u
u
o
u
u
u
u
u
u
HM4B
u
a
o
o
o
0
u
u
u
u
o
a
u
0
0
o
0
o
0
o
o
o
o
n
o
o
0
0
0
o
2 J
u
II
o
o
u
D
D
D
u
HW4C
u
u
II
u
II
u
u
u
u
u
u
D
II
u
u
u
u
u
D
u
u
u
u
u
u
II
u
u
u
u
2 J
u
II
II
u
u
u
u
D
u
HW6A
u
II
o
o
0
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
o
u
u
u
u
u
o
0
o
o
a
D
u
D
u
2 J
u
0
a
u
o
a
u
u
u
MM12A
u
u
u
u
o
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
14 •
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
II
u
u
D
a
D
u
II
u
u
u
D
0
II
u
D
u
u
u
HM12B
o
0
o
o
o
a
0
o
o
0
o
0
1
0
a
II
0
a
0
a
a
D
o
D
D
o
a
0
a
o
D
0
o
o
u
D
o
o
0
KW11«
u
u
u
0
u
u
u
u
u
u
2
u
u
a
u
o
u
o
u
a
0
a
0
u
o
D
0
u
a
o
u
D
II
II
u
u
0
u
u
FIELD
BLANK 1
u
u
a
a
a
u
u
0
u
u
u
D
0
0
a
u
u
u
D
D
o
u
D
D
u
D
u
0
o
u
u
u
o
II
0
a
u
u
FIELD
BLANK 3
u
u
u
II
u
u
u
u
II
u
0
D
u
n
II
u
a
a
u
a
o
D
o
0
g
0
0
n
u
u
u
u
II
u
0
u
u
u
EPA
NA
NA
2
MA
NA
NA
NA
7
7
NA
NA
' 9
MA
200
9
*c^
— ,^
MA
9
MA
MA
9
MA
NA
NA
HA
MA
MA
IC7OC
NA
NA
NA
too
lO.OQO
'MS
NA
NA
NA
NA
NVSDCC
NA
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
NA
NA
NA
' NA
9
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.7
NA
NA
NA
MA
MA
MA
MA
9
MA
MA
9
NA
NA
NA
9
NA
NA
NA
D - Undetected
B - Entered if reported value ie leae than the Contract Required Lleit
ICKDL) but greater than or equal to the Inetru»ent Detection Liajit (IDL)
N - Metrlx Spike not within ll»lta
i*) - USEPA Drinking Miter Standard*. Maxlanui Contaminant Level* (HCL).
4O CFR 141. February. 1992
(b) - NVSDEC Meter Quality Regulations * HYCRR Pert 701, September. 1991
NA - Not Applicable
• - Blind Duplicate
POOR QUALITY
ORIGINAL
H2MGROUP
CN0NCCNS • AKCHITCCTS ' PVANNCItS
MUXUX. Ml.
SOCNT1STS
SUMvcvans
1OKNW. *4
2-19
-------
TABLE
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
WELLS 12A/12B
SEPTEMBER 1991
METALS TOTAL AND DISSOLVED
PARAMETER •' .^.:;:C3:i
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
MW 12A
TOTAL ,
.555
.031 B
.02
.483
<.001 B
.019
73.4
.237 N
U
.038
110
.004
15.70
2.25
U
.165
33.5
•c.OOl B
U
32
U
.017 B
.045
DISSOLVED
.128 B
U
.003 B
.215
<.001 B
U
68.8
.011
U
.02 B
3.70
.002 B
15
1.95
U
.03 B
31.6
U
U
30.7
U
U
.043
«W 12B
TOTAL
1.41
U
.007 B
.053 B
<.001 B
.008
22.5
.332
.013 B
.060
12.9
.011
6.34
.333
U
.207
9.16
<.001 B
U
15.5
U
. u
.069
DISSOLVED
.088 B
U
.003 B
.033 B
<.001 B
U
23.2
U
.007 B
.011 B
1.31
U
5.44
.209
U
U
7.85
U
U
14.6
U
U
.03
-------
H2MGROUP
TABLE
CONT'D
NORTH SEA LANDFILL
WELLS 12A/12B
SEPTEMBER 1991
METALS TOTAL AND DISSOLVED
MW 12C*
PARAMETER
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
TOTAL
1.10
U
.007 B
.053 B
<.001 B
U
20.4
. .273
.01 B
.049
12.1
.01
6.38
.337
U
.170
9.44
U
U
15.7
U
U
.079
DISSOLVED
.071 B
U
.004 B
.033 B
<.001 B
.012
22.5
U
U
.054
2.46
U
5.44
.23*2
U
U
7.48
U,
.011 N
13.2
U
U
.024
FIELD
BLANK
i TOTAL
.197 B
U
U
U
<.001 B
U
U
U
U
.01 B
.163
U
.038 B
U
U
U
.375 B
U
U
.645 B
U
U
.011 B
RINSE
BLANK
TOTAL
.04 B
U
U
U
U
. U
U
U
.008 B
.027
.034 B
.001 B
U
U
U
U
1.38 B
U
.005 B
1.57 B
U
U
1.21
EPA (a)
NA
NA
.05
2
NA
.005**
NA
.10**
NA
I
0.3
.05
.015**
NA
.05
.002
NA
NA
.01
.10**
NA
NA
NA
5
N¥SDEC (b}
NA
NA
.025
1
NA
.01
NA
.05
NA
.20
0.3
.025
NA
.3
.002
NA
NA
.01
.05
20
NA
NA
0.30
U - Undetected .
B - Entered if reported value is less than the Contract Required Limit (CRDL) but greater
than or equal to the Instrument Detection Limit (IDL)
N - Matrix SpiJce not within limits
(a) - USEPA Drinking Water Standards, Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL),
40 CFR 141, February, 1992
(b) - NYSDEC Water Quality Regulations 6 NYCRR Part 703, September, 1991
NA - Not Applicable
* - Blind Duplicate
** - The USEPA cleanup level for lead in groundwater is 15 ppb
The USEPA MCL for cadmium, chromium and silver became effective July 1992
-------
TABLE 4
HORTH SEA LANDFILL
WILLS 12A/12B
SEPTEMBER 1991 SAMPLING
QUANTIFIED ORCANICS
PARAMETER IfifffL)
CHLOROMETHANE
BROMOMETHANE
VINYL CHLORIDE
CHLORO ETHANE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
ACETONE
CARBON DISULFIDE
1 , 1-DI CHLOROETHENE
1 , 1 -DI CHLOROETHANE
1 , 2 -DI CHLOROETHENE
(TOTAL)
CHLOROFORM
1, 2 -DI CHLOROETHANE
2-3UTANONE
1.1, 1-TRI CHLOROETHANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
BROMCD I CHLOROMETHANE
1, 2-DICHLOROPROPANE
cis-1 , 3-DICHLORO-UU
PROPANE
TR I CHLOROETHENE
i DI3ROMOCHLOXOMETHANE
1,1,2 -TRI CHLOROETHANE
BENZENE
trans-1, 3-DICHLORO-U
PROPANE
BROMOFORM
4 -METHYL- 2 -PENTANONE
2-HEXANONE
T ETRA CHLORO ETHENE
1,1,2, 2-TETRACHLORO-
| ETHANE
• TCZ/JENE
CKLOROBENZENE
• ETHYIBENZENE
i STYRENE
XYLENE (TOTAL)
1 , 3-DICKLOROBENZENE
1 , 4-DICHLOROBENZENE
1 , 2-DICHLOROBENZSNE
1 , 2-DI3ROMO-3-CHLORO-
PRGPANE
: , 2 -DIBROMOMETHANE
HP
X2i
0
0
0
0
2B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
10
U
o
0
11
U
U
U
iff
I2B
U
D
U
U
14B
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
U
sHP:.?&
•020*;
0
U
O
U
178
U
U
U
U
U
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
FIELD
BLANK
0
0
0
0
2B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
U
U
U
0
U
O
0
U
U
U
U
i:; ' TRIB':/:
' BLAN3T
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1-EPJL
(«)
NA
NA
2
HA
NA
HA
HA
7
7
HA
HA
5
NA
200
5
NA
S,
*& J
NA
5
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
\OOO
NA
WA
\0*
(4000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NYSDEC
fb)
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.7
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
i
i
NA
NA
5
5
NA
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
U - Undetected
B - Entered if reported value is less than the Contract Required
Liait (CRDL) but greater than or equal to the Instrument
Detection Liait (IDL)
N - Macrix Spilce not vithin liaits
(a) - USEPA Drinking Water Standards, Maxiaua Contaainant Levels
(MCL), 40 CFR 141, February, 1992
(b) - NYSDEC Water Quality Regulations 6 NYCRR Part 703,
September, 1991
NA - Not Applicable
• - Blind Duplicate
-------
LOCATION
SWAN SON
BEGY
APPUZO
BRADLEY
KIRK
MTSUTA
FINNERTY
ZORKO
REK&ER
LAVMO
ALUSKEMCZ
CAS9DY
KOO
CASTLE*
**>FBa*>*"'0
tOCRAl OOftMHT,
•Alt* -v
IlANOAROS li/
M.UMNW ANTIUONI AftStMC
.09
.03
.03
.06
U
.03
.04
U
.03
04
.03
.02
.03
.04
NA
NA
.04
U
.04
U
U
U
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
.03
NA
NA
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.05
O.OS
BARIUM
02
03
.04
.04
.03
.16
.03
03
04
.08
.09
.04
.04
.04
1.0
2.0
MRtUJUK CAOMUU
U
U
u
u
0
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
NA
NA
U
U
U
U
U
U
.005
U
U
.008
U
U
U
U
0.01
.065
RESIDENTIAL WELL SURVEY SEPTEMBER
CAICIUU
4 77
4.68
239
2.57
243
106
3.07
3.54
655
3.37
3.49
2.01
3.71
6.61
NA
NA
CHROMIUh
U
U
II
U
11
U
4)
U
u
u
u
0
u
u
u
o.os
0.10
COBALI
U
II
U
u
U
008
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
NA
NA
.05
11
.17
06
03
01
.04
.14
.314
02
.10
.16
.007
.241
1.0
1.0
TOfA
IRON
15
.17
&
70
.17
&
.30
(6?)
16
&
.12
.21
(£95)
©
•0.3
0.3
mq/l
1. MF. I
UAO
.00(5
.005
.006
.01
.007
.008
004
.008
CHI)
.01
.006
.004
.005
0.05
DOS/
0015 "
M.S
ItOMSUH
7. in
7.24
1.74
1.27
1 37
482
1 64
1.64
5.76
1.74
1.75
231
1.9
5.77
NA
NA
I*MM«9
006
.007
03
02
005
(TJB)
02
02
09
.02
.02
01
.004
12
CO
0.3
05
UlRCUKY
II
U
U
U
U
U '
II
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.002
0.002
MCKCl
U
U
u
u
u
u
u
.02
U
U
U
U
U
u
NA
NA
1991
pourauM SCUNIUU
57
72
.74
.43
.40
5.08
.64
62
56
.59
.57
.70
.56
.55
NA
NA
II
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.01
0.01
suvtR
.005
U
U
.01
.005
U
U
U
u
u
u
u
.02
u
0.05
0,10
souuu
6. ;«
129
14.7
5.55
5.43
10.5
10.4
6.66
8.02
6.36
6.83
8.32
6.95
7.87
NA
NA
HIAUJUW
II
U
.002
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
u
u
u
NA
NA
VAMADIUK
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
NA
NA
IWC
.697
19
.25
.384
.04
.21
369
22
.07
(foj)
.06
095
.08
.09
5.0
5.0
CVAMN
U
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
NA
NA
•i = 'iNorrccito
NA = NO I APPLICABLE
» = niINO OUPLICAIE
• « - USEPA CLEANUP LEVfl FOR LEAD IS 15 PPH
HVS IIAXMUM coHfAUMAMi ir.vflS
CMAPIT.R i or nc. HVS SAMIART
:noc. PARIS. SUBPM! j-i (rre t»»j)
(5) r man AND uAMCAMrsc xn
IOIAL COMCINIBAIIOM nr Roni
HOI rxCIIO O5 m«/l
(S) USFPA ORMKMC WAITD <:|ANOAI)OS
MAKIUUM CnHIAUWANI ICVUS (MCI)
• n CIR 141 (ffB !«*?)
H2A4GROUP ~
7-12
-------
RESIDENTIAL WELL SURVE YSEPTEMBER 991
INORGANICS
ORGANIC
LOCATION
SWANSON
KGY
APPUZO
BRAMCY
KTRK
MTSUTA
F1NNERTY
ZORKO
ROGUR
LAVWO
ALUSKCWCZ
CAS9DY
BCCO
CAS1UE*
PART 5 NYS SANITARY
COOe-ORINKINC ^
WATER SUPPLY (i)
rrocRAL rmiNKiNO ,->.
WAIfR STANDARDS W
c«Um*
12
20
18
7
8
11
19
II
II
8
8
12
10
a
250
250
AMMOMA
< O.O2
0.81
0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.87
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
NA
NA
MIW IT
< 0.1
< O.I
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< O.I
< O.I
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< O.I
< O.I
< 0.1
< 0.1
NA
NA
Ml IP* IT
< 0.01
1.3
0.9
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.7
< O.I
O.I
12
0.4
< O.I
0.3
0.9
1.4
10
to
IOIAI
PI If HOIS
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< I
< 1
NA
NA
IOIAI
nssn vrn
'.nuns
mq/1
62
70
63
40
35
127
56
40
82
50
36
40
50
80
NA
500
cinonnrnmi
2
1
1
5
5
Art tour
8
5
5
niiun miDii^.tr (D HW •'•"•M* COMIAMHAMI UVTIS (J) USTPA DUNK**; WAICT STANDARDS
• = BUND UUPLICAIt ^-^ CHAPTT.K 1 flT IMC MTS SAMtABY vx MAXIMUM CdNIAUWANI UVUS (MCI)
coor. PAHI 5. smiPARr i-i (ire in?) in cm MI (irn 1997)
• If^h ^Af~* f~}/^^^ D O*OP^8WB • 4UV(Jllllr !• ' n>HMI^> ' ^vHIISIV * KW^Y(M9
I IJ^^»WV^I \ V^^^^ MTlVWIf. « T IOW»<»il
2-
-------
TABLE
BASELINE EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
CONTAMINANT
Toluene
Methoxy Butene Isoner
Ethylbenzene
1 , 2-Dichloro-l , 1,2, 2-tetraf luoroethane
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Methyl Cyclohexnne
Ch lorobenzene
Chlorodif luoronethane
Dlch lorod i f luor one thane
Benzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
2 -Butene
2 , 2 , 3 , 4-TetraMethylpentane
Trichlorof luoronethane
Alkyl Alkane
1 , 2-Dichoroethane
Acetone
Ch lor oe thane
1 , 2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Chloroform
1, l-Dichloroethene
Trichloroethene
Te t rach loroethene
MAXIMUM SOIL
GAS
CONCENTRATION
(fig/cm3)
0.0049
O.0046
0.0099
0.003
O.0023
O.0016
O.0012
0.00095
0.00065
O.OO055
0.00041
0.0002
0.00016
O.O0015
O. 00011
0.0001
0.000083
0.000049
O.OO0049
0.000038
0.000031
0.000024
0.000007
0.000005
DIFFUSIVITY
IN AIR
(cm2/day)
7517
6912
6480
7171
5962
6912
6307
7171
7171
8052
6739
6912
6912
7517
6912
7836
10714
7171
7171
9331
7672
7171
6826
6221
VOLATILIZATION
FLUX
(M9/c»2-day)
9.72E-02
8.39E-02
6.67E-02
5.6BE-02
3.62E-02
2.92E-02
2.00E-02
1.61E-02
1.23E-02
1.17E-02
7.29E-03
3.65E-03
2.92E-03
2.98E-03
2.01E-03
2.07E-03
2.35E-03
9.28E-04
9.28E-04
9.36E-04
i
6.28E-04 .
4.54E-04
1.26E-04
8.21E-05
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(kg/day)
5.83E-02
5.04E-02
4.00E-02
3.41E-02
2.17E-02
1.75E-02
1.2OE-02
9.66E-03
7.38E-03
7.01E-03
4.38E-03
2.19E-03
1.75E-03
1.79E-03
1.20E-O3
1.24E-03
1.41E-03
5.57E-04
5.57E-04
5.62E-04
3.77E-04
2.73E-04
7.57E-05
4.93E-05
-------
TABLE
AMBIENT AIR IMPACTS
ONIAMINANf
olutna
etHoxy But em laoawr
thytbeniena
.2-OlcMoro-1.1,2.2-tttrafluoro«them
.2-DleMorobenient
lathyl Cycloha»ena
MOT obenient
MorodlfluoroMthane
licnlorodlfluoroMthan*
lent en*
1.1.1-IrlcMoroethana
'-But tnt
frlcMorofluoroMthan*
!. 2.3.4- le,tr«Mthylptnt«w
klkyl Mkane
1,2-Dlcnoroethane
icetont
Chloroethene
1.2-OlcMoroethene
Vinyl Chloride
dilorofor*
1.1-DlcMoroothene
IrleMoroetheoe
letrechloroethene
NOUM.V
MISSIONS
(LBS/Ml)
5.J7E-OJ
4.A4E-0)
S.ME -01
S. 14E-OS
2.00E-0)
1.61E-01
1.1 IE-OS
8.90C-M
A.80E-M
6.MC-M
4.0K-M
2.02C-M
.6SC-M
.AtE-M
.1IE-04
.UE-04
.30E-M
.1U-OS
.«£ 05
.IK -OS
.*7E OS
.5U 05
.97C-M
.5*1 06
ANNUAL
: [MISSIONS
(LM/V*)
4.MC»01
.011*01
.1K«Ot
.m«ot
.nc»oi
.S9E«01
.551*00
.6K«00
.B7E*00
,58t«00
.4K*00
.74E«00
.42E«00
.J9C»00
.556-01
.are -01
.12000
.OE-01
.4IE-01
.4K-01
.OOC-01
.17E-OI
6. OH 02
J.VZE-OZ
AC1UAI
ANNUAL
IHPACf
1.06C-02
V.20E-OS
7.SOE-01
6.2SE-01
I.V4C 01
I.20E 03
2.I9C-0)
1.7M-OS
1.J5C-05
1.20E-OS
8.00E-04
4.00E-04
S.27E-M
S.20E-04
2.19E-04 .
2.26C-M
2.S7E-M
I.02E-04
1.02C-04
1.0U-04
A. BBC-OS
4. 9ME -05
1. SBC -05
9.00C-06
MAXIMUM
rauNiui
ANNUAL
IMPACI
(HB/B1)
t.OBE-02
V.SM-OS
7.4SE-OS
A. SIC -OS
4.05E-OS
3.25E-OS
2.2SE-OS
1.7VE-OS
1.S7E-OS
1.SOE-OS
8.15E-04
4 .07E -04
S.S2E-04
J. 251-04
2.2SC-04
2.SOE-04
2.621 04
1.01C-04
LOSE -04
1.04E-04
7.00E 05
5.07E-05
1. 411 05
9.16C-M
NAKIMUN
SNOHt-ICMt
IHPACt
(••/a1)
1.0BE*00
9.S6E-01
7.45E-OI
A.SSE-01
4.0K-OI
S.25E-01
2.23E-01
1.7VE-01
i.sre-oi
1.SOE-01
B. 11C -02
4. ore -02
S.S2E-02
S.25E-02
2. 251-02
2.30C-02
2.621 02
1.03E-02
LOSE -02
1.041 02
7.00E-01
5. ore os
1.4 IE OS
9.16C 04
SHOR1-IEIN
ANBICNt
GUIOEIINC
CONCENIM1ION
(SCC)
OB/*1)
69.000
NA
10S.SSS
1.664.2BA
50.000
SM.OOO
11.000
9.524
1.178.571
SO
450,000
NA
560.000
NA
NA
950
140.000
NA
190.000
1.500
980
4.762
51,000
81.000
10*6- URN
ANBIfNf
GUIDELINE
CONCCHIIA1ION
(AGC)
IHB/*1)
2.000
0.1*
I.OSS
16.A4S
200
S.BOO
20
9*
11,786
0.12
1.000
0.1*
700
O.I*
O.I*
O.OS9
14.000
0.1*
1.900
0.02
25
48
0.4*
0.075
COMPLIANCE
SIAfUS
In Cowptlcnc*
In CMpllwK*
In C
-------
H2M3ROIP
TABLE
SURFACE WATER CONCENTRATIONS NEAR
SOUTHEAST REGION OF FISH COVE
DATE
5/23/89
6/8/89
6/15/89
State
SA'1'
State Bt1>
Federal")
STATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
A
6
C
"Beach"
D
E
ci-*
6
6
20
24
24
26
26
24
26
28
26
28
28
26
24
26
28
28
28
26
30
26
26
26
20
0.4
24
24
NA
NA
NA
NIU*
3.56
5.49
0.922
0.441
0.419
0.189
0.508
1.25
0.091
0.10
0.32
0.174
0.173
0.093
0.086
0.07
0.059
0.029
0.024
0.043
0.017
0.034
0.491
1.87
8.89
0.509
0.088
0.051
NA
0.015**
NA
Fe
0.675
0.714
0.109
0.069
0.061
0.057
0.093
0.303
0.046
0.059
0.055
0.054
0.046
0.055
0.005
0.041
0.041
0.044
0.048
0.05
0.052
0.096
0.121
0.522
1.21
0.083
0.028
0.028
NA
0.30
NA
Mn
1.73
3.13
0.781
0.34
0.33
0.23
0.33
0.583
0.18
0.21
0.27
0.25
0.22
0.18
0.15
0.16
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.18
0.307
0.627
2.22
0.699
0.338
0.219
NA
NA
NA
HPO*'
0.003
0.006
0.005
0.007
0.005
<0.002
0.005
0.002
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.004
<0.002
0.002
0.002
0.003
<0.002
0.003
0.006
0.004
0.003
0.002
--
--
--
_-
•m •
— —
NA
NA
NA
*
**
CD
(2)
Concentrations in 1,000 mg/L; all other results in mg/L
Based on pH of 7.25 and temperature of 20 degrees C.
6 NYCRR Part 700-705 - New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, September 1, 1991.
USEPA Criterion Maximum Concentration for Saltwater,
November 1991.
2-6
-------
H2MGROUP
TABLED
PARAMETERS QUANTIFIED IN FISH COVE SURFACE WATER
(UG/L)
PARAMETER
ACETONE
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
MANGANESE
SELENIUM
SILVER
ZINC
LOCATION
SW-l
ND
3. OB
ND
ND
7.0B
978E
976E
12.0
10.0
18. OB
SW-2
. 27
3. OB
ND
13.0
1S.OB
1490E
557E
ND
10.0
17.0B
SW-3
26
4.0B
ND
44.0
8. OB
968E
90.0E
ND
ND f
20.0
SW4
26
4.0B
ND
17.0
8.0B
499E
129E
ND
ND
21.0
BACKGROUND
SW-5
ND
4.0B
ND
ND
10.0B
338E
109E
ND
ND
26.0
SW-6
33
5.0
7.0
ND
S.OB
617E
156E
ND
ND
22.0
STANDARDS
NYSDEC
CLASS SA (1)
NA
NA
7.7
54*
2.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
58
FEDERAL (2)
NA
NA
43
NA
2.9
NA
NA
300
2.3
95
ND Indicates "Not Detected"
(1) 6 NYCRR Pans 700-705, NYSDEC, September 1, 1991
(2) Saltwater Criterion Maximum Concentation
* Class SA standard for hexavalent chromium
E The reported value is estimated because of the presence of interference
B Entered if the reported value is less than the Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL)
but greater than or equal to the Instrument Detection Limit (IDL)
8113192
-------
t-2u3t~
TABLE I 0
egxyririep IN FISH eevs SECIMSNTS
garar.eter
SP-1
Methyl ene Chloride 2J
Acetone 13 OJ
C.w.lsre;cr= 1J
1.1,1-TCA «9
TCI ND
Location
SP-2 SP-3
(in ag/Jcg)
Arse.-.ic
Cadrius
ead
Karganese
Nickel
T.w.a:iiu=
Zinc
PUer.sls
ND
ND
3.5
3.85
1400
1.6
61.0
ND
.76B*JJ
8.6
ND
HO
18 OJ
ND
43
ND
.40BN
ND
ND
l.OB
3600
1.7
24.0
29.0
1.4B*N
4.4
ND
ND
93J
ND
33
KD
.36BK
1.6
2.7
2.4B
1800
1.8
22.0
ND
.53B*WN
9.1
ND
SD-4
ND
KD
ND
ND
ND
1.1N
1.4
4.9N
3.3BN
3100
^
17.0
ND
.66B*HN
13. SN*
ND
Background
SP-5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
.33BN
ND
ND
2.9B
1700
1.9
200
ND
.SOBN*
4.0
.581
ND
170J
ND
39
ND
ND
ND
2.2B
1.5B
1000
1.8
200
ND
6.6BN*
3. IB
ND
r ir.iisates "Net Detected"
6.
-------
TABLE \ |
CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION TO FISH COVE
THROUGH GROUND WATER SEEPAGE FROM NORTH SEA LANDFILL
(DETERMINED BY SOCEM)
CONTAMINANT
Wells near Fish Cove
(ug/L)
AMMONIA
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM III
CHROMIUM VI
MANGANESE
NICKEL
VANADIUM
ZINC
1722.251
5.775
1.817
26.589
0.430
1.366
38.816
6.469
158.183
23.608
3.932
33.296
-------
IAIIE
CRITICAL 10XICITT VALUES FOR ORAL ROUIE
CHEMICAL
A«aonla S.OOE-03 (2) NA
NA KA 4.SOC«00 (3)
).OOE-M (3) NA NA
1.0K«00 (2) 1.00C«Ot (2) NA
5.00E-03 (3) 2.00C-02 (2) NA
NA NA NA
t.OOE-01 (3) 1.00E-01 (2) NA
2.00E-02 (3) 2.00E-02 (2) NA
7.00E-03 (2) 7.00E-03 (2) NA
2.00E-OI (2) 2.00C-01 (2) NA
NA • Not Anal y led, Not Applicable, or Hot bailable
• Reference Dote/Reference Concentration
•• RfOs • •ubchronic reference dose used for exposure periods
than seven years.
••• Oral Carcinogenic Slope factor
(1) Value derived fro* a unit rlak of 5.01-05 ug/L proposed
in HEASI fVl99t.
(2) Values obtained fro* HEASI IT 1991.
(3) Values obtained fro» IRIS on April U. 1992.
(4) Derived fro» 34 »g/l (or organoleptlc threshold In
HEASI ff199t.
A • Sqffici«ni evidence of huaan carcinogeniclty.
•2 • Sufficient evidence of carcinogenic it/ in anisMla
uilh inadequate evidence In huaans.
0 - Not classifiable as to human carcinog«nlclty (inadequate
NA
NA
NA
A
NA
NA
82
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
less
i
or no tvidence).
-------
Table 13-
Summary of Site Cancer Risks
and Noncancer Health Effects
Noncarclnoqenlc
Ground-water Ingestion
Surface Water
Fish Ingestion
Incidental Ingestion
Dermal Absorption
Total:
Adult
8.30E-01
1.08E-02
3.91 E-05
1.19E-05
8.41 E-01
Children
1.29E+W
2.42E-02
6.13E-04
9.52E-05
1.31E+00*
Carcinogenic
Ground-water Ingestion
Surface Water
Rsh Ingestion
Incidental Ingestion
Dermal Absorption
Total:
5.90E-05
1.82E-06
5.73E-09
1.75E-09
6.08E-05 ~
2.20E-05
1.70E-06
3.21 E-08
4.99E-09
2.37E-05
•Above the threshold level of one
-------
STATE OF NEW YORK - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph Crua
Bureau of Environmental Exposure Investigation
FROM: Donald H.
Bureau of Toxic Su<5sta*i€e Assessment
SUBJECT: Metals in Clams from Fish Cove
DATE: September 1. 1992
I have reviewed the data on metals in nine composites of Mercenaria mercenaria
collected from Fish Cove; these data are summarized in Table 1.
I compared the results to NYS DEC data on metals in M. mercenaria collected from New
York waters during 1982 to 1991. Although some of these data are from clams collected from
areas closed to recreational, as well as commercial clamming, they appear to be fairly
representative of typical levels of metals from New York waters. The mean level for six of the
eight metals in Fish Cove clams is at or below the mean level in the DEC database. The mean
cadmium level in clams from Fish Cove is about 40% higher and the mean arsenic level is
roughly twice as high. In general, however, results are within range of the DEC data. An
assessment of the risks to consumers posed by heavy metals in bivalves from New York's
marine waters does not indicate that these levels would be expected to generate doses above
levels of concern for clam consumers. This is based on a dose calculated for a 70 Kg individual
consuming 20 g clams per day (approximately 1/2 dozen per week) and comparing that dose to
a risk reference dose (RfD) reported in the literature (ATSDR, 1988-1991; DOH, 1988). The ratio
of dose to RfD (hazard index) is well below 1 for the six elements for which an RfD can be used;
these are shown in Table 2.
This approach cannot be used for lead since no RfD exists for lead and no discemable
threshold has been observed for health effects of lead ingestion (ATSDR. 1988). The common
unit of body burden measurement is blood-lead (PbB), expressed as micrograms per deciliter
(ug/dL). The mean PbB level for adults in the United States is estimated to be between 108 and
17.7 ug/dL (US EPA, 1989). A means of predicting an increase in PbB due to dietary intake for
adults is provided in the following equation (US EPA. 1989):
A PbB = (0.032 day/dL) * (ug/day dietary intake) (1)
Clinical data have shown this relationship to be valid for daily intakes of less than 200 ug lead.
Using a mean of 0.11 ug/g (Table 1), a daily intake is determined as follows: 0.11 ug/g * 20 g/day
= 2.2 ug/day. Using this in Equation (1) gives an estimated increase in PbB:
A PbB = ((0.032 day/dL) « 2.2 ug/day) = 0.07 ug/dL
This indicates that consumption of M. mercenaria from these waters is not expected to
significantly increase an individual's blood-lead level.
The oral reference dose for arsenic is for inorganic arsenic. Research has shown that the
chemical forms of arsenic found in clams and other marine life are unusual and complex
organic molecules (ATSDR, 1992; US EPA. 1984). These organic arsenicals are considered
relatively nontoxic and are substantially less toxic than the inorganic forms of arsenic that have
-------
caused toxic effects in humans and animals. They are mainly derivatives of arsenobetaine and
arsenocholine and are extensively absorbed, but are resistent to metabolism and are rapidly
excreted intact. Therefore, its toxicity is greatly reduced compared to inorganic arsenic (Foa
et al., 1984; ATSDR. 1987). Consequently, the risks of ingesting arsenic in M. mercenaria are
not considered to be substantial.
In conclusion, clam samples from Fish Cove contain levels of metals generally within
range of those collected from other waters and do not appear to present any significant
increased health risk to consumers.
-------
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological Profile for Arsenic
1991; Cadmium. 1989; Lead. 1986; Mercury. 1988; Copper. 1990; Chromium. 1989; Nickel,
1988: Zinc, 1989. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, TN.
NYS DOH, 1988. Ambient Water Quality Human Health Fact Sheets on Mercury. BTSA, NYS
DOH. Albany. New York.
Foa. V.. A. Columbi, M. Maroni, M. Buratti and G. Calzaferri. 1984. Speciation of the Chemical
Forms of Arsenic in the Biological Monitoring of Exposure to Inorganic Arsenic. Science
Total Environ.. 34: 241-259.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1989. Review of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Lead: Exposure Analysis Methodology and Validation.
EPA-450/2-89
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1984. Health Assessment Document for
Inorganic Arsenic. EPA-600/8-83-021F. Washington, D.C.: Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment.
djv/22370231
Attachment
cc: Dr. Horn
Mr. Chinery
-------
Table 1
Metals in Clams, North Sea Landfill
Sample ID Pfe £d As dfl &
9096
9097
9098
9099
9100
9101
9102
9103
9104
o.r
0.1*
o.r
o.r
o.r
o.r
0.15*
o.r
0.15*
0.14
0.18
0.22
0.26
0.28
0.32
0.55
0.42
0.25
1.38
1.22
2.18
2.90
0.74
2.22
1.85
2.04
2.03
0.006
0.011
0.021
0.054
0.086
0.026
0.021
0.038
0.018
0.2*
0.2*
0.2*
0.2*
0.2*
0.2*
0.25*
0.2*
0.5*
1.36
1.52
2.10
3.60
4.06
2.24
2.02
2.16
2.03
02*
0.2*
0.4
0.56
0.2*
0.4
0.53
0.56
0.5*
9.24
8.14
8.38
9.20
13.3
9.60
10.1
8.06
8.20
mean 0.11 0.29 1.84 0.03 0.24 2.34 0.40 9.36
DEC Database
Mean
n
min
max
0.363
126
0.08
1.04
0.207
116
0.08
0.37
0.942
63
0.04
2.17
0.037
67
0.01
0.173
0.383
116
0.01
1.05
2.41
63
1.33
3.76
0.878
61
0.50
1.77
18.2
50
12.1
32.8
* -1/2 detection limit
Table 2
Comparison of Dose to RfD
Element Mean loom} Dose fmo/KQ/davl Oral RfD Hazard Index
Cadmium 0.29 8.29E-5 6.9E-4 0.12
Chromium III 0.24 6.86E-5 1.0 <0.01
Mercury (organic) 0.03 8.57E-6 9.0E-5 0.10
Copper 2.34 6.69E-4 3.7E-2* 0.02
Nickel 0.40 1.14E-4 2.0E-2 <0.01
Zinc 9.36 2.67E-3 2.0E-1 0.01
Dose is calculated for a 70 Kg individual consuming 20 g dams per day
* - surrogate RfD calculated from 1.3 mg/L drinking water standard
22370293
-------
North Sea
Harbor
FISH
COVE
Zz&*
4?
Long Island
i
Zone •
l*
2A-1
2 A- 2
2B
2C-1
2C-2
3A-1
3A-2
3B-1
3B-2
No. of Clans Analyzed
.....
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
Range of the Size of
Clams in Millimeters
_
70 - 85
52.5 - 57.5
65 and 70
72.5 - 90
52.5 - 65
52.5 - 60
45 - 47.5
55 - 67.5
45 - 50
Sample Number
-
9096
9097
9098
9099
9100
9101
9102
9103
9104
-------
APPENDIX IV
-------
:
New York State Department of Environmental Cdmservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233 ,7010 VfCi-:^: •
Thomas C. Jotting
Commissioner
SEP 2 1332
Ms. Kathleen Callahan
Director
Emergency & Remedial Response Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Re: North Sea Landfill ID No. 152052 Operable Unit 2
Record of Decision
Dear Ms. Callahan:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has
reviewed the referenced document and finds the no action alternative to be
acceptable.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Michael J.
O'Toole, Jr., at (518) 457-5861.
Sincerely,
Ann DeBarbieri
Deputy Commissioner
------- |