FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR
METALTEC/AEROSYSTEMS, INC. SUPERFUND SITE
SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
^tD Sr
-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary iv
Five-Year Review Summary Form v
Introduction 1
Site Chronology 1
Background 1
Physical Characteristics 1
Site Geology/Hydrogeology . 1
Land and Resource Use 2
History of Contamination 2
Initial Response ... 2
Basis for Taking Action. , 3
Remedial Actions 3
Remedy Implementation 4
OU1 (Source Area) : 4
System Operations/Operation and Maintenance 4
Progress Since Last Five-Year Review 5
Five-Year Review Process 5
Administrative Components . 5
Community Involvement 5
Document Review 5
Data Review,. . 5
Site Inspection . 6
Interviews ; 7
Institutional Controls Verification 7
Technical Assessment 7
Question A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents? 7
Question B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action
objectives used at the time of the remedy still valid? 8
Question C: Has any other information come to light that could call into question the
protectiveness of the remedy?....... 8
Technical Assessment Summary 9
Issues, Recommendations and Follow-Up Actions ..9
Protectiveness Statement 9
Next Review 9
Tables ; 10
-------
Table 1: Chronology of Site Events. 10
Table 2a: Remediation Goals for Soil (all concentrations in fig/kg) 11
Table 2b: Remediation Goals for Groundwater (all concentrations in ng/L)..< 11
Table 3: Documents, Data and Information Reviewed in Completing the Five-Year Review. 12
Attachments.... ..13
Attachment 1: Figures . 13
-------
Executive Summary
This is the initial five-year review (FYR) for the Metaltec/Aerosystems, Inc., Superfund Site
located in Franklin Township, Sussex County, New Jersey. The purpose of this FYR is to review
information to determine if the remedy is and will continue to be protective of human health and
the environment. The triggering action for this policy FYR was the Preliminary Close-Out
Report signed on June 18, 2009.
The remedies selected for the Site have been implemented and have eliminated the exposure
pathways for humans and ecological receptors, therefore, the remedies are functioning as
intended regarding preventing exposure to Site-related contaminants.
iv
-------
Five-Year Review Summary Form
* .1
I* Issues/Recommendations '
OU(s) without Issues/Recommendations Identified in the Five-Year Review: =
02 '
, . ¦£ Protectiveness Statement(s)
Operable Unit:
Protectiveness Determination:
OU2
Protective
V
-------
Protectiveness Statement:
The remedy for 0U2 remedy is protective of human health and the environment.
| Sitewide Protectiveness Statement
% • " ¦
Protectiveness Determination: Addendum Due Date (if applicable):
Protective
Protectiveness Statement:
The remedies implemented at the Site are protective of human health and the environment.
vi
-------
Introduction
The purpose of a five-year review (FYR) is to evaluate the implementation and performance of a
remedy in order to determine if the remedy is and will continue to be protective of human health
and the environment and is functioning as intended by the decision documents. The methods,
findings, and conclusions of reviews are documented in the FYR. In addition, FYR reports
identify issues found during the review, if any, and document recommendations to address them.
This is the initial FYR for the Metaltec/Aerosystems, Inc., Superfund Site (Site), located in
Franklin Borough, Sussex County, New Jersey. This FYR was conducted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Remedial Project Manager (RPM) Brian Quinn. The
review was conducted in accordance with the Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance,
OSWER Directive 9355.7-03B-P (June 2001). This report will become part of the Site file.
The triggering action for this policy review is the Preliminary Close-Out Report that was signed
on June 18,2009. A five-year review is required at this Site due to the fact that the remedial
action will not leave hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants on Site above levels that
allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, but requires five or more years to complete.
The Site consists of two Operable Units (OUs). OU1 addressed contaminated soils that
presented an unacceptable risk and/or a source of contamination to the groundwater. OU2
addressed contaminated groundwater. The OU1 remedy has been completed and soils have been
remediated to levels that allow for unrestricted use. Therefore, that OU is not being evaluated in
this FYR. The OU2 groundwater restoration remedy is ongoing and is the subject of this FYR.
Site Chronology
See Table 1 for the Site chronology.
Background
Physical Characteristics
The Metaltec/Aerosystems Site is located on a 15 1/2 -acre property in a rural/residential area.
The Site lies in a valley drained by a small unnamed stream that flows approximately 2,000 feet
to the Wildcat Brook, a tributary of the Walkill River. Franklin Pond lies 3/4 mile northeast of
the Site. The now-closed Franklin Water Supply Well, which served as a secondary water supply
source, is about 400 feet east of the property. Approximately 4,000 people live within 3 miles of
the Site. Local surface water is used for recreation, fishing, and swimming. Wildcat Brook is
located approximately 1/4 mile northwest of the Site in the middle of a broad flood plain.
Surface water in the vicinity of the Site is classified by the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) as fresh-water number two, non-trout (FW2-NT). Streams
classified as FW2-NT are not used as potable supplies, nor are they maintained as trout fisheries.
Site Geology/Hydrogeology
1
-------
The Site geology consists of glacial deposits, gneiss, marble, and dolomite. The overburden
geology consists of both stratified and unstratified glacial drift, with various mixtures of stiff
sandy and silty clay, and sand and gravel deposits. The thickness of the overburden varies greatly
across the Site, from 15 feet or less beneath the parking lot area to approximately 100 feet to the
north of the Site. A three-part aquifer system exists beneath the Site, which includes glacial and
marsh deposits, fractured granitic gneiss, and fractured dolomite.
Although the marble noted above is lithologically different from the granitic gneiss, it is not
considered to be a different aquifer system. The overburden aquifer is variable in composition
and includes sands, silts, and gravel beneath the parking lot areas, and clayey silts to the east and
northwest. Estimated permeabilities of the overburden aquifer range from 10"2 to 10"7 centimeters
per second. Fractures within the bedrock aquifer are the primary pathways for groundwater
flow. Primary fractures in the granitic gneiss bedrock trend in a northeast to southwest direction,
following the granitic gneiss/dolomite contact. Secondary fractures in the granitic gneiss trend
northwest to southwest. Groundwater in the area of the Site is designated as Class II-B,
indicating that it is a potential source of drinking water, and is in fact a source of drinking water.
The plume configuration results from the (1) vertical migration of source material in the granitic
gneiss hydrostratigraphic unit; (2) horizontal migration due to pumping of nearby residential
wells, the former the Site facility production well, and the Franklin Borough pumping well; and
(3) the natural groundwater flow gradient. The source material present in a former waste lagoon
leached through the soil and entered the underlying granitic gneiss hydrostratigraphic unit.
Chemical and hydrogeological data suggest that source material migrated along the bedrock
fracture network and diffused into the lower, dolomite bedrock hydrostratigraphic system.
Land and Resource Use
The Site is the location of a former manufacturing facility that produced a variety of metal
products. Currently, the Site houses an office building that is mostly unoccupied except for a
commercial linen cleaning company. The area surrounding the Site is rural and residential.
History of Contamination
In 1980, the NJDEP began sampling the Metaltec/Aerosystem's wastewater lagoon and
surrounding soil as part of a Site inspection. Results revealed the presence of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals. These contaminants leached from the lagoon into
surrounding groundwater, and upon sampling residential wells, the NJDEP found VOCs at levels
above federal standards for drinking water. The Franklin Water Supply Well and contaminated
private wells were closed in 1980. Groundwater sampling results indicated that VOCs are
present in both the surficial overburden and the underlying bedrock. The Site was placed on the
EPA National Priorities List (NPL) in September 1983.
Initial Response
From April 1980 through December 1983, remedial response activities undertaken by the
property owner and supervised by the NJDEP occurred at the Site. Known contaminant sources
at the Site included a former unlined wastewater lagoon, a buried pile of green oxidized powder,
and a subsurface septic field installed below the parking lot.
2
-------
Basis for Taking Action
From June 1984 to May 1986, EPA performed an RI/FS to delineate the nature and extent of
contamination at the Site and to develop the remedial alternatives addressing the contamination
found within the soils and groundwater. The investigation determined that an estimated 10,000
cubic yards (yd3) of soil were contaminated with various VOCs in an area referred to as Parcel 1,
which included the remaining contamination in a lagoon; an estimated 4,000 yd3 of soil were
contaminated with inorganic chemicals and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in areas
referred to as Parcels 2, 3 and 4; both the shallow and bedrock aquifers beneath the Site were
contaminated with elevated levels of the contaminants found in the soil on the Site. A human
health risk evaluation was performed as part of the Rl, and the results identified high levels of
VOCs, including trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (1,1,1-TCA), trans-1,2-dichloroethene
(trans- 1,2-DCE), vinyl chloride, chloroform, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethane (1,1-
DCA), chromium, zinc, lead, copper and manganese as contaminants of concern in the soil and
groundwater. The risk assessment concluded that the potential risks to human health and the
environment associated with the source material are direct contact with the contaminated Soils
and continued migration of contaminants to the groundwater. These results were finalized in a
1986 RI/FS Report for the OU1.
A supplemental RI/FS for OU2 was conducted between 1987 and 1990 to evaluate groundwater,
surface water and sediment contamination. The risk assessment concluded that surface water and
sediment contamination did not present an unacceptable risk to potential human receptors.
Groundwater contamination for potential future users presented an unacceptable risk. The
contaminants of concern identified included the same contaminants found to impact soils
(referenced above).
Potential impacts associated with contaminants at the Site were also evaluated for ecological
risk. It was determined that aquatic life in the Wildcat Brook and its tributary were unlikely ot
be affected by contaminants present at the Site.
Remedial Actions
OU1 (Source Area)
The ROD for OU1 was signed on June 30, 1986.
The 1986 ROD selected the following remedy:
• Parcel 1: Excavation, treatment and off-Site disposal of VOC contaminated soils;
• Parcels 2, 3 and 4: Excavation and off-Site disposal of VOC and metals contaminated
soil; and
• Connection to the Hamburg public water system while the groundwater study was being
conducted
OU2 (Groundwater)
The ROD for OU2 was signed on September 27, 1990.
3
-------
The 1990 ROD selected the following remedy: extraction of contaminated groundwater and
restoration of the groundwater to drinking water standards; treatment of extracted groundwater to
levels attaining New Jersey surface water discharge limitation requirements; discharge of treated
groundwater to a surface water body; and appropriate environmental monitoring to ensure the
effectiveness of the remedy.
The remedial action objectives for OU2 is to restore the groundwater to the more stringent of the
federal or state MCLs.
Remedy Implementation
QUI (Source Area)
An alternate water supply pipeline extension was completed in February 1991.
Excavation and off-Site disposal of approximately 4,800 yd3 of contaminated soil from Parcels 2,
3, and 4 was completed in June 1991. The excavations were backfilled with clean fill.
For Parcel 1, approximately 5,600 yd3 of contaminated soil was excavated and treated. A Low
Temperature Volatilization System (LTVS) was mobilized on Site to volatilize organic
contaminants from the excavated soil. Treated soil was sampled prior to off-Site disposal to
determine compliance with the performance criteria. Construction of the remedy began in
December 1994 and was completed in January 1995.
OU2 (Groundwater)
Prior to the start of construction it was discovered that the planned location for the groundwater
treatment building would not comply with local property setback requirements. The soil at the
new location was found to be inadequate to support the treatment building. Because of
structurally unsound soil for the building foundation, soil-stabilization efforts were performed to
allow the construction of the treatment building to begin. The soil stabilization involved
injecting grout to fill soil voids to produce a stable base for the treatment building foundation.
Following the soil stabilization, work began on the foundation and erection of a steel frame for
the treatment building. Forcemain piping and associated electrical conduit had previously been
installed during the pre-design investigation work for two groundwater extraction wells at the
Site. A final inspection by EPA and Army Corps of Engineers (COE) was held on February 19,
2009. All equipment had been installed and a clean water test had been performed. Start-up and
shake-down work began in January 2009 and was completed by July 8, 2009.
System Operations/Operation and Maintenance
No operation and maintenance activities are required for OU1.
The groundwater extraction and treatment system became operational on July 9, 2010.
Groundwater influent from two extraction wells is collected in an equalization tank and then
pumped to a flash-mixing tank where caustic soda is added for pH adjustment. The mixture
enters a flocculation tank via gravity and a polymer is added. The extracted water, caustic and
polymer mixture is then transferred via gravity into a clarifier where solids are removed by
settling. The extracted water is pumped from the clarifier to a shallow-tray air stripper to remove
VOCs. Particulate filtration units are employed as two units in parallel, with each capable of
4
-------
treating the maximum process flow rate. This allows maintenance to be performed on one filter
unit while the treatment system continues to operate through the other unit; Liquid and vapor
phase granular activated carbon (GAC) beds each operate as two adsorber Units connected in
series.
An additional volume of groundwater is collected from the extraction well number two vault
sump. The groundwater is extracted and sent to an equalization tank, air stripper, and liquid and
vapor phase granular activated carbon prior to discharge into the unnamed brook.
Monitoring of the groundwater is accomplished by quarterly sampling of 51 monitoring wells.
To date approximately more than 200 pounds of VOC mass has been removed from the
groundwater since the treatment system was installed.
Progress Since Last Five-Year Review
This is the first FYR for the Site.
Five-Year Review Process
Administrative Components
The FYR team included Brian Quinn (EPA-RPM), Sharissa Singh (EPA-Hydrologist), Charles
Nace (EPA- Risk Assessor) and Natalie Loney (EPA-Community Involvement Coordinator).
This is a Fund-lead Site.
Community Involvement
The public notice of the FYR was posted on the Franklin Township website on February 10,
2014.
The FYR results will be made available at the local Site repository, which is at the Sussex
County Library Main Library at 125 Morris Turnpike Newton, New Jersey, 07860. In addition,
efforts will be made to reach out to local public officials to inform them of the results.
Document Review
The documents, data and information which were reviewed in completing this FYR are
summarized in Table 3. / '
Data Review
Overburden Groundwater Plume
Figure 1 summarizes semi-annual sampling from overburden monitoring well network. Well
results indicate that only TCE is present in overburden above maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs).
Laboratory results from overburden, shallow, groundwater wells indicate that TCE
concentrations remain above regulatory standards in one upgradient well (with seasonal
variations). Contaminants of concern (COC) analysis for overburden sentinel wells, wells
5
-------
outside treatment area, indicate that the downgradient edge of the plume is not expanding and
COC concentrations are not being detected along its northeast and/or southwest boundaries.
Bedrock Groundwater Plume
Figure 2 summarizes semi-annual sampling from bedrock monitoring well network.
Laboratory results from bedrock groundwater wells indicate that the highest concentrations of
TCE, which is one of the COCs for the Site, exist within the vicinity of the extraction wells and
wells located below the footprint of the former source area(s). DCE concentrations are also
elevated in those wells with the highest TCE concentrations. TCE and DCE concentrations in
sentinel bedrock wells indicate that the bedrock plume is stable and not expanding. Laboratory
results indicate that concentrations in those sentinel wells are either below regulatory standards
or below laboratory method detection limits.
Arsenic, antimony, and chromium were detected in several wells during the last five years at
concentrations that exceeded the MCLs. Arsenic and antimony are not Site COCs and are likely
naturally occurring. Chromium was detected in wells at concentrations ranging from 100-1,700
micrograms per liter (ug/L). Chromium is a potential COC and has been detected in the effluent,
but is consistently well below federal and NJDEP MCLs.
In 2012, the COE conducted a foeused optimization study using Monitoring and Remediation
Optimization System software, a decision support tool that provides suggestions for optimizing
the long-term groundwater monitoring plan. This study recommended that several wells be
eliminated from the monitoring network, and that some wells be reduced in sampling frequency
from quarterly to semiannually or annually.
EPA is in the process of implementing those recommendations. EPA plans to conduct an
additional optimization study in 2015 which will include a more rigorous assessment of the
groundwater capture zone in this complex geologic setting. In addition, this optimization will
evaluate opportunities to address hot spot contamination in the bedrock aquifer.
Analytical results of the effluent samples collected from the groundwater extraction and
treatment system indicate that VOCs, SVOCs and metals are either within or below discharge
limits.
Site Inspection
An inspection of the Site was conducted on May 14, 2014. In attendance was Brian Quinn, EPA;
John Camby, COE; and COE contractor representative Dave Miller of ECC, Inc. The purpose of
the inspection was to assess the protectiveness of the remedy.
The site visit found that the groundwater extraction system was working as designed with
minimal downtime. No issues were found that would impact remedy performance or require
discussion in this FYR.
6
-------
Interviews
No interviews were conducted during the FYR. However, there has been considerable
interaction with local residents and officials during remedy implementation.
Institutional Controls Verification
Due to the groundwater contamination, a Classification Exception Area was established by the
NJDEP for this Site to prevent installation of any wells into the contaminated aquifer that could
also impact the operation of the groundwater extraction and treatment system.
Technical Assessment
Question A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents?
Summary of Data Review
The primary objectives of the implemented remedy are to restore the groundwater to beneficial
use.
Groundwater concentrations indicate that the overburden groundwater contamination is isolated,
stable and remains just above the MCL. The bedrock plumes is stable and not expanding. Elevated
contamination remains in bedrock wells in the vicinity of the extraction wells and under the former
footprint of the source area(s). Contaminant mass removal rates from the groundwater treatment
system indicates that VOC mass is effectively being removed from the groundwater and the
groundwater extraction and treatment system is operating efficiently. Monthly progress meetings
are held to discuss system operation. Annual reports detail the effectiveness of the system. Based
on the information above the remedy continues to operate as intended by the ROD.
Implementation of Institutional Controls and Other Measures
The Classification Exception Area is the only institutional control that was implemented for the
Site and is still in effect. ,
Expected Progress Toward Meeting RAOs
As this is the first FYR and the system has only been operating since July 2010, it was not
expected that plume restoration would be achieved within that time period. The annual operation
and maintenance reports show that the groundwater contamination is contained on-Site and that
the remedy continues to remove VOCs from the groundwater. However, persistent high
concentrations in the source area indicate that the treatment system will need to continue to
operate for an extended period of time (perhaps decades) before contaminant mass removal
allows VOC concentrations to be reduced to cleanup levels. EPA will conduct an optimization
review in 2015 to evaluate ways to better understand contaminant fate and transport in this
complex hydrogeological bedrock setting. In addition, the optimization will consider
opportunities to address hot spot areas in groundwater to facilitate more expedient restoration of
the plume.
7
-------
Question B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action
objectives used at the time of the remedy still valid?
Human Health - The 1986 ROD identified evaluation of exposure to Site-related contamination
through soil ingestion, inhalation of vapors and ingestion of drinking water and the
endangerment assessment associated with the 1990 ROD evaluated inhalation of vapors from
surface water (eg. lagoons), direct contact with surface water and sediment, dermal absorption
from surface water and sediment, and ingestion of groundwater. These exposure pathways and
the assumptions utilized to evaluate the pathways are still valid. The toxicity data that was used
in the assessments were current and valid at the time of their usage, however, toxicity values for
the primary Site-related contaminants (e.g., TCE, trans- 1,2-DCE, vinyl chloride, and 1,1,1-TCA)
have changed. Toxicity values for the Site-related contaminants have become more stringent, and
the use of the current toxicity values would still result in unacceptable risks identified during the
original risk assessment, and would support the need for a remedial action. Therefore, the results
obtained from the older toxicity values are still valid. The cleanup values for the soil removals
were based on New Jersey impact to groundwater values, which were calculated from MCL
values. Given that toluene is the only compound that currently has a more stringent MCL (see
below), and toluene was not a COC for soil, the soil cleanup values used are still valid. The
groundwater cleanup values that were selected were the lower of the federal and NJDEP drinking
water standards. There are several changes in the MCLs. The 1990 ROD selected values of 2,000
ug/L for toluene, 2 ug/L for 1,1-DCA, and 44 ug/L for xylenes. Current MCLs for toluene are
1,000 ug/L (federal and NJDEP values), 50 ug/L for 1,1-DCA (NJDEP value, no federal value),
and 10,000 ug/L (federal value) or 1,000 ug/L (NJDEP value) for xylenes. The remainder of the
MCLs selected as cleanup goals are still valid.
The RAO selected for the groundwater, restoration to beneficial use, is still valid.
Vapors migrating from the contaminated groundwater plume into indoor environments, known
as the vapor intrusion pathway, were not evaluated as part of the 1986 or 1990 RODs. However,
potential vapor intrusion has been evaluated at the Site within the past 10 years. Subslab vapor
and indoor air samples were collected in nearby homes that are located over the plume. Results
of the sampling were evaluated and no actions were taken based on the results. The data
collected during the vapor intrusion sampling events was reviewed and the conclusion that no
action was warranted for the vapor intrusion path is stiil valid.
Ecological - An ecological risk evaluation was conducted for the 1990 ROD and the evaluation
concluded that "it was determined that aquatic life in Wildcat Brook and its tributary were
unlikely to be affected by contaminants released to the surface water." Given that the soils and
the source material, which served as point sources to Wildcat Brook, have been remediated, the
exposure pathways for ecological receptors have been eliminated. Thus, the conclusion that
aquatic life is unlikely to be impacted is still valid.
Question C: Has any other information come to light that could'call into question the
protectiveness of the remedy?
No other information has come to light that could call into question the protectiveness of the
remedy.
8
-------
Technical Assessment Summary
The remedies selected for the Site had four objectives: (1) to excavate contaminated soils with
treatment and/or disposal, (2) to provide public water to the impacted community, (3) initiate
additional study on groundwater contamination, and (4) restore groundwater to drinking water
standards through extraction and treatment technology. The remedies that have been
implemented have eliminated the exposure pathways for humans and ecological receptors,
therefore, the remedies are functioning as intended regarding preventing exposure to Site-related
contaminants.
Issues, Recommendations and Follow-Up Actions
The following is a recommendation that would reduce costs but does not affect current
protectiveness and was identified during the FYR:
• Reduction in groundwater sampling of wells that are non-detect or below MCLs.
Protectiveness Statement
. 4 .. * #
Operable Unit: Protectiveness Determination:
Addendum Due Date
2 Protective
(if applicable):
Protectiveness Statement:
The OU2 remedy is protective of human health and the environment.
1 ¦ V,
I Sitewide Protectiveness Statement
Protectiveness Determination: Addendum Due Date (if applicable):
Protective / Click here to enter a date.
Protectiveness Statement:
The remedies are protective of human health and the environment.
Next Review
The next FYR for the Metaltec/Aerosystems, Inc., Superfund Site is required five years from the
completion date of this review.
9
-------
Tables
Table 1: Chronology of Site Events
Event
Date(s)
Initial discovery of problem or contamination
April 1980
Final NPL listing
September 1983
Removal actions
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study complete
June 1984
ROD signature OU1
June 30,1986
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study complete
August 1990
ROD signature OU2
September 27,
1990
Enforcement documents (CD, AOC, Unilateral Administrative Order)
OU1 Remedial design complete
December 1990
OU1 On-Site remedial action construction start
June 1994
OU1 Construction completion date
March 1996
OU2 Remedial design complete
September 2006
OU2 On-Site remedial action construction start
March 2008
OU2 Construction completion date
February 2009
Final Close-out Report (if applicable)
June 18, 2009
Deletion from NPL (if applicable)
10
-------
Table 2a: Remediation Goals for Soil (all concentrations in /xg/kg)
From the OU[l] ROD
Contaminants of Concern
Federal MCLs
NJDEP MCLs
Vinyl chloride
5
50
Tetrachloroethylene
5
50
T richloroethylene
5
50
Trans 1,2-dichloroethene
50
Chloroform
100
50
1,1,1 -trichloroethane
. 200
50
1,1 -dichloroethane
5
50
Chromium
50
100
Zinc
1000
350
Lead
50
100
Copper
1000
170
Manganese
50
-
Table 2b: Remediation Goals for Groundwater (all concentrations in fig/L)
From the OU[2] ROD
Contaminants of Concern
National Primary Drinking
Water Standards (Federal
MCLs)
Remediation Goals
Vinyl chloride
2
2
Chloroethane
-
.
1,1 -Dichloroethane
-•
2
1,1 -Dichloroethene
7
2
1,2-Dichloroethene
-
10
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
200
26
Tetrachloroethene
5 .
1
Trichloroethene
5
1
Toluene
2,000
«.
Xylenes
10,000
44
Manganese
-
50
11
-------
Table 3: Documents, Data and Information Reviewed in Completing the Five-Year Review
Document Title, Author
Submittal Date
Find Annual O&M report for June 2011-May 2012
January 2014
Final Annual O&M Report for June 2012-April 2013
February 2014
Hydrogeologic Summary Report
July 2006
OU2 Record of Decision
September 1990
OU1 Record of Decision
June 1986
j
12
-------
Attachments
Attachment 1: Figures
-------
ocg<»frft)
onoo\2
Legend
V6rt012
izaott2
3ft&2Q13
Overburden (OB) Wells
® Monitoring Well
Piezometer
I Residential Well
_ Lithologlc Contact
(Dolomite/Gneiss)
Treatment Plant
TC£(uB/L)
ocelli
0*70312
SMJ/21312
NOTES
TCE a Trichloroetftone
DCE - cls-1,2-Dicliloroethene
VC = Vinyl Chloride
ug/L - micrograms per filer
ND 2 Not Detected
J = Detected Result Is Estimated
Bolded Results Indicate a Detection
Blue-Shaded Results Indicate Exceedanca
of Action Level
6*11/2012
ftrt 3*3012
\vrnxm
3/2WOT3
pcE{ugA.)
amooi2
OB-IO
TCE<«n»fl.|
PCE(ug/L)
evnfjoi?
® 13/201?
tmmn
vcwll
PCE(MgJt)
!3
UXiiAH^N
12MC201J
3/20S013
3/'W013
ANNUALQ4M REPORT
REPORTING PERIOD 2012 TO 2013
METALTEC t AEROSVSTEMS SUPER FUND SITE
FRANKLIN BOROUGH. SUSSEX COUNTY. NEW JERSEY
fas Evl OeLorma. NAVTEQ. Tom Tom. Intarmap. increment P Corp GEBCO. USGS. FAO, NPS. NRCAN. G«0as«.
Kadastef NL Otttrmnce Survey, E*rl Japan METt. Esri Ghana CHcng Kong), swtsstopo. and the GIS U«l Corrvnunly
mTZZZr
oe-9
-------
pcetupn
PCClugA^
TgEfug/t)
€U7/2012
6/13/2012
6/1273012
WW012
an23012
•nuttta
12r7/20t;
12^2012
MMOU
3/21*20*3
127472012
JSSJiaiL
OCE(ugn-)
6f1?720l2
fcll2/2G12
TCE(ug>t}
VC (ug/L)
<5/7/2012
6M 3/2012
12/3/2012
1277/2052
TCE(Bgfl-)
vc^u
<5/12/5012
4MV2012
1277/2012
TCE (Ug/L)
3OM2013
EW-1
vcja2j
6/12/2012
W11/2012
12/5/2012
3/20/2013
bCE (ug/L)
TOE(uqA.)
M
12/1/2012
6/B/2012
a/7 Residential Well
Llthologic Contact
(Dolomite/Gneiss)
Treatment Plant
NOTES;
TCE = Trichteocttlnne
OCE = ds-1.2-OlchIoroethcne
VC ¦ Vinyl Chloride
ug/L = micrograms per liter
ND = Not Detected
J = Detected Result is Estimated
Balded Results Indicate a Detection
Blue-Shaded Results Indicate Exceedance
of Action Level
Scivko Lajr«r Ciedits: Sources: Esu. DeLom«. NAVTEQ
Tom Tom. Inter map, increment P Corp.. GEBCO. USGS
FAO. MPS NRCAN, G
-------
Legend
$ Extraction Wells
Overburden (OB) Wella
* Monitoring Well
Piezometer
* Residential Well
Bedrock (OR) Wtlls
* Monitoring Well
4* Piezometer
» Residential Well
Lithologic Contact
(Dolomite/Gneiss)
Treatment Plant
Trend Graph Legend
f ds-1,2-Oiehlcroethene (DOE)
0 Trichloroethene (TCE)
1 Vinyl Chloride (VC)
* * - TCE and VC Acbon Level
Vinyl Chloride (VC)
NOTES
AL = Action Level
TCE = TrieMoroethene
DCE - cis-1.2-Dichloro«ffien«
VC = V»nyl Chloride
ug/L 3 micrograms per liter
NO - Not Detected
J = Detected Result is Estimated
Bolded Result$ Indicate a Detection
Blue-Shaded Results Indicate Exceedance
of AL
S« I i < * i |
«S 3*r.f F -P'^^Vta^V-XLV^.u* }-«_TC£ DCE VC Tfttt* GrapM-ifml
------- |