REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR'S
ANNUAL REPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
IN NEW ENGLAND
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUGUST 1976
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 1
JOHN F. KENNEDY FEDERAL BUILDING • BOSTON, MA.022O
.
-------
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR'S
ANNUAL REPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
IN NEW ENGLAND
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUGUST 1976
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword from the Regional Administrator
Air Quality Page 1
Surface Water Quality 4
Drinking Water 9
Solid Waste Management 13
Toxic Substances 15
Appendices
Air Quality
Figure 1: 1975 TSP Annual GM
1974 TSP Annual GM
Figure 2: 1975 TSP 24-Hour Average
1974 TSP 24-Hour Average
Figure 3: 1975 CO 8-Hour Average
1974 CO 8-Hour Average
Figure 4: 1975 Photochemical Oxidants
1974 Photochemical Oxidants
Figure 5: Frequency of Violation of Photochemical Oxidant Standard, 1975
Surface Water Quality
Table 1: Main Stem & Major Tributary River Mileage Meeting
Federal and State Standards
Table 2: Summary of Water Quality by State
Drinking Water
Table 3: Inventory of Interstate Carrier Water Supplies in New England
Solid Waste Management
Figure 6: Percent of Population Served by Environmentally Acceptable
Solid Waste Disposal Facilities
-------
Toxic Substances
Table 4: Water Supply Sampling Results for PCB
Table 5: Industrial Effluent Sampling Results for PCB
Table 6: Solid Waste Sampling Results for PCB
-------
From the Regional Administrator:
This is the Environmental Protection Agency's second annual Report on
Environmental Quality in New England. Like the first report, it discusses
air quality, surface water quality, drinking water quality, and solid waste
management in the six New England states—Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. There is also a new section on
toxic substances.
Wherever possible, this report makes comparisons with the data contained in
last year's edition. As was the case a year ago, there is both good news
and bad. Again, the most significant accomplishment is the control of sulfur
oxides in the atmosphere. There were no violations of the national ambient
air quality standards for sulfur oxides anywhere in New England during 1975.
Data from 188 monitoring stations attest to that fact. Unfortunately, we
have not experienced the same success with pollutants produced in large part
by the automobile. The eight-hour standard for carbon monoxide was vio-
lated at a majority of monitoring stations, and the photochemical oxidant
standard continued to be violated at almost every monitoring station across the
region.
With regard to surface water quality, there was a six percent improvement over
last year -in the number of main stem river and tributary miles meeting the
fishable-swimmable water quality standard stipulated by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. Fifty-one percent of New England's main stem river
and tributary mileage is now suitable for fishing and swimming. This improve-
ment is expected to accelerate in the immediate future as new pollution con-
trol facilities are completed and become operational, but achievement of the
fishable-swimmable standard throughout New England by the target date of 1983
is in doubt.
Since the last report, there has been improvement in the lead concentrations,
bacteriological quality, and chloride levels in drinking water supplies, but
a new and serious issue has arisen from evidence that chlorination of water
for disinfection may produce carcinogenic compounds.
In solid waste management, the percentage of New England's population served
by waste disposal facilities which meet state requirements has risen from
30 to 41 percent. Although this improvement is gratifying, it is clear
that a majority of New Englanders do not enjoy environmentally sound waste
disposal in their communities.
The section on toxic substances reviews the region's monitoring program for
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's). These compounds bio-accumulate in the
human body, and can cause serious adverse health effects. The monitoring
program found PCB's in river water and bottom sediments downstream from
certain industries, in fish samples, and in sludge from a municipal
wastewater treatment facility handling wastewater from an industrial user
of polychlorinated biphenyls.
-------
report includes both federal data and data compiled by the official
state environmental programs in the six states.
It is intended as a resource for all of those citizens who believe
that protection of New England's environment is dependent upon their
factual knowledge of its quality.
-------
AIR QUALITY
Analysis of air monitoring data for calendar year 1975, like that for 1974,
reveals a mixed picture for air quality in the New England states. Comparison
of the data for the two years shows fewer violations of standards for some
pollutants and more for others-in 1975. The fact that air pollution levels
are dependent on a number of factors, including meteorological conditions,
makes it difficult to draw conclusions about trends from only two years'
data.
EPA has established primary and secondary standards for ambient air quality.
Primary standards are set to protect the public health, while the secondary
standards are set to protect public welfare, which includes such items as
prevention of corrosion and protection of vegetation.
Standards have been set as follows:
Pollutant
Sulfur Oxides
annual arithmetic mean
maximum 24-hour concentration*
maximum 3-hour concentration*
Particulate Matter
annual geometric mean
maximum 24-hour concentration*
Carbon Monoxide
maximum 8-hour concentration*
maximum 1-hour concentration*
Photochemical-Oxidants
maximum 1-hour concentration*
Nitrogen Oxides
annual arithemetic mean
Sulfur Oxides
Primary Standard Secondary Standard
80 ug/m3 (.03 ppm) NA
365 ug/m3 (.14 ppm) NA
NA
1300 ug/m3
75 ug/m3,
260 ug/m"
60 ug/m3
150 ug/m3
10 mg/m- (9 ppm) same as primary
40 ing/m (35 ppm) same as primary
160 ug/m _(.08 ppm) same as primary
. • •Q
100 ug/m (.05 ppm) same as primary
The principal source of sulfur oxides in the air is emissions from
fossil fuel combustion facilities, including power generating plants.
In 1975, as in 1974, no violations of the sulfur dioxide standard were
found in New England. This standard continues to be attained throughout
New England.
*Not to be exceeded more than once a year.
ug/m3-= micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter
-------
Particulate Matter
Particulate matter is produced by fossil fuel combustion, industrial pro-
cesses, and uncontrolled dust from both natural and man-made sources. Fig-
ures 1 and 2 compare 1974 and 1975 data for the annual geometric mean and
24-hour average, respectively.
In 1975, the annual geometric mean standard was violated at at least one
monitoring site in every state but Maine. The pattern for 1975 appears to
be identical with that for 1974, with violations occurring at the same lo-
cations. The Connecticut and Vermont networks were expanded in 1975.
For the 24-hour primary standard, 1975 showed new violations at
Bangor, Maine; and Worcester, MA (Narcus Store). Violations for 1974 at
Springfield and Worcester (Washington Street), MA were repeated in 1975.
Violations of the secondary standard occurred in every state in 1975, as
in 1974.
Carbon Monoxide
Virtually all of the carbon monoxide in New England air comes from automo-
bile emissions. This pollutant is localized in occurrence, and thus is
usually found immediately adjacent to highways and street intersections with
heavy volumes of slow-moving traffic.
In 1974, one site, East Boston, MA, violated the one-hour primary standard
for carbon monoxide. That violation did not occur in 1975.
Figure 3 compares 1974 and 1975 data for stations violating the maximum
eight-hour primary standard for carbon monoxide. As in 1974, violations
were found in every state. Twenty-one of 31 sites were in violation in
1975, as compared with 22 of 25 in 1975. All sites showing violations in
1975 had also shown violations in 1974. There were, in some cases, signifi-
cant decreases in the maximum second high value recorded. Burlington, VT
dropped from 16.0 to 10.7 ug/m3, and New Britain, CT from 27.6 to 17.4
ug/m-*. Generally, however, the monitoring data indicated a continuing car-
bon monoxide problem in the urbanized areas of New England.
-------
Photochemical Oxldants
Photochemical oxidant pollution is probably the most serious and widespread
air pollution problem in New England. Photochemical oxidants, or "smog,"
are not emitted directly, but are produced by a complex chemical reaction between
hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen which takes place in the presence of in-
tense sunlight. Hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen are emitted by automo-
biles and by stationary sources such as fossil fuel-fired .generating plants
and certain industrial processes. The requirement for high levels of sun-
light essentially means that in New England, smog is a seasonal pollutant,
generally occurring between May and October.
In 1974, every monitoring site in New England showed violations of the oxidant
standard. In 1975, two stations, Berlin, NH and Portland, ME
did not record oxidant violations. However, neither station was operating
during the summer months when violations would be expected to occur. The mag-
nitude and frequency of oxidant violations for 1974 and 1975 are shown in
Figures 4 and 5.
The number of violations of the oxidant standard dropped significantly in Con-
necticut and Massachusetts between 1974 and 1975, but increased in Rhode Is-
land, probably because the monitors were not in operation for much of the 1974
oxidant season. The number of violations dropped at each site in New Hamp-
shire, but the maximum readings for 1975 remain virtually the same as those
in 1974.
Nitrogen Oxides
Nitrogen oxides are. a product of high temperature fuel combustion, as in auto-
mobile engines and fossil fuel-fired power generating stations. Violations of
the annual primary standard were observed at only two of the 143 sites across
New England where this pollutant is monitored—Boston and Springfield, Massa-
chusetts. At these sites, the annual average was only two percent over the
standard.
Where the Air is the Cleanest...
New England's air is generally cleanest in the rural areas, and more polluted
in the heavily developed urban and suburban areas. The lowest readings for
particulate matter were in Acadia National Park in Maine. Lowest carbon mon-
oxide values were recorded at the Groton, Connecticut State Park, where the
highest observed value was only 6.8 milligrams per cubic meter.
...And the Dirtiest
The highest 24-hour particnlate readings in New England were recorded in Meri-
den, CT and Worcester, MA. Carbon monoxide levels were highest in New Bri-
tain, CT; Worcester, MA; and Providence, RI. In Providence, the carbon
monoxide standard was violated 111 times in 1975.
Although violations of the oxidant standard were prevalent.throughout New Eng-
land, the highest levels continue to be found in Middletown, New Haven, and
Bridgeport, CT. Concentrations exceeding the public health standard
by a factor of three were found in Bridgeport. Oxidant standards were violated
most frequently in Litchfield, CT (350 times in 1975) .
-------
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
For surface water, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act establishes
a national goal of "...water quality which provides for the protection
and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and provides for
recreation in and on the water,11 to be achieved by July 1, 1983.
The Act further requires that water quality standards adopted by
each state be achieved by 1977 as an interim goal. Generally, the
standards for New England rivers, lakes, and coastal areas provide
for fishable-swimmable waters, except in heavily urbanized or
industrialized areas.
State water quality standards vary according to the category of use for
the surface waters involved. Class "A" waters are suitable for water
supply without further treatment except simple disinfection. Class "B"
waters are suitable for swimming and fishing, and Class "C" waters can
be used for fishing, but not swimming. By these definitions, only
Class "A" and Class "B" waters would meet the national goal described
in the first paragraph.
In addition to use categories, water quality standards specify criteria
which must be met to insure that uses are maintained. Numerical or
narrative criteria for Class "B" waters, the minimum classification
which will meet the 1983 goal, include bacteria (coliform) limits to
protect the health of swimmers, dissolved oxygen levels high enough
to assure the protection and propagation of fish and wildlife, and
prohibitions on the presence of toxic substances. In addition, Class "B"
waters must be.low in turbidity, and free from excessive algae.
Current Water Quality Conditions
This report is based on water quality monitoring from Annual Water Quality
Assessment, January through December 1975, prepared by Region I, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and on the information provided in the
Water Quality Inventory Reports prepared by the six New England states.
Since last year's report, the states and EPA have improved the capabilities
of their water quality monitoring networks, increasing the number of
stream miles assessed and the parameters analyzed. Thus, this year's
data may not be directly comparable with last year's.
As of December 1975, 3,299 of a total of 6,427 miles of major river main
stems and tributaries assessed are meeting Class "B" fishable-swimmable
standards or better. Thus, 51 percent of the major stream miles
assessed presently meet Class "B" standards. This represents a six
percent improvement over the 45 percent reported last year (see Table 1 ).
As indicated last year, most of New England's thousands of miles of •
smaller upland tributaries are now meeting Class "B" criteria, but these
streams are not included in this assessment. For example, 93 percent of Con-
necticut's total stream miles meet Class "B" or better standards, while only 42
percent of the major streams meet the same standards. Vermont reports 97 per-
cent for total miles versus 62 percent for major stream miles.
-------
Therefore, approximately 49 percent of New England's major river miles
do not presently meet fishable-swimmable standards. Dissolved oxygen
levels and bacteria levels are the most frequently violated water
quality criteria. Major municipal and industrial discharges with
inadequate levels of treatment -are largely responsible for these
violations. In highly urban areas, run-off and overflows of combined
sewage contribute to the problem.
Coliform violations occurred in most of the major rivers assessed. Although
raw municipal discharges, urban run-off, and combined sewage overflows are
the main causes of excessive coliform concentrations, non-point source
run-off from silvacultural and agricultural practices are also implicated
in coliform violations in rural areas.
Although millions of dollars worth of municipal wastewater treatment
facilities are currently under construction and all major industrial
dischargers have been issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permits, the major rivers will continue to show the effects of
pollutant discharges until the treatment plants are operational and the
dischargers have attained effluent limitations prescribed by their permits.
One major uncontrolled discharge can seriously degrade the downstream
portions of the river. By the same token, control of one major discharge
can result in restoration or substantial upgrading of an entire stream.
Specific examples of localized clean-up and subsequent water quality
improvement are the Pemigewassett and Contoocook Rivers in New Hampshire;
Lake Quinsigamond and the Deerfield River in Massachusetts; the Naugatuck
and Willimantic Rivers in Connecticut; the Androscoggin River and
Annabessacook Lake in Maine; the West River and Stevens Branch of the
Winooski in Vermont; and the Blackstone and Seekonk Rivers in Rhode Island.
Table 2 contains a summary of water quality conditions in the six New England
states. This table summarizes information from the states' 305 (b) reports
and 303(e) basin plans. Brief descriptions of major problems and recent
progress in each state follow.
Connecticut
Connecticut reports that 42 percent of the major main stem miles assessed
now meet fishable-swimmable standards. However, major water quality
problems still occur in the Quinnipiac, Hockanum, Pequabuck, and Still
Rivers, due mainly to industrial and municipal discharges and to urban
run-off. Combined sewer overflows cause severe pollution problems in
the Connecticut River downstream of Hartford, the Thames downstream of
Norwich, and in the coastal waters around the major urban centers of
New Haven and Bridgeport.
Although coliform violations are reported in all major streams, dissolved
oxygen violations have been decreasing. In fact, Connecticut reports that
73 percent of the stream stations analyzed this year for water quality
trends indicate significant improvements in dissolved oxygen. Of the
-------
eight water quality parameters (total dissolved solids, color, coliforms,
turbidity, toxicity, dissolved oxygen, copper, and zinc) analyzed at
eleven stations, only the colifonn parameter did not indicate significant
improvements in a majority of cases.
Water quality improvements were reported in the Naugatuck and Willimantic
Rivers. Connecticut's biological sampling program indicates that for the
first time in several decades, the Naugatuck River is now clean enough
to support natural populations of fish and aquatic life. The Willimantic
River is once again being stocked with trout after.a ten year period
during which the river had been too polluted to support any fish life.
Massachusetts
Only 26 percent of the major stream miles in Massachusetts are presently
meeting Class "B" standards. Most urban rivers, including the Charles,
Connecticut, Nashua, and Merrimack, report major coliform problems.
Portions of the Merrimack and Connecticut Rivers still receive untreated
wastes from large municipalities; and combined sewer overflows severely
degrade water quality in the Charles, Connecticut, Merrimack and Nashua
Rivers, and particularly in the Boston Harbor. The headwaters of the
Blackstone River are impacted by municipal wastes and combined sewer
.overflows from Worcester, resulting in septic conditions downstream.
On the positive side, completion of municipal and industrial treatment
facilities along the Deerfield River has resulted in the attainment of
water quality standards over its entire length. Elimination of raw
discharges and institution of non-point source controls have been credited
with improving the quality of Lake Quinsigamond and preserving the area's
recreational benefits.
Maine
Maine reports that 62 percent of the major streams assessed meet Class "B"
standards. Most of the state's thousands of miles of smaller streams
are of high quality. Specific problem areas are the Little Androscoggin
River and portions of the Kennebec, Penobscot, and Saint John Rivers,
where dissolved oxygen and coliform violations occur frequently.
Significant industrial discharges, particularly from the pulp and paper
industry, contribute to dissolved oxygen problems in the Penobscot,
Kennebec, Saint Croix, Presumpscot, and Little Androscoggin Rivers.
Areas that have demonstrated water quality improvement are the Androscoggin
River and Annabessacook Lake. As a result of industrial and municipal
pollution clean-up programs, dissolved oxygen levels in the Androscoggin
River have improved considerably. The elimination of several municipal
discharges into Annabessacook Lake has significantly reduced algal
bloom problems, reversed the eutrophic trend, and preserved the
recreational potential of this lake.
-------
New Hampshire
Of the major stream miles assessed in New Hampshire, 54 percent meet Class
"B" standards or better. In the Merrimack River, untreated municipal wastes,
combined sewer overflows, and industrial discharges seriously deplete oxygen
levels and contribute to violations of coliform criteria. In the Nashua,
these same problems upstream in the Massachusetts segment contribute to coli-
form violations downstream in New Hampshire.
The more rural Connecticut, Androscoggin, and Upper Ammonoosuc Rivers have
severely depleted dissolved oxygen levels as a result of discharges from ma-
jor paper mills in Groveton and Berlin.
Water quality has improved in the Pemigewasset and Contoocook Rivers. Over
55 miles of the Pemigewasset have been improved by industrial and municipal
clean-ups, and now meet Class "B" standards. Pollution abatement efforts,
specifically the application of industrial pollution controls, have been
responsible for upgrading much of the Contoocook to Class "B."
Rhode Island
Sixty-four percent of main stem and major tributary miles in Rhode Island
achieve at least Class "B" standards. However, high coliform levels still
exist in the Pawcatuck, Blackstone, Pawtuxet, and Providence Rivers. Com-
bined sewer overflows and urban run-off have serious adverse effects on water
quality in the Providence area and the Blackstone River. Municipal and in-
dustrial discharges contribute to dissolved oxygen violations in the Paw-
tuxet and Pawcatuck Rivers, and natural conditions are believed to be re-
sponsible for the large number of pH violations reported throughout the state.
On the plus side, 92 percent of the Narragansett Bay acreage is classified
as suitable for bathing, and municipal sewage treatment has resulted in im-
provement of portions of the Blackstone and .Seekonk Rivers.
Vermont
Sixty-two percent of Vermont's major streams are now Class "B" or better.
Assessing all stream miles including upland streams, 97 percent are Class "B"
or better. Portions of Lake Champlain and Lake Memphremagog receive nutrient-
rich loadings from municipalities and non-point sources, both of which con-
tribute to localized algae problems. Natural conditions and non-point sources
are responsible for pH and turbidity violations in these lakes, in the Winoo-
ski River, and in the tributaries to the Connecticut River.
Preservation of the pristine quality of the West River, an upland stream,
by eliminating a direct discharge from a resort, and the clean-up of the
Stevens Branch of the Winooski, are examples of water quality improvement
in Vermont.
-------
8
Lakes
Lakes are one of New England's greatest aesthetic, recreational, and
economic assets. They contribute enormously to the quality of life
for New Englanders, and provide diverse recreational opportunities
for residents and tourists as well.
Thus we have a number of good reasons to be concerned about the
preservation of our lakes. Lake ecology is very fragile, much
more fragile than river ecology, because the water volume and rate
of removal are relatively low. Thus, lakes do not have the self-
cleansing capabilities of rivers, which are constantly restored
as they flow to the seas.
One of the most stubborn problems of lake ecology is eutrophication,
or advanced aging, often marked by algal blooms which give the lake
a pea soup appearance. Decaying algae release gases that can cause
unpleasant odors, and in some cases, can blacken paint. • Clearly,
this condition is not conducive to aesthetic or recreational use
of a lake.
State water pollution control agencies estimate that of the
significant lakes in their states, the following portions are
showing signs of eutrophication: Maine, 1 percent;
New Hampshire, 5 percent; Vermont, 24 percent; Massachusetts,
20 percent; Rhode Island, 18 percent; and Connecticut, 24 percent.
A new program, the Section 314 Clean Lakes Program, was initiated
this year with the goal of preserving and protecting these endangered
lake areas.
-------
DRINKING WATER
Nineteen hundred seventy-six marks the beginning of the most comprehensive pro-
gram to improve this country's water supply since 1893. In that year, the
Congress passed the Foreign and Interstate Quarantine Act, the basis upon
which a succession of Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards were pro-
mulgated and applied to those water supplies which served interstate carriers.
In 1974 the Public Health Service Act was amended by the Safe Drinking Water
Act, thus making federal drinking water standards applicable to all of Ameri-
ca's public water supplies. Many of these supplies had become interstate sup-
plies as a result of the increased use of the automobile. The Act extends
federal regulatory authority to cover all public water systems which provide
piped water for human consumption, and have at least fifteen service connec-
tions or regularly serve 25 individuals. The implementation of the Act and
enactment of appropriate state programs will ensure consistent quality and
safety of public water supplies.
In 1976, fifty-four of the 56 U. S. states and territories agreed to enter into a
joint federal-state program to apply modern drinking water standards through-
out the country. Vermont was the first state in the nation to receive an EPA
support grant under the provisions of the Act to help the state implement wa-
ter supply programs designed to provide drinking water meeting the national
standards, and to help the state prepare itself to accept primary-enforcement
authority. The other five New England states have also advised EPA that they
will move to accept primary enforcement responsibility, and they have been
awarded support grants to help them meet those responsibilities.
Eighty-three percent of New England is served by public water supplies. This
percentage is comparable to a national average of 82 percent. The rest of
the New England population, about two million people, use individual water
supplies which are not regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act.
No. of Supplies Population Served
1,900 Less than 1,000
400 1,000 - 10,000
200 Over 10,000
There has been some progress in dealing with the water supply problems out-
lined in last year's report, and one new area of concern has emerged. There
has been a reduction of lead content, an improvement in bacteriological qual-
ity, and a leveling off of the trend toward increasing levels of chlorides
in drinking water supplies. The new issue concerns the formation of organic
compounds such as chloroform in drinking water.
Bacteriological Quality
The 45 interstate carrier water supplies in New England have been under sur-
veillance for many years, and they give some indication of the quality of
drinking water in the larger New England cities. At the present time, there
are two cities—Revere and Haverhill, MA—classified as "Use Prohibited."
Revere is so classified because of a lack of adequate bacteriologi-
cal monitoring. Revere did monitor for bacteriological quality for a few
months in 1975, but is presently performing very little, if any, monitoring.
Haverhill has had problems with bacteriological quality for several years, and a
-------
10
Joint federal-state survey indicated a need for improved treatment facilities and
operation. The city has engaged a consulting engineer to design a filter
plant, and steps have been taken to improve operation of existing treatment
facilities.
In addition, there are eleven water supplies classified "Provisionally
Approved." Four were so classified because of high bacteria readings
during one of the summer months of 1975. The other seven were downgraded
for several reasons, but predominantly for insufficient treatment facilities.
.Improvements are underway at four of these supplies, and the-other three are
actively moving toward upgrading their facilities.
Table 9 summarizes the status of 43 of the.interstate, carrier water supplies.
In 1975, Vermont's public water supplies were used as indicators of bac-
teriological quality of drinking water in New England. There has been some
improvement in the past year. Of 378 water systems under surveillance in May
1976, 216 took the required number of samples (using the Public Health Service
drinking water standards requirements), and of these,' 185 met the interim
primary standards. In May 1976, there were still twelve-permanent boil water
notices in Vermont, but the number of temporary boil water orders had dropped
from fourteen to four.
Glardiasis, an intestinal disorder caused by a parasite which survives simple
chlorination, has not appeared in New England in epidemic proportions since
1974, but isolated cases are still being found. Research into the most
effective method for removing the organism from drinking water is underway.
Lead
In 1974, EPA, in cooperation with Tufts New England Medical Center, completed
a survey of water and blood lead levels in Boston, Somerville, and Cambridge,
MA, communities known to use lead pipe to convey drinking water. In 25.5
percent of Boston households, 30.1 percent of Somerville households, and 14.5
percent of Cambridge households tested, water lead levels exceeded the EPA
public health standard of fifty micrograms per liter.
These findings have significant public health implications, because the study
also found that when water lead values exceeded 0.1 milligrams per liter,
proportionate increases in blood lead levels of household members occur.
Lead is a cumulative toxic substance which can produce irreversible damage to
the brain and central nervous system.
In order to control the problem, Cambridge began treating its drinking water
with sodium hydroxide, or caustic soda, to reduce the corrosivity of the water.
The program appears to have been effective, because sampling conducted in 1975
showed that drinking water from eight of the ten homes had no detectable
levels of lead, and water at the other two contained lead at a concentration
of only 20 micrograms per liter, well below the standard.
The Metropolitan District Coranission, which supplies drinking water to Boston
and Somerville, began adding an anti-corrosion agent to the water supply in
June 1976. EPA will monitor selected Boston homes for lead once per month
during the coming year to determine the effectiveness of this treatment.
-------
11
The Agency has also sampled drinking water in other New England cities known
to use lead pipe, in order to pinpoint problem areas and make recommendations
for reducing lead in drinking water supplies. A number of these cities are
already taking action to minimize corrosion of lead pipe.
Chlorides and Sodium
Chlorides in drinking water pose a significant problem for residents of
New England. During the late 1950's and early 1960's, the average concentra-
tion of chlorides in drinking water began to rise. Although the levels were
generally well below the 250 parts per million guideline used by most states,
the trend was not encouraging. However, in recent years the rise has begun
to level off. This leveling off may be attributed in part to much more ju-
dicious use and storage of road salt, which is the main source of chlorides
to New England water supplies. EPA is currently investigating alternative
technologies for roadway snow and ice control.
Sodium is the other major component of road salt. Even when chloride levels
fall below the public health standard, the levels of sodium associated with
the chlorides may be hazardous to the increasing number of people on sodium-
restricted diets. Also, many physicians believe that the restriction of
sodium intake may be of general physiological benefit, so sodium levels in
drinking water may be of concern to the general public and not just to those
people on sodium-restricted diets.
EPA has requested that the National Academy of Sciences include information on
the health effects of sodium in its December 1976 report to Congress. EPA
has also recommended that the states institute regular monitoring for sodium,
and design programs to inform physicians and consumers of the sodium concen-
trations in drinking water.
Organic Compounds
During 1975, EPA conducted a survey of the drinking water supplies in eighty
selected cities throughout the country to detect the presence of six volatile
organic compounds, including chloroform and carbon tetrachloride. Four New
England supplies—Metropolitan District Commission (MA); Lawrence, MA;
Waterbury, CT; and Newport, RI—were included in the survey. Chloroform,
which is carcinogenic to rats and mice, was detected in every one of the
eighty supplies. This compound is believed to form in drinking water when
chlorine, used for disinfection, reacts with organic substances in the water.
These organic substances may come from municipal or industrial discharges,
or they may occur naturally.
A single sample from the Newport, RI water supply showed chloroform
levels of 103 parts per billion, more than *ny of the other New England sup-
plies tested. During the coming year, EPA will be working with Mavport to
reduce the chloroform levels in the city's water sunr>iv.
-------
12
EPA has begun a follow-up to that initial study. This survey will include
112 cities, and will examine seasonal effects on water supplies. Ten New
England cities will be included in this survey. They are New Haven, Waterbury,
and Hartford, CT; Providence and Newport, RI; Springfield and Boston, MA;
Manchester, NH; Burlington, CT; and Portland, ME.
*
The survey will cover twenty specific organic substances, and some addi-
tional tests will be made to establish a routine monitoring procedure for
organics in drinking water.
During early 1976, EPA research laboratories examined methods for preventing
the formation of chloroform and for removing chloroform and other organic
substances from drinking water.
The Agency is also examining alternate forms of disinfection. One project
in Vermont is evaluating the effectiveness of disinfection by ozone and ultra-
violet light for small water supplies.
-------
13
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Although significant progress has been made in solid waste management in New
England, much remains to be done. In order to effectively manage this prob-
lem, it is important to consider the entire solid waste system—the genera-
tion of waste; handling of waste, including source separation and recycling;
transportation; processing of waste, including energy recovery; and the dis-
posal of residuals, such as stumps, tires, and demolition wastes, which can-
not be processed.
All of the New England states are considering measures to reduce the quantity
of solid waste generated through the enactment of so-called "bottle bills."
All of the bottle bills proposed or enacted in the New England states are
mandatory deposit bills, requiring retailers to pay from two to ten cents for
every empty container of malt beverages and soft drinks. Retailers could then
return empties to the distributor for a refund. The system would provide a
strong incentive to return containers either for refilling or recycling, which
would result in environmental benefits in terms of reduced litter, energy
conservation, and conservation of raw materials.
~fft
Vermont has had a mandatory deposit law since 1972. The Massachusetts
legislature failed to pass mandatory deposit legislation during the last session,
and supporters are now trying to gather enough voter signatures to have the bill
placed on the ballot in November. Maine will be voting on mandatory deposit
legislation in November.
Although EPA favors the adoption of a national mandatory deposit law, the
Vermont experience indicates that similar legislation at the state level is
effective in achieving the aforementioned benefits.
In addition, EPA has proposed returnable beverage container guidelines for
vendors at federal facilities. The guidelines would require purchasers of
beverages to make a five-cent deposit on the containers.
Numerous source separation programs have been implemented at the local level
to recover materials, primarily paper, from the waste stream prior to process-
ing. Approximately 40 cities and towns in New England currently have municipal
curbside collection of waste paper. EPA has recently awarded grants to both
Marblehead and Somerville, MA of $77,564 and $121,698, respectively, to
demonstrate the extent to which recyclable materials can be economically
recovered from the waste stream. Participation is currently estimated to be
about 30 percent in Marblehead and 10 percent in Somerville and increasing.
Each of the New England states has prepared a comprehensive solid waste man-
agement policy plan and strategy document. In two states, the plans have
led to the passage of innovative legislation. Connecticut has created a
Resource Recovery Authority, and Rhode Island, the Solid Waste Management
Corporation. Both organizations have authority to plan, design, construct,
finance, and operate resource recovery facilities.
In March 1976, the Connecticut Authority signed a contract with CEA-OXY Re-
source Recovery Associates, a joint venture of subsidiaries of Occidental
Petroleum Corporation and Combustion Equipment Associates, to design,
-------
14
construct, and operate an energy recovery facility for the Greater Bridgeport area.
This facility will become operational during 1978. Planning is pro-
gressing for a similar project to serve the Central/Capital (Hartford) re-
gion of Connecticut.
The Rhode Island Corporation initiated planning efforts during January 1976
with the employment of staff. Analysis to determine the feasibility of con-
structing energy recovery facilities to serve the state is underway.
Massachusetts promotes resource recovery by supporting planning for regional.
groups interested in working together to establish an energy recovery facility.
Following a comprehensive review of proposals, the Commonwealth's Bureau of Solid
Waste within the Office of Environmental Affairs recommended to the Northeast
Solid WasteCommittee the selection of Universal Oil Products of Des Plaines, Il-
linois to desidn, construct, and operate an energy recovery facility to serve the
needs of northeastern Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire. The Committee
voted to accept the recommendation, and during February 1976, the Haverhill City
Council agreed to hose the facility. Contract negotiations are now underway.
The Commonwealth is or will be sponsoring similar projects in the West Suburban
(Newton, Concord, Springfield, Worcester, and New Bedford, MA areas.
Resource recovery is also being actively pursued-in the rural areas of New
England. Small groups of municipalities in Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire
are investigating or' have in operation small regional resource recovery centers.
Communities in both Maine and New Hampshire are seriously investigating the
feasibility of solid waste energy recovery systems with industrial establishments.
Government and citizen interest are vigorous.
At present, only 41 percent of New England's population is served by solid
waste disposal facilities which meet state requirements, and thus can be
considered to be environmentally acceptable. There is a wide variation in
terms of population served by acceptable facilities, ranging from 78 percent
in New Hampshire, to one percent in Maine, as shown in Figure 6 . The overall
percent compliance figure, however, represents an increase of eleven percent
over the last year. This increase can be attributed to strengthened state efforts,
It is important to note that land disposal of residuals will remain a subject
of great concern, even as resource recovery facilities becomes more widely
available, because every solid waste management processing system produces
residues which must be disposed of on land in an environmentally acceptable
manner. In addition, large quantities of wastes which cannot, be processed
using presently available technology must be disposed of on land.
Finally, not nearly enough is known about hazardous wastes—those substances
disposed on land, water, or air that are toxic to human beings or the
environment. It has been estimated nationally that ten million tons of
hazardous wastes are produced annually by industry. This amount does not
include quantities generated by government, agriculture, hospitals,' and labora-
tories. Each of the New England states is currently undertaking a statewide
survey, financed in part through a grant from EPA, to identify potential
problems. Recommendations will be forthcoming to solve these problems.
Federal legislation has been proposed, and may be enacted shortly.
-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Every day we are confronted with mounting evidence of the prevalence and ef-
fects of toxic substances in the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food
we eat, and throughout our ecosystem.
The fact that we find ourselves in a fire-fighting situation regarding toxic
substances—trying to protect the public from a substance it has already been
exposed to for years, without putting anyone out of work—is unfortunate
but not surprising. There are approximately 30,000 chemicals commercially
available in this country, with an additional 1,000 produced every year.
And toxic substances control legislation, which would allow us to regulate
these dangerous substances before they enter the environment, has been stalled
in Congress for five years.
In order to direct public scrutiny to the problem of toxic substances, we
are ..including in this year's report, and will continue to include as a regu-
lar feature in future reports, a section on toxic substances, focusing on
one or more toxic or hazardous substances.
Perhaps the most widely monitored and studied substance, and certainly the
substance which has generated the most controversy this year is polychlori-
nated biphenyls, or PCB's. PCB's are a group of chlorinated hydrocarbons
closely resembling DDT. However, PCB's are even more persistent than DDT,
and in addition are known to have serious human health effects. The health
effects associated with PCB's include eye discharge, severe acne, abnormal
skin pigmentation, gastro-intestinal lesions, enlarged livers, abnormalities
of the lymphatic system, and reproductive failure. These health effects in
animals were confirmed for human beings in 1968 in Japan, where more than
1,000 people suffered adverse health effects after using rice oil that had
been contaminated with PCB.
PCB's have numerous industrial applications; including brake fluid, fire
proofing, paint and ink solvents, textile coatings, epoxy glues and cements.
Since 1971, Monsanto, the sole United States manufacturer, has supplied PCB's
only for use in closed systems. PCB's are still used by the electrical power
distribution industry in transformers and capacitors, because no other known
substance has the same stability plus high resistance to heat and explosions.
However, the same stability that makes PCB's so valuable in industry also
makes them extraordinarily persistent in the environment. PCB's have been
found to bio-accumulate in bottom sediments, and also in some species of
fish by a factor of up to 7500.
In December 1975, EPA Administrator Russell E. Train announced a comprehensive
nationwide program to identify the sources of PCB's to the environment, and
to eliminate or drastically reduce the adverse health effects associated
with these sources. In New England, this program has been a three-pronged
effort. First, letters requesting information on point source
discharges of PCB's were sent to likely industrial users of PCB's. Through
the 308 responses, .sixteen New England companies were identified as PCB users—
fifteen of which had not previously been known to be PCB users.
-------
16
Six major users were identified. They are General Electric Company in
Pittsfield, MA; Sprague Electric Company in North Adams, MA; Universal
Manufacturing Company, Bridgeport, CT; Jard Company, Bennington, VT;
and Aerovox Corporation and Cornell Dubilier, both of New Bedford, MA.
EPA studied each major user's method of handling the substances, from delivery
to the plants, through the manufacturing process, and eventual disposal. Based
on this information, EPA will provide technical assistance to companies to
show them how to reduce their uses of PCB's and where PCB use is unavoidable,
how to dispose of them in an environmentally acceptable fashion.
Monsanto has announced plans to phase out production of PCB's as soon as
available substitutes can be developed. One potential substitute, polydi-
methylsiloxane, has been found by EPA to be far preferable to PCB's for use
in transformers, from the environmental viewpoint. Dow Corning Corporation,
the producer of the substance, had asked EPA for an evaluation of the environ-
mental risk associated with polydimethylsiloxane as a substitute f°r PCB's
in electrical transformers. EPA noted that about 340 million pounds of poly-
dimethylsiloxane have been produced for various purposes, and that the Agency
is unaware of any incidents of adverse health or ecological effects.
The second aspect of the PCB monitoring program involved sampling of industrial
effluent, ambient water, bottom sediments, leachate from landfills, municipal
incinerator emissions, sewage sludge, fish, and drinking water in the vicinities
of the six major users.
The results of the monitoring program have been mixed.. Analysis of striped
bass taken off Newburyport, MA, showed that PCB's were present, but the values
were well below the U.S. Food and Drug Administration standard (five parts
per million) in the edible portions (skin and flesh). However, analysis of
two composite fish samples taken from the Housatonic River below a known PCB
discharge revealed PCB concentrations exceeding the standard by factors of
three and seven.
Samples of both raw and finished drinking water were taken from wells and
reservoirs in six New England cities —New Bedford, MA; North Adams, MA;
Pittsfield, MA; Bridgeport, CT; Dartmouth, MA; and Lowell, MA. In all
but one sample, PCB concentrations, if present, were below the
detectable limit of 0.05 parts per billion. One sample of raw water showed
a value of 0.1 parts per billion, but finished water from the same reservoir
showed no detectable level of PCB. Drinking water results are available on
Table 4 .
It is important to note that a standard for -PCB in drinking water has not yet
been established. The results of these and similar tests of drinking water
supplies throughout the nation will help in determining the need for such a
standard, and if a need is established, this sampling and analysis program
will be useful in setting the standard.
Results of the industrial effluent analysis are available on Table 5
The range of values in industrial sanitary and cooling water effluent was
thirteen to 2,900 parts per billion. It is important to note that these
values cannot be compared to the five parts per million standard, which is
applicable only to food fish.
-------
17
The highest reading in leachate from a sanitary landfill associated with a
major PCB user was ten parts per billion. Landfill leachate monitoring is
very important, because the major source of PCB's to the environment appears
to be the disposal of reject capacitors. Leachate readings are available on
Table 6 .
The highest readings were in river sediments, up to 139,000 parts per billion,
and in sludge from sewage treatment plants, up to 64,000 parts per billion at
the New Bedford sewage treatment plant. Because of this high reading, EPA
intends to sample and analyze emissions from New Bedford's sludge incinerator.
The third aspect of the regional PCB program involves a thorough review of
federal discharge permits. Where necessary and .where sufficient technology
exists, permits will be modified to reduce or eliminate PCB discharges to
New England waterways.
-------
LEGEND
1975 TSP Annual CM
1974 TSP Annual GM
HIGHEST VIOLATION
TOTAL NUMBER OF VIOLATION SITFS
( *) NUMBER OF MOXITOR
SITES WITH VIOLATION
OF STANDARD
V IVLiAl I.
\ TOT
XX
PRIMARY
STANDARD
NUMBER OF MONITOR
"SITES KITH NO
VIOLATION OF
STANDARD
83 (83)
Std.
75 ug/»3
(82)
Conn. 1974
1975
120 (57)
Maine I?7-
(2)
(54)
1
(56) 93
(2)
(54)
83 (31)
(1)
(30)
(32)
U>
(31)
88 89
(22)
(1)
(21)
(21)
(1)
(20)
88
104 (13)
Mass.
1975 1974
NH
1975 1974
RI
1975 1974
(1)
(1)
(12)
(6) 80
(1)
(5)
VT
1975
FIGURE 1
-------
(56) 551
HIGHEST VIOLATION
»W '—1 T
1975 TSP 24 hr. average
1974 TSP 24 hr. average
293
260
primary ___
5
150
secondary
(83)
(1)
(14)
(68)
294
(74)
(14)
(60)
235
(33)
(1)
(4)
(28)
396
(20)
(2)
(18)
176
(57)
(3)
(10)
(44)
(2)
(10)
(44)
PRIMARY __
STANDARD •*-
SECONDARY _
STANDARD^-'
(31)
(10)
(21)
(32)
196
(4)
(28)
1975 1974 Maine MASS NK
Conn. ' 1975 1974 ^75 3974 1975 i97i
(-)
•^^ ^^B^
(*)
••^W •^^•i^
(*)
224
•SITES VIOLATING PR
^•i^
SITES VIOLATING
•SECONDARY BUT
NOT PRIMARY 312
STANDARD
SITES WITH NO
•VIOLATION OF
STANDARD
(22)
(1)
(21)
202
(21)
(2)
(19)
RI
1975 1974
174
IMARY
(131
(1)
(0)
(12)
VI
1975
STANDARD
(6) 314
a>
(2)
C)
• A ~ '
FIGURE 2
-------
LEGEND
1975 CO 8-Hour Average
1974 CO 8-Hour Average
17.
Std.
HIGHEST VIOLATION
V TOTAL NUMBER OF VIOLATION SITES
xx ( *) XtttBER OF MONITOR SITES WITH
PRIMARY
STANDARD
(7) .27.6 -J
(13)
(7)
(6)
(7)
(0)
16.7
u;
(i)
••••••••••
(0)
(i)
(i)
(0)
19.7
17.8
( •*
( **
(10)
(7)
(3)
V1UUU1U3 Ul1 MA-MUAKL)
___ II —
NUMBER OF MONITOR. SITES WITH '
NO VIOLATION OF STANDARD
(12)
(10)
(2)
19.2
t*i\
11.5
(3)
( 3)
(o)
(2)
(1)
(D-
J. | » C
12.0
•W^B^^^^B
75 7"* 75 7k . 75 7k 75 7k
CONN MAINE MASS N.H.
(2)
^•••^••••B
(0)
75
R.I.
(2)
(2)
•> ^BUV
(0)
7k
19.6
. -i— 16 n
10.7, (?).
(1) (0)
75 71*
VT.
FIGURE 3
-------
(HO
.608
Std.=
loo mg/n->
(HO
(0)
_«,
(0)
bJO
37
5 (21)
(21)
(0)
. (12)
(12)
(0)
39
216
6
(3)
(2)
(1)
323
(2) 223
(2)
(0)
LEJ
HIGHEST VIOLATION
V
XX
PRIMARY
STANDARD
(2)
(2)
(0)
(1)
(1)
(0)
167
1975 Photochemical Oxidants.
1974 Photochemical Oxidants"
;END
3TAL NUMBER OF VIOLATION SITES
(«} — WITH VIOLATION OF
STAMDARD
(*> - NUMBER OF MONITOR SITES
WITH NO VIOLATION OF
STANDARD
(1) (1)
(1) (1) . '
(0) (0)
75 7U 75 • 71* 75 . 1* 75 7>* 75 7^
COHN MASS N.H. R.I. ' TO.
FIGURE
-------
\
Violation Frequency
Photochemical Oxidant Standard
& 1975
HIGHEST NUMBER OF
VIOLATIONS AT ANY SITE
526
350
117
/
135
LOWEST NUMBER OF
VIOLATIONS AT ANY
/ SITE V
/ *
/ 191
7
6
75 7"» 75 7U
CONN MAINE MASS
266
. 90
7
15
112
100
55
22
75 7>» 75 71* 75 7U
N.H. R.I. ' VT.
FIGURE 5
-------
TABLE
Main Stem and. Major Tributary River Mileage
Meeting Federal and State Standards
State
1 . Connecticut
2. Maine
3. Massachusetts
4. New Hampshire
5. Rhode Island
6. Vermont
Total
Major Water Areas (mains terns & major tributaries)
Miles
Assessed
409
1907
1399
1280
329
1103
6427
Now Meeting Class B
( f ishab le / swimmabW
Miles %
173
1181
357
691
211
686
3299
42*
62*
26*
54*
64*
62*
51*
Now Meeting State
Water Quality Standards
Miles Z
173
17U
443
701
302
708
4041
42*
90*
32*
55*
92*
64*
63*
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Massachusetts
Major Water Areas
• (Including malnstem
& major tributaries)
Blackstone
Boston Harbor
Streams
Charles .
Chicopee
Connecticut
Deerfield
Farming ton
French &
Quinebaug
Hoosic
Housatonic
Total
Miles
Assessed
107
U
81
112
68
70 '
19 •
57
43
96
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(f ishable/
swimraable)
standards
or better
31
0
0
U
0 .
34
19
19
17
26
Miles
.expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
65
20
.25
85
55
70
19
40
40
75
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
36
'7 .
2
67
0
70
19
20
20-
31
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
71
37
80
45
68
0
0
37
23
65
*Wacer
quality
problems
1,3,5*,6
1,3,4,5,6
3,5,6 .
1,2,3,5,6
2,3,5,6
2,6
-
3,5,6
2,5,6
1,3,5,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I=lndustrlal .
CS-Conblned Sewers
NPS-Nonpoint Source
M,I,CS
M,I,CS,NPS
M,I,NPS
M,I,CS
M,I,CS
K.MPS
M,I
M,I,NhS
M,I,NPS
* Water quality problems 1" "armful Subutunccs; 2. Physical Modification (Suspundod Solids, Tump., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Hp.nl rh Hnr.nrrts-froHfoni^
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF WATKI! QUALITY
State of Connecticut
Major Wacer Areas
(including nainscem
& major tributaries)
Connecticut
Farmington
French
Hockanum
Housatonic
Naugatuck
Fawcatuck
tequabuck
Quinebaug
Shetu-'ket
Thames
Yantic
•Quinnipiac
Totals
Total
Miles
Assesses
69
54
6
17
80
35
11
15
42
18 -
17
11
34
409
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
swimmable)
standards
or better
23 . •
.31
0
2
80
20
0
3
0
7
0
0
7
173 (12*)
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
69
54
6
17
80
35
11
15
&
18
17
11
34 .
409 JOO*)
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
23
31
0
. 2
. 80
20
0
3
0
7
0
0
7 .
173 (42$)
Miles not
meeting
' State
water quality
standards
46
23
6
15
0
15
11
12
42
11
17
11
27
236 (5855)
*Water
quality
problems
3,6
6
1,2,3,5,6
1,2,3,5,6
3,6(periodl
1,3,4,5,6
1,2,3,5,6
3,5,6
3,5,6
2,6
2,3,5,6
3,5,6
2,3,5,6
Sourceof water
quality problems
M=Municlpal .
i=Industrial
CS-Conbined Sewers .
NPS-N'onpoint Source
CS,NrS
M
M, I
M.I.W-S
5) NJS,CS,M,I
M,I,CS,»S
M,I,NFS
M,I
M,I
M
. M,I,CS
CS,M
M,CS,I
* Water quality problems
Harmful Substances; 2. Physical Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
Health Hazards-(coliform)
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Maine
Major Water Areas
(including ma ins tern
& major tributaries)
Fenobscot
Kennebec
Androscoggin
St. John
Salmon Falls-
Hscataqua
Saco
St. Croix
tresumpscot
"otals
Total
Miles
Assessec
379
325
320
351
157
230
87
58
1907
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
swimmable)
standards
or better
180
152
150
269.
120
212
77
21
1181
(62*)
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
3U
263
3U
279
157
228
77
58
mo
(9156)
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
364
263
314
260
157
228
77
51
17U
(90?)
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
15
62
6
91
0
2
10
.7
193
(10%)
*Water
quality
problems
/,, 5, 6
4, 5
1, 2, 5, 6
2, 5, 6
5, 6
1, 5, 6
5, 6
5, 6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I°lndustrial
CS-Combined Sewers
NPS-Nonpoint Source
M, I
M, NFS
M, I
M, I, NFS
M
M,I
I
M,I
* Water quality problems *' Harmful Substances; 2. Physical Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
3. Eutroohication ootential: 4. Salinity, aciditv. alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Health Hazards-(coliform)
-------
TABLE 2
t
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Rhode Island
Major Water Areas '
(including ma ins tern
& major tributaries)
Blackstone
Moosup
Moshassuck
Narragansett Bay
havcatuck
Pawtuxet
Woonasquatucket
Totals
Total
Miles
Assessec
89
25
17
117,764A<
115
60
23'
329
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
switmnable)
standards
or better
48
25
8
107,959Ac
94
28
8
211
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
54
'25
10
11 2, 832 Ac
102
30
13
234
(71 it)
Miles now
meeting
State .
water quality
standards
76
25
U
107,959
111
56
20
302
(92$)
Miles r.ot
meeting
State
water quality
standards
13
C
3
9,805Ac
4
. 4
3
27
(8V
*Water
quality
problems
*5,6
-
5,6
6
5,6
5,6
5,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I=Industrial
CS-Combined Severs
NPS-Nonpoinc Source
M,l
. -
M,CS,NFS
M,I,CS
M,I
M,I
M,CS,NPS
* Water quality problems *" Harmful Substances; 2. Physical Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Health Hazards-(coliform)
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Massachusetts
Major Water Areas
• • (including mains tern
& uajor tributaries)
Merrimack
Millers
Nashua
North River
SuAsCo*
. •
Taunton
Ten Mile
Westfield
Totals
%
*_Sudbury, Assabet,
Concord
Total
Miles
Assessed
50
58
103
53
86
134
38
114
1399
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(flshable/
swlmnable)
standards
or better
0
7
5
0
0
18
4
69
357 .
26%
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
30
40
55
40
45
70
,25
95
960 .
69%
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
0
7
5
12
0
35
4
73
472
34%
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
50
51
98
42
86
99
34
41
928
66%
*Water
quality
problems
2,3,5,6
2,3,5,6
2,3,5,6
3,5,6
3,5,6
1,3,5,6
1,3,5,6
2,5,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I=Industrlal
CS-Cocbined Sewers
NPS-Nonpoint Source
M,I,CS
M,I .
M,I,CS,NPS
M, NTS
M,NTS
M,I,CS,NFS
M,I
M,I
* Water quality problems 1- IIiirnlEu^ Substances; 2. Physicul Modification (Suspended Solids, Tcr.:p., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Ho.iUh H.i-.irHf:-(rol-!fr>rr.rt . ' •
-------
TABLE 2 .
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of New Hampshire
Major Water Areas
(including mainscem
& major tributaries)
Androscoggin
Marrlmack
Connecticut
Piscataqua &
Coastal
Saco
Totals
Total
Miles
Assessec
98
U8
4.57
183
94
1280
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
swimmable)
standards
or better
75
287
150
85
94
691
(54S)
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
82
419
440
183
94
1222
(9556)
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
75
297
150
85
94
701
(5556)
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
23
151
307
98
0
579
(4555)
*Water
quality
problems
2,5,6
2,5,6
2,5,6
2,5,6
2,5,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I°Industrial
CS-Combined Sewers ;
NPS-Nonpoint Source
M,I,CS
M,I,CS
M.I'
M,I
* Water quality problems if Harnful Substances; 2. Physical Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Health Hazards- (coliform)
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Vermont
Major Water Areas
(including ma ins tern
& major tributaries)
Battehkill~Hoosic
Foultney
Otter Creek
Lake Chanplaln
Missisquoi
Lanoille
Winooski
White
Ottauquechee
West, Williams,
Saxton
Deerfield
Total
Miles
Assessed
46
44
83
25
88
90
115
69
65
76
34
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
swimmable)
standards
or better
25
36
70
19
61
21
72
54
19
71
24
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
43
40
76
20
82
69
95
59
38
74
34
Miles now
meeting
State
water quality
standards
27
38
77
. 23
20
14
85
59
37
74
16
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
19
6
6
2
67
70
30
10
28
2
18
* Water
quality
problems
1,2,5,6
2,6
2,5,6
2,3,5,6
2,3,6
3,5,6
2,3,5,6
6,2
1,2,6
2,6
2,3,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I=Industrial
CS-Combined Sewers
NPS-Nonpoint Source
M,I
M
M
I,M
M,I
M,NPS
. M'1
M,I
M,I
M
M
* Water quality problems
^' Harmful Substances; 2, Physical. Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Health Hazards- (coliform)
-------
TABLE 2
Page 2 of 2
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
State of Vermont
Major Water Areas
(including mainstem
& major tributaries)
Connecticut
Stevens, Wells
Passumpsic
Lake Memphremagog
Black, Barton,
Clyde.
Totals
Total
Miles
Asses sec
238
16
47
67
1103
Miles now
meeting
Class B
(fishable/
swimmable)
standards
or better
153
6
20
35
686
(62%)
Miles
expected
to be Class
B or better
by 1983
170
12
28
61
901
(82£)
Miles now
meeting .
State
water quality
standards
172
6
25
35
715
(65*)
Miles not
meeting
State
water quality
standards
66
10
22
32
388
(35$)
*Water
quality
problems
1,2,3,5,6
1,2,4,6
6
2,3,6
Source of water
quality problems
M=Municipal
I=Industrial
CS-Combined Sewers
NPS-Nonpoint Source
I,M
M,I,NFS
M,I
M
Water quality problems
1. Harmful Substances; 2, Physical Modification (Suspended Solids, Temp., etc.);
3. Eutrophication potential; 4. Salinity, acidity, alkalinity; 5. Oxygen depletion;
6. Health Hazards-(coliform)
-------
TABLE 3
INVENTORY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER' SUPPLIES
Report Date 06/17/76
. CONNECTICUT REGION I BOSTON t
DATE
CITY OR NAME OF PRIVATE SUPPLY POPULATION <"•" "
BRIDGEPORT HYDRAULIC COMPANY
DANBURY
GROTON WATER DEPT
HARTFORD (MET. DISTR. COMM. OF HARTFORD)
NEW HAVEN WATER CO.
NEW LONDON WATER DEPT.
STAMFORD WATER CO.
WATERBURY WATER DEPT.
WINDSOR LOCKS (BRADLEY INT'L. AIRPORT)
SERVED
340287
35000
31420
393000
371135
38902
100925
126000
3000
•J W\J
jj.rti.uo a ruuv. DATE
REASONS APPR LATEST
(OTHER CLASS. STATE
THAN APPR) EXPIRES SURVEY
12/00/74
12/00/74
12/00/75
04/00/75
06/00/75
05/00/75
12/00/74
10/00/74
08/00/75
DATE
LATEST
JOINT
SURVEY
17/05/72
09/27/72
06/22/72
05/24/76
11/20/72
06/07/72
11/01/72
06/27/72
08/22/72
DATE
LAST
BACT
EXAM
09/71
09/7'.
09/7:
08/75
09/75
09/75
09/75
09/75
09/75
STATE SUMMARY
TOTAL SUPPLIES 9
TOTAL APPROVED 9
TOTAL PROV APPR Q
TOTAL POPULATION' 1439669
-------
INVENTORY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLIES
MAINE
CITY OR NAME OF PRIVATE SUPPLY
BANGOR WATER DISTRICT
BAR HARBOR WATER COMPANY
BUCKSPORT WATER COMPANY
PORTLAND WATER DISTRICT
SEARSPORT WATER DISTRICT
WISCASSET WATER COMPANY
REPORT DATE 06/17/76
POPULATION STATUS & REASONS PROV. DATE
.SERVED (OTHER THAN APPR) APPR LATEST
CLASS STATE
EXPIRES SURVEY
45,000 07/10/74
5,200 Prov. Q 08/31/76 02/18/76
2,400 Prov. Q 08/31/76 08/29/74
135,000 06/19/75
3,100 07/17/75
1,200 Prov.Q 08/31/76 03/25/76
DATE
LATEST
JOINT
SURVEY
07/10/74
10/11/72
01/10/73
06/19/75
07/08/74
12/02/69
DATE
LAST
BACT.
EXAM.
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
STATE SUMMARY
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
SUPPLIES
APPROVED
PROV APPR
6
3
3
TOTAL POPULATION 191,900
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MANCHESTER WATER WORKS
PORTSMOUTH WATER WORKS
100,000
40,000
01/27/75
02/04/75
05/29/74
02/19/68
STATE SUMMARY
TOTAL SUPPLIES
TOTAL APPROVED
TOTAL PROV APPR
TOTAL POPULATION
12/75
12/75
2
2
0
140,000
-------
INVENTORY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLIES
MASSACHUSETTS
CITY OR NAME OF PRIVATE SUPPLY
BOSTON
CHELSEA
EVERETT
FALL RIVER WATER WORKS
FALMOUTH WATER DEPT.
NEW BEDFORD
QUINCY
SALEM-BEVERLY WATER SUPPLY BOARD
SOMERSET
SPRINGFIELD
TEMPLETON WATER DEPARTMENT
TISBURY
WEYMOUTH
WORCESTER
REPORT
IPPLY POPULATION
SERVED
641071
30625
42458
100000
15942
101777
87966
BOARD 78904
18008
217000
5000
2257
54610
176572
DATE 06/17/76
REGION I BOSTON
STATUS & DATE DATE DATE
REASONS PROV. LATEST LATEST
(OTHER APPR STATE JOINT
THAN APPR) CLASS SURVEY SURVEY
EXPIRES
04/30/75
03/24/75
04/09/65
PROV F 12/31/75 01/04/73 02/24/73
11/03/72 09/19/68
PROV F 12/31/76 07/07/72 05/02/69
05/31/73 05/31/73
11/25/74
04/04/74 04/04/74
02/14/73 01/02/75
02/14/73 10/07/71
08/22/72 08/25/75
10/06/72 12/10/68
PROV F 08/31/76 05/10/74 05/10/74
STATE SUMMARY
TOTAL SUPPLIES
TOTAL APPROVED
TOTAL PROV APPR
TOTAL POPULATION
DATE
LAST
BACT.
EXAM.
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
12/75
14
11
3
1,572,190
-------
RHODE ISLAND
CITY OR NAME OF PRIVATE SUPPLY
INVENTORY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLIES
REPORT DATE 06/17/76
REGION I BOSTON
- BRISTOL COUNTY WATER COMPANY
EAST PROVIDENCE
NEWPORT
NORTH TIVERTOWN (NORTH TIVERTOWN
FIRE DISTRICT)
PROVIDENCE
WAKEFIELD WATER COMPANY
CITY OF WARWICK
POPULATION STATUS &
SERVED REASONS
(OTHER
THAN APPR
46300
49975
62000
7635 PP.OV Q
280100
11240
79000
DATE DATE DATE
PROV. LATEST LATEST
APPR STATE JOINT
CLASS SURVEY SURVEY
EXPIRES
01/08/74 00/00/00
10/16/74 10/15/65
07/15/74 07/15/74
03/31/76 10/07/74 12/19/73
03/17/76 03/17/76
03/13/74 06/18/74
10/21/74
STATE SURVEY
DATE
LAST
BACT
EXAM
09/7.
09/7.
09/7.
09/7.
09 IT.
09/7'.
09/71
TOTAL SUPPLIES 7
TOTAL APPROVED 6
TOTAL PROV APPR 1
TOTAL POPULATION 536250
-------
INVENTORY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLIES
REPORT DATE 06/17/76
VERMONT
CITY OR NAME OF PRIVATE SUPPLY
REGION I BOSTON
BURLINGTON WATER DEPARTMENT
RUTLAND WATER DEPT.
SOUTH BURLINGTON WATER DEPARTMENT
WHITE RIVER JUNCTION
(HARTFORD WATER DEPARTMENT)
REASONS FOR PROV. APPROVED STATUS
ARE DEFICIENCIES IN:
Q = WATER QUALITY
B = BACT. MONITORING
F = FACILITIES
0 = OPERATION
N = NO CURRENT REPORT
POPULATION
SERVED
41000
19000
9200
5000
STATUS & REASONS
(OTHER THAN APPR)
Prov. F
Prov. Q, F
Prov. Q, B
Prov. Q, B, F
PROV.
APPR
CLASS.
EXPIRES
12/31/76
12/31/76
12/31/76
12/31/76
DATE
LATEST
STATE
SURVEY
03/11/75
06/14/76
05/22/74
11/21/74
DATE
LATEST
JOINT
SURVEY
05/22/74
06/14/76
05/22/74
09/22/75
STATE SUMMARY
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
SUPPLIES
APPROVED
PROV APPR
POPULATION
4
•
4
74200
REGION SUMMARY
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
SUPPLIES
APPROVED
PROV APPR
POPULATION
43
31
11
3,954,209
* = BACT. DATA OVER 15 MONTHS OLD
-------
FIGURE 6
MASS, 51%
REGION I. AVERAGE • 41 %
% POPULATION SERVED BY ENVWONMENTALLY
ACCEPTABLE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
-------
TABLE '4
WATER SUPPLY SAMPLING-PEStfLTS FOR PCB'S
Sample
U2Ud*
U211*$
U2118
U2119
U2120
1*2217
1*2218
1*2219
U2220
1*2221
12222
1*2223
1*2221*
Ii2225l
1*2226
U2227
1*2228
1*2229
U2230
U2272
1*2273
U227U
1*227$
1*01*29
1*01*30
No. Location
New Bedford ,
•tittle Quitticas PoncT
Little Quitticas Pond
i
North Adams
Broad Brook
James Brook
Mount V7illiams Reservoir
Bridgeport j Conn.
Hejml^Jcs_T?ese2cvQJ.r
Hemlocks Re servo iY
Easton Lake
Easton Lake
Trap Falls Reservoir
Trap Falls Reservoir
Maples Well
Maples WeU
Housatonic Well
Housatonic Well
Seymour Reservoir #1
Seymour Reservoir #1
Dartmouth , Mass.
Well
Well
Pittsfield, Mass.
Cleveland"Reservoir
Farnham Reservoir
Upper Sackett Reservoir
Ashley Lake
Lowell ^Mass.
Merrimack River
Merrimack River
raw
finished
raw
raw
raw
raw
finished
raw
finished
raw
finished
raw
finished
raw
finished
raw
finished
raw
raw
raw
raw
raw
raw
raw
finished
Aroclor
ppb
0.1
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
KO.O^
K0.05
K0.05
K0.0$
K0.0$
K0.05
K0.0$
KO.O^
K0.0£
K0.05
K0.05
KO.O^
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K0.05
K = Less than
-------
TABLE 5
INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT SAMPLING RESULTS FOR PCB'S
Comell-Dubiller Electric Corporation
1605 East Rodney French Boulevard
New Bedford, Massachusetts 02744
Station
CDED01
CDED02
CDED03
CDED04
Date
01/14/76
01/16/76
01/14/76
01/16/76
01/14/76
01/16/76
01/14/76
01/16/76
Sample1 Time
Type (hours)
G
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
0945
1245
0800-1500
0730-1430
1040-1340
1100-1400
0800-1500
0730-1430
Flow Rate
m3/day GPD
-—
91
76
2303
2303
24,000
20,000
60,0003
60,0003
34 '. 9,000
30 7,800
Total Plant
01/14/76
01/16/76
Total
PCB
ug/1
*
*
710
460
110
41
2,900
580
Discharge*
Daily Quantity^
grams ounces
--
65
35
25
9.4
99
17
189
61
__
2.3
1.2
0.9
0.3
3.5
0.6
6.7
2.1
* Below detection limit of 0.5 ug/1.
1 "G" - grab sample
"C" - composite sample, incremental samples collected at one hour intervals,
Times shown indicate collection time of first and last sample.
2 Assuming the company production line operates 24 hours per day and flow rate
is constant.
3 Company's estimate of total daily flow, not a flow rate.
-------
SAMPLING RESULTS
JARD Company, Inc.
Bennington, Vermont 05201
Station
JARD 01
JARD 02
JARD 03
Sample
Date Type
1/21/76 T.C.
1/22/76 T.C.
1/21/76 G.
1/21/76 G
Time
(hours)
0800-1500
0730-1430
0830
0840
Total 2
-Flow Rate PCB Daily Quantity
m /day GPD ug/1 Grains Ounces
33 8600 270 8.9
35 9200 75 2.6
• — ' — 400 ' --
~ .. 19
0.31
0.09
--
__
1 T.C. - Time composite - equal aliquots of sample composites at hourly intervals
G - Grab sample
2 Assumes the flow is constant and discharge continues for 24 hours
-------
SAMPLING RESULTS
UNIVERSAL MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT 06607
Station
UNIV 01
UNIV 02
UNIV 03
UNIV 04
Date
1/28/76
1/29/76
1/28/76
1/29/76
1/28/76
1/28/76
Sample
Type
FC
FC
TC
fc
G
G
Time
(hours)
0945-1645
0730-1430
0955-1655
0735-1435
1115
1120
-Flow
m /day
6.1
6.1
20
20
—
__
Rate
GPD
1600
1600
5300
5300
—
„_
Total
PCB
ug/1
13
17
20
89
8.3
0.5
Daily
Grams
0.08
0.10
0.40
1.80
— .
__
2
Quantity
Ounces
K0?01
K0.01
0.01
0.06
—
__
1 - FC = Flow composite - hourly samples collected and composited proportional
to flow
TC = Time composite - equal aliquots of sample composites hourly
G = Grab sample
2 - Assumes constant flow and discharge for 24-hours
3 - K means value less than that shown
-------
SAMPLING RESULTS
General Electric Company
100 Woodlawn Avenue
Pittsfield, Massachusetts 01201
Station
GE005
GE006
SCRU01
SCRU02
Sample
Date Type
01/21/76 C*
01/22/76 C
01/21/76 G\
01/22/76 C
01/22/76 G
01/22/76 ' G
Time
(hours)
0820-1530
0830-1530
0835-1535
0840-1540
1535
1520
3 Flow
'm /day
4,200
3,800
2,000
2,000
— .
__
Rate
MGD
1.1
1.0
0.53
0.53
--
_»
Total
PCB
ug/1
14
30
10
4.3
9.1
9.7
Daily Quantity
Grams Ounces
59
110
20
8.6
—
_ _
2.1
4.0
0.71
0.30
—
_..
1 - Assuming flow rate constant 24 hours/day
2 - Eight-hour time/flow composite sample. Incremental samples collected at
one-hour intervals
-------
SAMPLING RESULTS
Aerovox Industries, Inc.
740 Belleville Avenue
New Bedford, Mass. 02741
Station
AVOX 01
AVOX 02
AVOX 03
Date
1/14/76
1/15/76
1/14/76
1/15/76
1/14/76
i 1
Sample
Type
F.C.
F.C.
T...C.
T.C.
G
Time
(hours)
0830-1500
0830-1415
0750-1450
1030-1430
—
3Flow
m /day
2000
2000
450
450
_
Rate
MGD
0.53
0.53
0.12
0.12
_
Total
PCB
ug/1
51
29
400
72
2.4
2
Daily Quantity
Grams Ounces
102
58
180
32
_
3.6
2.0
6.3 .
1.1
_
1 F.C. - Flow composite - hourly aliquots composited proportional to flow
-------
SAMPLING RESULTS
Sprague Electric Company
87 Marshall Street
North Adams( Massachusetts 01247
Total
Station
SPRA01
SPRA02
SPRA03
*
Date
01/21/76
01/22/76
01/21/76
01/22/76
Sample Time
Type (hours)
C
C 0705-1405
G 1315
G 1420
Flow Rate PCBs Daily Quantity1
m3/day GPD ug/1 Rrams ounces
760 200,000 120 91
760 200,000 78 59
14 •
*
3.2
2.1
—
—
* Below detection limit of 0.5 ug/1.
1 Assuming the company production line operates 26 hours per day.
-------
PEG SAMPLING STATIONS AT INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
January, 1976
Aerovox Corporation, New Bedford, Massachusetts
AVOX01 Vacuum pump noncontact, cooling water sampled at North
Trough discharge to the Acushnet River.
AVOX02 Sanitary wastes sampled at pump station discharging to
municipal sewer system.
AVOX03 Influent municipal water sampled near entrance to the
plant.
Cornell-Dubilier Electric Corporation, New Bedford, Massachusetts
CDED01 Influent municipal water supply at chemical mix station
for boiler feed water.
CDED02 Groundwater infilltration from basement sumps and some
non-contact cooling water sampled at south moat. Dis-
charges to municipal sewer. Company station designation
5S.
CDEDO3 Primarily vacuum pump non-contact cooling water, boiler
blowdown, and drainage from building underdrains sampled
at junction with municipal storm sewer. Company station
designation serial #001 NPDES #MA0003930
CDED04 Groundwater infiltration from basement sumps and some
non-contact cooling water sampled at north moat. Dis-
charges to municipal sewer. Company station designation
5M.
JARD Company, Bennington, Vermont. >
JARD01 Sanitary wastes to municipal sewers sampled at man-
hole outside the plant.
JARD02 Cooling water wet well.
JARD03 Influent water.
Sprague Electric Company, North Adams, Massachusetts
SPRA01 Industrial effluent from Brown Street plant at open
drainage ditch leading to Hoosic River.
-------
SPRA02 Sariitary sewer from Brown Street plant discharging to
municipal sewers. Sampled at manhole in parding area near in
dustrial effluent drainage ditch.
SPRA03 Influent process cooling water from Tunnel Brook. Sampled
at entrance to plant.
Universal Manufacturing Corporation, Bridgeport, Connecticut
UNIV01 Vacuum pump noncontact, cooling water effluent sampled
at temperature equalization tank in the basement of the
building. Discharges to municipal storm sewer system.
UNIV02 Sanitary wastes discharging to municipal sewer system.
Company installed spigot for sampling.
UNIV03 Air compressor cooling water.
UNIV04 Influent water from municipal water supply.
General Electric Company, Pittsfield, Massachusetts
GE005 NPDES Permit No. MA0003891, Out fall Serial 005.
Effluentffrom oil/water separator treats ground-
water incinerator scrubber water, and flows from power
and distribution transformer departments.
GE006 NPDES Permit No. MA0003891, Outfall Serial 006. ground-
water, flows from the power transformer department, and
runoff from adjacent city areas.
SCRU01 Influent scrubber water from influent end of oil/water
separator at Outfall 005.
SCRU02 Effluint scrubber water returned to oil/water separator
at Outfall 005.
Bennington, Vermont, Wastewater Treatment Plant
BENN01 Final effluent after chlorination.
-------
SOLID WASTE SAMPLING RESULTS FOR PCB'S
Site Location
Sampled
1. New Bedford, Ma
Sanitary Landfill
2.
3-
I*.
5-A
5-B.
6.
7-
8.
Type of Sample
Collected Sanpliiij; Motlu»J
Ground water-CW-1 ?'.:ri- vpl.ls
Groundwater-GW-2
Croundwater-GW-3
Groundvater-GW- 1*
Split Sample grat- sample
Leachate Seep
near well GW-3
Soil Sample-S-1 split, spoons
(0-7-5 ft.) from well GW-3
Soil Sample-S-2
(10-12 ft.)
Soil Sanrple-S-3
Date Sample Analytical Resul
Taken 1016
3/i!6/76 ND1'2'5
Ippb
N.D.
N.D.
lOppb
" . 73ppb3 of
580Dppb
N.D.
N.D.
1254
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
Aroclor
1700ppb
N.D.
N.D.
ts
1260
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1232
N.D.
N.D
N.D.
9. Nev Bedford,Ma
Industrial
Disposal Site
(15-17 ft.)
Surface Stream
greb sample
10. Nev Bedford.Ma Sludge (sediment)
Sewage Treatment PI.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
11.A
Split Sample
Sludge (sediment)
61*000 ppb 9600 ppb N. D.
U/21/76 28000 ppb 2800 ppb N.D.
i.l. B
39000 ppb'
N.D. N.D.
-------
Site Location Type of Sanple
12.
13-
Ik.
15-
16.
17-
18.
19-
20.
2.1.
Sannled Collected Sampling Method
Pittsfield,Ma. Sludge grab sample
Sewage Treatment
Plant
North Adams, Ma. Sludge "
Sewage Treatment
Plant
Bridgeport, Ct. Sludge "
Sewage Treatment
Plant
Peabody,Ma. Surface Lea chat e "
Municipal Disposal
Site
Danvers,Ma. Surface Leechate grab sa-nple
Municipal Disposal
Site
Bangor,Me. " "
Municipal Disposal *
Site
Watervllle,Me.
Municipal Disposal
Site
Bristol, Ct. Leachate (composite- grab sample
Municipal landfill 2 leachate seeps)
Windham, Ct. Leachate pond "
Municipal landfin
New Britain Croundwater pump existing wells
Date Sample Analytical Results
Taken 1016 1254 1260
2/10/76 liquid 3 ppb 3 ppb
1 ppb
Sediment 8000 ppb SOOOppb
1400 ppb
5/U/76
Analysis not completed
5/12/T6
2/25/76 N.D. N.D. N.D.
2/25/76 N.D. N.D. N.D
3/15/76 N.D. N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D. N.D.
V6/76 W.D. N.D. 11. D.
N.D. N.D. W.D.
" 2k ppb 22 ppfc :>". u.
•Mun. L.F.Berlin,Ct
-------
'Site Location
Sampled
22. Beacon Falls, Ct.
Private Landfill
23. Sanitary Landfill
Inc . , Cranston, R . I .
2k.
25. Bennington, Vt.
Sewage Treatment
Plant
26. Bennington. Vt.
Municipal landfill
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33-
Type of Sanple
Collected Sampling Method
Surface Leachate grab sample
Groundwater (5) pump existing wells
(6)
Sludge grab sample
Groundwater (L-l) pump existing wells
Groundwater (D-2) pump existing wells
Groundwater (D-3) "
Leachate Seep- A grab sample
II ir
Industrial lagoon "
Industrial lagoon "
Leachate seep-E "
operating lift
Date Sample Analytical Results
Taken
"
U/8/76
u
3/18/76
1/20/76
1/20/76
"
3/31/76
3/18/76
3/31/76
5/V76
loiS !
N.D
N.D.
N.D.
liquid
4ppb i iJ.
sediment
2800 ppb
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1300 ppb
liquid
210000 ppti
Sediment
U . 0x10 ' ppb
liquid
60,000 ppb
sediment
760 ppb .
Iggfr
N.D.
N.D.
2ppb
"2ppb
SOOOppb
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
1260
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
-------
Site Location
Sampled
31*. Bennington,Vt.
Municipal Landfill
35.
36.
37-
38.
Footnotes
Type of Sample
Collected
Leachate seep-D
Leachate seep-F
swamp
Leachate seep-C
Leachate Seep-B
Polumbo veil
Sampling Method
grab sample
pump existing
veil
Date Sample
Taken
5/V76
5A/76
5/V76
5/V76
Analytical Results
IQJg 125!*1260
liquid
85 ppb N'D- H'D-
sediment
3900 ppb r;.o. N.D.
liquid
N.D. N.D. N.D.
sediment
38ppb 35ppb N.D.
liquid
5ppb 5ppb N.D.
sediment
llOppb 88ppb N.D.
liquid
Ippb N.D. N.D.
sediment
72ppb 52ppb N.D.
N.D. N.D. N.D.
1. Unless otherwise indicated, PCB analysis performed by EPA National Enforcement Investigation Center, Denver,
Colorado.
2. Not detected. This Indicates that the PCB level vas below the detection limit. The detection limit when
extracting 10CO ml of water is 0.001 ug/ml (1 ppb). However, the detection limits of some of the Aroclors in these
samples are higher because large amounts of one of the other Aroclors in a sample required that dilutions of that
sample extract be used for quantltation.
3. Analysis performed on split sample by Westinghouse Ocean Research Laboratory, Annapolis, Md. under contract
with OSVMP. Analysis suspect, Aroclor 1232 never known Co have been used in Region.
1*. Analysis performed by EPA Region I Surveillance & Analysis Division Laboratory, Lexington, Mass. 02173-
5- The gas enromatographic pattern of Aroclor 1016 greatly resembles that of Aroclor 12^2 and it ie not
always possible to distinguish one from the other, especially in the presence of other Aroclors.
------- |