'i-if!-",' ..»•'A L-jijt'ffiW*'

Reports will not . signed for transmlttal to i ;!1ent without acopy of the record of review attached to the report following thecover sheet. The Record of Review Is not transmitted to the client.

7/24/84 RECORD OF REVIEH

PROJECT NAME Tybouts_____ NUS PROJECT NO. 0717.2JREPORT TITLE Focused Feasibility Study_____________•_CLIENT____________________CLIENT PROJECT NO.______REPORT STATUS: DRAFT X FINAL______DUE DATE comments 7/27/B4DOCUMENT/REPORT NO.______ ______________________AUTHOR/PROJECT MANAGER Linda Paul,_________________

TECHNICAL REVIEWERS APPEAL DATE COMMENTSX i.'

PROJECT SECTION MANAGER /•'•_ ._____, ______SIGNATURE REQUIRED ON •' * ——————ALL REPORTSPROJECT DIRECTOR Attfc ft-l-flA- ___SIGNATURE REQUIRED ON / AALL REPORTS ' ' ' fl ,,.../ REGIONAL COORDINATOR i/T'1 / /1/?7 .APPLICABLE REGION % /i&~?-~~ ' ' ~~RAMP COORDINATOR ' ' ____ ____"(RAMPs ONLY) —HEALTH/SAFETY ___ ;___

' (IF APPLICABLE) .. ———— '~~ ~TCOMMUNITY RELATIONS(IF APPLICABLE)

DISCIPLINE REPRESENTATIVESASSIGNED BY THEDISCIPLINE DIRECTOR

DIck.Tarbert

Andrzej Nazar

X EDITOR(ALL SUPERFUND REPORTS/""" CLIENTS FINAL DEPORTS OMIY^

X QUALITY ASSURANCESIGNATURIPRIOR TOSIGN OFF

\l

SIGNATURE REQUIRED ' ?;<•PRIOR TO GENERAL MANAGER / ¥i

n

"'

FOCUS FEASIBILITY STUDYWATER SUPPUY ALTERNATIVES

TYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILLNEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE

EPA WORK ASSIGNMENTNUMBER 07-3L09.0

CONTRACT NUMBER 68-01-6699

Cv, ' ' . ' '.NUS PROJECT NUMBER 071721

1

JULY 1984

SUBMITTED FOR NUS BY: ' APPROVED:

ParKWwtlWClllf Mine RoadPittsburgh PA 15276

CXDRRDRATION 412-78B-10BO

LINDA S, PAUL, P,E. E. DENNIS IPROJECT MANAGER MANAGER, REMEDIAL PLANNING

J

D-31-7-4-15 .'0,,DRAFTTC- -D-l V

rA Halliburton Company

• ^ • DRAFTV : '

CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Iv

1,0 INTRODUCTION 1

2,0 ALTERNATIVE I: EXTEND EXISTING PUBLIC 8WATER LINES

2,1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 82,2 PROPOSED RESPONSE 82,3 COSTS . 15

3,0 ALTERNATIVE II: TREATMENT OF EXISTING WATER SUPPLIES 183,1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 183,2 PROPOSED RESPONSE 183,3 COSTS 22

4.0 ALTERNATIVE III: INSTALLATION OF INDIVIDUAL WELLS 25INTO THE DEEP AQUIFER

(*"*) 4,1 EXISTING CONDITIONS . 25'"" . 4,2 PROPOSED RESPONSE .27

4,3 COSTS . 28 '

5,0 ALTERNATIVE IV: INSTALL CENTRAL WATER SUPPLY WELL 31AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM $.'

5,1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 31 $'5,2 PROPOSED RESPONSE 31 }\5,3 COSTS 34 •.«.'..

6,0 SUMMARY 38•

} ;, • . DRAFT\~

CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

TABUS

SECTION PAGE

2-1 COST SUMMARY ALTERNATIVE I: EXTEND EXISTING 16PUBLIC WATER LINES

3-2 COST SUMMARY ALTERNATIVE II: PROVIDE TREATMENT TO 23INDIVIDUAL WELLS

4-1 COST SUMMARY ALTERNATIVE III: INSTALL INDIVIDUAL 29WATER SUPPLY WELLS

5-1 COST SUMMARY ALTERNATIVE IV: INSTALL CENTRAL WATER 35SUPPLY WELL AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

6-1 TOTAL PROJECT COST SUMMARY* FOR ALTERNATIVE WATER 40SUPPLIES TYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL NEW CASTLECOUNTY, DELAWARE

,. FIGURES,•..,,•' , t '

1-1 'EXISTING CONDITIONS 32-1 OPTION 1 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION 92-2 OPTION 2 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION 102-3 OPTION 3 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION 112-4 OPTION 4 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION 124-1 GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC PROFILE 265-1 ALTERNATIVE IV: CENTRAL WATER SUPPLY WATER AND 32DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

oolb

':':'..' >/•*$«•'

DRAFT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report summarizes the findings of a Focus Feasibility Study to evaluatepossible water supply alternatives for residences near the Tybouts Corner LandfillIn New Castle County, Delaware, This study was requested by the U. S,Environmental Protection Agency under Work Assignment Number 07-3L09.0, Thestudy was conducted to Identify an alternative to alleviate water supply problems.Previous water quality testing at tho site; the discontinued use of the well at theWagner residence, located along U, S, Route 13; and current Investigations of thewater quality near the Tybouts Corner Landfill by NUS Corporation stronglysuggest a need for an alternate water supply.

NUS studies were conducted as part of the Remedial Investigation at the TyboutsCorner Landfill to determine the nature and extent .of contamination at thelandfill, These studies have Included Installation of monitoring wells at the site,sampling and analysis of residential water supplies In homes.adjacent to the site,and a health and risk assessment of the quality of residential water supplies, The'health and risk assessment Indicates that Ingesting untreated water from oneresidential wells that' was sampled could result In a long-term health risk.Evaluation of the groundwater quality from the monitoring well data and directions,.of groundwater flow Indicate a potential for contamination of other residentialwells.

Based on the contamination Identified through analytical results and the potentialfor future contamination, 11 residences/public facilities were Identified forevaluation to receive alternate water supplies under any alternative that may bechosen. These locations Include the 2 Wagner homes along U, S, Route 13; theMartin, Webb, Baker, McCaffery, Outran, and Andrews residences, also along U. S,Route 13; the Woytko residence on State Route 71; and the Operating EngineersSchool and Union Meeting House along State Route 71, The potential forcontamination was based upon the hypothesis that contamination may 'continue tomigrate from the site, This assumption will be tested during a third phase of

lv 00291°000003 °.1 13

DRAFT

drilling and monitoring well Installation to define potential contamination In theUpper Hydrologlc Zone of the Potomac Formation to the south of Red Lion Creek.

The 11 residences/facilities have been Identified as the study Target Area, Costsfor Implementation of each alternative were developed for the Target Area, sinceall residences/facilities In this area would receive some form of alternate watersupply, whatever alternative Is chosen. In addition, costs were developed forproviding an alternate water supply to all residents adjacent to the landfillproperty, should groundwater In these areas also be contaminated or should thepotential for future contamination be significant, The additional areas Includeother residents along Route 71, west to Route 7; residents along Route 13,southwest to Dragon Neck Road; and residences and other facilities along GovernorLea Road, between Route 7 and Route 13, This other study area, which Includes allresidents adjacent to the landfill area, has been termed the Expanded Area In thefollowing text,

Construction of a new highway near the Intersection of Routes 71 and 13 may ' jf$''''|change property ownership and highway access In the study area, This effect was • K|not Included In this study, as final construction plans have not been prepared.

Four schemes for alternate water supplies were considered for evaluation:

•• Extension of the existing public water lines to the affected areas

• Installation of Individual treatment units at each residence/facility

• Installation of new deeper water supply wells for each residence/facilitydrilled Into the Lower Hydrologic Zone mInstallation of a central water supply well Into the Lower Hydrologic Zonewith a distribution system to the residences/facilities

f-'o i$:00000'-"" !*13

• 'n

, .. ..... -...,.,I--.- . _»«—^r ilu. „ j

1 DRAFT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tybouts Corner Landfill, which is located In New Castle County, Delaware, Is anuncontrolled hazardous waste site that was Identified and ranked as a NationalPriorities List (NPL) site under the Comprehensive Environmental ResourceConservation Liability Act (CERCLA) of the United States, As an NPL site,Tybouts Corner Landfill was subjected to a Remedial Investigation (Rl) andFeasibility Study (FS) of Remedial Alternatives as defined In the NationalContingency Plan (NCP) published In the Federal Register as 40 CFR Part 300, onJuly 16,1982,

The Remedial Investigation for Tybouts Corner Landfill was Initiated In the' springof 1983 to determine, in part, the Impact of the landfill on the local and regionalgroundwater systems, The main concern is that hazardous substances that weredisposed In the landfill are contaminating the groundwater system, Residencesclose to the site have wells screened in the aquifers potentially affected iiy

...) < ' contamination' from the site, In addition, the landfill Is situated over a majorregional aquifer that Is used for private/munlc'ipal/industrial water supplythroughout New Castle County. • . , |i|>

The geologic and groundwater investigation portions of the Rl were divided Intothree phases of drilling activities in the scope of work (Work Plan) for the RI/FS.The Initial Phase of drilling was to determine the general character of the geologyand groundwater at the site for the regional aquifer (Potomac Formation) and todetermine If contamination could be occurring In that aquifer, The Second Phaseof drilling was to determine the detailed geology and potential for groundwatercontamination.In the shallower aquifers tr-at lie above the regional aquifer In theImmediate vicinity of the landfill, The Third Phase of drilling was to determinethe exact character of groundwater contamination, or potential contamination, inthe regional aquifer, if the results of the Initial and Second phases Indicated thatthe regional aquifer Is, or could become, contaminated in the future,

00291*

000007

fffv

&'_ 'r••••';;,>

DRAFT

The Initial and Second phases of the Rl have been completed. The Third Phase hasnot been Implemented and Is scheduled for August 1984, The results of the Initialand Second phases of drilling and a health and risk assessment of the anaiytrjlresults of samples from residential and monitoring wells Indicate that there is athreat to the public health posed by groundwater contaminated by the landfill, Asummary of these studies Indicates the following,

• Two shallow aquifers He above the regional aquifer Immediately beneaththe landfill, The uppermost aquifer Is the Columbia Formation, which Is asand and gravel that occurs throughout the area, The second shallowaquifer Is a sand that Is separated from the Columbia Formation by a siltlayer that forms the Marchantvllle Formation. This sand layer maybelong to either the Magothy or the Potomac Formations, For thisInvestigation, this sand layer Is referred to as the Middle sand. Analyticalresults Indicate (hat both shallow aquifers are contaminated withhazardous substances from the landfill, Residential water wells have beendeveloped in both shallow aquifers adjacent to the landfill. Two of theseresidential wells have been contaminated by the landfill, The landfill and p-surrounding areas are identified In Figure 1-1,

• Past groundwater quality data and current hydrogeologlc Informationindicate that the Wagner water well was located in a directiondowngradlent from the landfill and was contaminated, The well has not

' been In use for several years and has since collapsed. K

• Groundwater quality data and flow directions in both shallow aquifers are , v;:such that other residential wells located along U, S, Route 13, north of IfRed Lion Creek (except the Wagner well), are not presently contaminatedbecause they are upgradlent from the landfill, However, naturalfluctuations In the groundwater table, or temporary local fluctuationscaused by pumping or by construction on the landfill during remedial ..

"It:action, could cause contamination of these wells In the future, '•« •

000008 fi

LEGEND——— EXISTING 16 INCH MUNICIPAL

WATER LINESPROPOSED AREA OF HIGHWAYCONSTRUCTION (APPROXIMATE)

rREFERENCEi SAINT 3EOROES QUADRANGLE, DELAWARE-NEW CASTLE CO., 7.5 MINUTE SERIES, 1983,PHOTOREVISED1970, US, OEOLOGICAL SURVEY,

TYBOUTSCAIO i mw v*wraui i luiio

CORNER LANDFILLNEW CASTLESCALE" l"a|00p'

~ * <l

CO..DE00

IS

iNUScOP:3GPiATiaNQlAHallibL .on Company

I'.'/

•""> DRAFT

• The potential for future contamination of residential wells located southof Red Lion Creek, adjacent to U, S, Route 13, Is unknown. Based onwater quality data, residential wells In this area are not presentlycontaminated by the landfj/l. Data from the Initial and Second Phases ofdrilling and monitoring well Installation indicate these residences probablyare not In the path of the contaminant plume, The potential forcontamination of these wells will be determined during the Third Phase ofdrilling and monitoring well Installation,

• Current hydrogeologlc Information Indicates that .the Woytko water wellalong Delaware Route 71 is located In a direction downgradlent from thelandfill, Current analytical data Indicate that the well has beencontaminated, A water treatment system has been Installed at theowners expense. This system has been effective In removingcontamination,

•'~'; • Residential wells located along Delaware Route 71 (Red Lion Road) west,of Pigeon Run are upgradlent from the landfill and are not likely to becontaminated from the landfill unless groundwatar flow Is artificiallyaltered, |$r

II <• An assessment of the chemical quality of samples acquired from the

Initial and Second Phase monitoring wells, from the Woytko residentialwell, and from data collected In other studies of the Wagner wallindicates the groundwater in the two shallow aquifers contains hazardoussubstances In sufficient concentrations to pose a threat to human health, v,If persons should drink this water, fjI

• The regional aquifer, the Potomac Formation, may be contaminated bythe landfill, There is a potential for contaminated groundwater to pass ,«,

Vbeneath Red Lion Creek within the regional aquifer, This potential will ;','be Investigated during the Third Phase of drilling and monitoring well |Installation,

O ' A

,1 .-ii ooflft

' DRAFT

Based on the data and conclusions described above, tha nature and risks posed bythe groundwater contamination from Tybouts Corner Landfill have beensufficiently defined to proceed with a Focus Feasibility Study for alternate watersupply for the residents Immediately adjacent to the landfill.

In order to Investigate tha cost-effective methods for supplying alternate watersupplies and to compare all alternatives on an equal basis, a Target Area wasIdentified, which Included the residences/facilities where the water quality Iscurrently being affected by the landfill or where the potential for futurecontamination Is significant, The Target Area Includes the Woytko residence, theOperating Engineers School, and the Meeting House along Route 71 (Red LionRoad) and the Martin, Webb, Baker, McCaffery, Outten, Andrews, and 2 Wagnerresidences along Route 13 (Dupont Highway), A total of 11 residences/facilitieswere Identified In the Target Area as shown In Figure 1-1,

Analytical results of the water at tha Woytko residence along Route 71 prior totreatment Indicate that potential health risks may be associated with long-term"use of the water for drinking and/or cooking, A treatment system has beenInstalled at the resident's expense, The well supplying the Wagner residences wasalso contaminated and also has been abandoned, Bottled water Is being used as adrinking source, The Engineers School and Meeting House were included, due totheir proximity to the landfill, The other six residences In the study area, whichare located along Route 13, were included due to the potential for futurecontamination from further migration from the landfill,

Currently, the Delaware Department of Transportation has planned constructionfor the relocation of Route 7 In the vicinity of the landfill, Construction plans forthis alternative are currently In review for approval, As part of the relocation anoff-ramp onto Route 13 (traveling southwest) Is proposed near tha currentIntersection of Routes 71 and 13 (See Figure 1-1), No determination can be madeat this time as to the effect this new highway construction may have on propertyownership in the area, Should the relocation be Implemented, access toright-of-ways (for water lines) In the area of construction may also be affected, A

IV 00001J00291*

i«.KK'i'lwi

few residences near the Intersection of Routes 71 and 13 have been purchased aspart of the proposed relocation. For purposes of this study, however, it has beenassumed that the highway construction will not affect the Target Area as definedabove,

To account for the potential of continued migration of contamination, a costanalysis to provide alternate water to all residences/facilities adjacent to thelandfill.property was also conducted, This additional area includes other residencesalong Route 71 to the Intersection with Route 7, other residences along Route 13to the intersection with Dragon Neck Road, and residences/facilities alongGovernor Lea Road between Routes 7 and 13, This larger area, which includes theTarget Area and the adjacent areas outlined above, has been identified as theExpanded Area In this report, Costs for providing alternate water to both theTarget Area and the Expanded Area are provided in the sections that follow,

:'v-f>Currently, residents along Route 71 and Route 13 adjacent to the landfill utilize S£h.Individual wells .developed In the shallow aquifer.? of the Columbia Formation andthe Middle sands, Other residents have wells developed in the deeper UpperHydrologic Zone (UHZ) of the Potomac Formation. These wells pass through the {/,shallow aquifers, Monitoring programs have Indicated that the shallow aquifers are ||:contaminated, Available data Indicate the UHZ may be contaminated, Thepotential for developing an uncontamlnated water supply source from groundwater .;supplies could exist In the Lower Hydrologic Zone (LHZ) of the PotomacFormation, Wells In the LHZ aquifer at a depth of approximately 400 to SOO feetare used as major sources of water supply In the area.

Additional sources of uncontamlnated water supply available nearby the landfillInclude public water lines along. State Route 7, Garwood Drive, and Dragon NeckRoad, Water supply In the. area of the Tybouts Corner Landfill Is provided by theGeneral Waterworks, Wllmlngton Suburban Water Corporation, Location of theexisting water mains Is shown in Figure 1-1, Existing 'mains in the area are of16-Inch diameter, In discussions with Wllmlngton Suburban, It was determined thatany future water line construction In the area would also include 16-Inch diameter

6

K 13

• DRAFT

main lines, Thus, main lines of 16-Inch diameter were assumed In cost estimatesfor this study,

Based on an evaluation of the existing water quality from wells In the shallowaquifer and the availability of other uncontaminated sources of potable water inthe area, 4 alternatives have been Identified for providing water to theresidences/facilities In the Target Area (and the Expanded Area), Thesealternatives Include:

• Alternative I: Extend the existing 16-inch public water lines,

• Alternative II: Install individual treatment units »• eachresidence/facility,

• Alternative III: Install individual water supply wells ' into the Lower, Hydrologic Zone,

• Alternative IV: Install a central water supply well Into the LowerHydrologic Zone and construct a distribution system,

Each of these alternatives Is described and evaluated in Sections 2 through 5, Thecost to construct, operate, and maintain each alternative was calculated forcomparison of the alternatives, An evaluation was made of the feasibility,reliability, and implementability of each alternative so that the effectiveness ofeach' alternative in providing a longterm source of potable water would boevaluated, The results of the Investigation of each alternative are summarized InSection 6 of this report, The Information is presented for the ERA and the State of

..Delaware to determine the most cost-effective means of providing alternate watersupplies to residences/facilities near the Tybouts Corner undflll and to prepare aRecord of Decision to Implement the chosen remedial action, Following theselection of an alternative, a conceptual design will Jae prepared and Included withthe final version of this report.

0000131 13 .

I'--''

|:

•fV

^ ' DRAFT

2,0 ALTERNATIVE I: EXTEND EXISTING PUBLIC WATER LINES

2.1 Existing Conditions

Implementation of Alternative I Involves extending the existing public water supplylines In the Tybouts Corner vicinity to the 11 homes In the Target Area. Rights forproviding water supply services In the vicinity of the Tybouts Corner Landfill areheld by the General Waterworks, Wllmlngton Suburban Water Corporation,Figure 1-1 depicts the location of the existing public water lines along StateRoute 7, Garwood Drive, and Dragon Neck Road,

Wilmington Suburban uses water lines that are 16-Inch In diameter In the vicinityof the Target Area, All future water supply lines Installed by Wllmlngton Suburbanwould be of 16-Inch diameter.

2,2 Proposed Responserv • ——.Figures 2-1 through 2-4 depict the four possible routes or options that' could beused to extend the public water lines and Implement this alternative. The firstoption, as shown In Figure 2-1, would extend the line from the Intersection ofRoute 7 and Route 71, along the right-of-way of Route 71 to the OperatingEngineers School and Meeting House, This portion of the route Is approximately6200 feet In length, From the Operating Engineers school, the water line wouldextend to Route 13, a distance of approximately 400 lineal faet, and then along the .Route 13 right-of-way to the Wagner homes for an additional distance of3400 lineal feet, A total distance of approximately 10,000 feet of water line Isrequired. Access through private property or the highway construction area wouldbe required between Routes 71 and 13.

The second option would extend the'16-Inch water line from the Intersection ofDragon Neck Road and Route 13 to the north along the Route 13 right-of-way,

/•i X X*mRATIN<J ENOINEEI<~ J C\ / SCHOOL ANDX / S\/ MEIMEETING HOUSEvf "

WOYTKORESIDENCE

— EXISTING 16 INCH MUNICIPALWATER LINES

Illllllll PROPOSED WATER LINEEXTENSION

rREFERENCE) SAINT 8EOR8ES QUADRANGLE,DELAWARE- NEW CASTLE CO,, 7,9 MINUTE SERIES,I953.PHOTOREVISED1970, US, GEOLOGICAL. SURVEY,

FIGURE 2-1OPTION I FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION

TYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL.NEW CASTLE CQ..DESCALE', l"= 1000'

NUSCORPOFlATiaN

0 §$wh 9allit)urton Company<<• it

/J X x^JPERATINO ENOINEER9

LEGEND_ICH MUNICIPAL

inillll PROPOSED WATER LINEEXTENSION

rOEOROES QUADRANGLE, DELAWARE- NEW CASTLE CO,, 7,9 MINUTE SERIES, I9S3.PHOTOREVISEO>AI SURVEY. .

OPTION 2 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSIONTYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILUNEW CASTLE CO..DE

SCALE' l"=!000'

U_

^

FIGURE 2-2

IMUS10 ;:• s» MoB1?*"*""*11*1*

IRATING ENGINE

SCHOOL ANDMEETING HO

———— EXISTING 16 INCH MUNICIPALWATER LINES

Illllllll PROPOSED WATER LINEEXTENSION

PREFERENCE'SAINT GEOROES QUADRANGLE, DELAWARE-NEW CASTLE CO., 7,5 MINUTE SERIES, 1953,PHOTOREVISED1970, US, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. AoO00298*

FIGURE 2-3OPTION 3 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION

TYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL.NEW CASTLE CO..DESCALE! l"= CORPORATION

A Halliburton Company

I'v'

I. - " • v f[ v,» i I* I I.•f

.. 16 INCH MUNICIPAL

Ilium PROPOSED WATER LINEEXTENSION

rREFERENCE) SAINT GEORGES QUADRANGLE, DELAWARE- NEW CASTLF, CO,, 7.9 MINUTE SERIES, 1933.PHOTOREVISED1970, US, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,

FIGURE 2-4OPTION 4 FOR WATER LINE EXTENSION

TYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL.NEW CASTLE CO..DE NUSCORPORATiaN

IA Halliburton Company12 * i« 00Jot!)

DRAFT

past the Andrews residence. This portion of the route is approximately 6400 feetin length. The water line would then extend to the north, about 900 feet, to theWoytko residence on Route 71. From the Woytko residence, the line would extendalong the Route 71 right-of-way about 1200 feet to the Operating Engineers Schooland meeting house (See Figure 2-2). A total distance of 8500 feet of water line isrequired. Access to private property or the highway construction area would berequired between Routes 71 and 13 for this option. The water line may besuspended along the bridge to cross Red Lion Creek.

The third option would extend the existing 16-inch water line approximately900 lineal feet from Garwood Drive to Route 71. From this intersection, the tinewould extend about 3700 feet to the Operating Engineers School along the Route 71right-of-way. From the school, the 16-inch line would extend about 400 feet southto Route 13, and an additional 3500 lineal feet to the southwest along Route 13 tothe Wagner homes (See Figure 2-3). A total of 8500 feet of water line is requiredin this option. Access or right-of-way through private property from GarwoodDrive to Route 71 must be obtained to implement this alternative, as well asaccess to private property or the highway construction area between Routes 71 and13.

The fourth option would include extending the 16-inch municipal water lines fromboth the Route 7/Route 71 intersection and the Dragon Neck Road/Route 13intersection to the Target Area. The main lines would be extended along Route 71to the school/meeting house and along Route 13 to the Andrews residence. Thisoption would entail about 12,500 lineal feet of water line extension (SeaFigure 2-4). All access and right-of-ways for installation of the water lines wouldbe along existing highways. The water tine may be suspended along the bridge tocross Red Lion Creek,

Information obtained from Wilmington Suburban indicates that problems generallyoccur whan attempting to obtain right-of-way on residential and business ownedland. Acquisition of right-of-way along an existing state maintained road isusually more easily obtained. Obtaining right-of-way for the public water lines in

002fc .„ 000020/!' * V

DRAFT

areas other than the existing highway right-of-way Is dependent upon thenegotiations with the Individual property owners and the restrictions that may beImposed In obtaining access through the highway construction area,

Other problems with extending the water lines through private property areassociated primarily with construction, Additional clearing, grading, etc,, may berequired on private property, Options 1, 2, and 3 require obtaining right-of-wayaccess through private property and/or the proposed highway construction area,Option 4 would be confined to access along existing highways.

Technical review of the proposed routes Indicates that Option 4 Is the preferredoption, Option 4 includes extension of the 16-inch line from both theRoute 7/Route 71 Intersection and the Dragon Neck Road/Route 13 Intersection to ,''"the Target Area, as shown in Figure 2-4, Choice of Option 4 as the preferred routeIs based primarily on the following: '

• Future construction for the highway relocation, at the Route 7/Route 13intersection would have a minimal affect on this option, Right-of-wayacquisition would not be delayed pending flnallzatlon of the highway ,,„,construction plans, ' l"

• No easement problems are anticipated, thereby, yielding more accuratecost estimates and minimizing schedule delays In property orright-of-way acquisition,

• Design and construction constraints In implementation are minimized,

• The construction of the. water mains in this layout provides theavailability of public.water supply to the largest number of local residents •'''<,that are affected, or may be affected, by groundwater contamination |-,'from the landfill, As can be seen from Figure 2-4, this route would makethe water line avallble to many other residents along Routes 71 and 13 in ' ijjaddition to the Target Area, $'

14

I II MM«

•~> DRAFTN""" ' '

2.3 Costs

A summary of the costs for Alternative I are presented in Table 2-1, Costs havebeen presented for two approaches, Implementing the alternative within the TargetArea only and Implementing the alternative to provide service to all residentsadjacent to the landfill property In the Expanded Area,

Initial Capital Costs

Costs estimates for extending the public water lines were based on Informationobtained from Wllmlngton Suburban and from published construction costing guides,To estimate the cost of placing the 16-Inch water supply line, an estimate of .,..$50,00 per foot was developed from the current construction costs In the area.This may be an upper range of construction costs, but was deemed appropriate, '""'since much of the proposed extension may require pavement resurfacing, Costs forconnections to the residences/facilities are based on a standard hook-up fee of

O $300 per unit and a charge of $3 per foot of distance to the home. An average .,distance of 100 feet to each-home was used, Based on the relative advantages , ,.v,.provided by Option 4, only costs for that option are presented, <

A summary of Initial capital costs Is presented In Table 2-1. The Initial capitalcost for extending the municipal water lines to the Target Area was estimated at

; $795,800, The Initial capital cost for providing service to all residents adjacent tothe landfill property In the Expanded Area was estimated at $976,700. The

' additional capital costs to provide service to the Expanded Area include theconnections to the other residences along Routes 71 and 13, the construction of thewater line along Governor Lea Road, and the connections to theresidences/facilities along Governor Lea Road,

Operation and Maintenance Costs

The operation and maintenance (0 & M) requirements for all the alternatives wereassumed to extend for a period of 30 years, It was assumed that all 0 & M costs for

15

». ,i 000022

TABLE 2-1

COST SUMMARYALTERNATIVE I: EXTEND EXISTING PUBLIC WATER LINES

TARGET AREA EXPANDED AREAS(11 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES) . (42 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES)

Initial Capital Costs Initial Capital Costs

Install Water Line Install Water Una"12,500 ft, @ S50/ft, 5625,000 15,000 ft @ S50/ft, $750,000

Residential/Facility Hookups Residential/Facility Hookups11 units® $600/unlt £ 6,600 42 units @ $600/unlt S2S.200Subtotal $631,600 Subtotal $775,200with 20% Contingency $757,900 with 20% Contingency $930,200with 5% Engineering*" $795,800 with 5% Engineering** $976,700TOTAL $795,800 . TOTAL $976,700

•Annual Operation & Maintenance Costa Annual Operation 61 Maintenance Costs

Assumed by Wilmlngton $ 0 Assumed by Wllmlngton $ 0Suburban Water Co, Suburban Water Co.

Prasant Worth 0 & M Coat $ 0 Present Work 0 & M Cost

TOTAL PROJECT COST*** $795,800 | | TOTAL PROJECT COST*** $976,700 I

* Includes Governor Lea Road** Assumes that Wllmlngton Suburban Water Co, will participate In the design .

engineering,*** Total Project Cost Includes the total Initial capital costs and the Present

Worth 0 & M cost.

16

•L| \i 000023

~> DRAFT

Alternative 1 would be Incurred by Wllmlngton Suburban, The 0 & M costs forAlternative I are, then, zero. An average usage rate for each residence to obtainthe service would be approximately $10 per month,

Present Worth Costs and Total Prolect Costs

For comparison of construction, operation, and maintenance costs of all thealternatives, the present worth costs were developed for all the alternatives, Ascan be seen In the cost summaries of all alternatives, some alternatives have highInitial construction costs and low 0 & M costs, or vice versa, In .order to evaluatethe monetary effect of longterm 0 & M costs, the present worth of eachalternative Is calculated.

&.The present worth of a future amount Is the present principal which must be "deposited at a'given Interest rate to yield the desired amount,at some future date,By calculating the present worth, the future costs for 30 years of 0 & M are

) ' compounded Into one value, This value Is the cost of 0 & M for the project Incurrent dollars which must be Invested at a specific Interest 'rate to fund the • i|;0 & M costs over the project lifetime (30 years),

The total project cost Is calculated so that all alternatives can be compared on anequal basis, The total project cost Includes the Initial capital cost and the presentworth of the 0 & M costs, Since the annual cost of 0 & M for Alternative I wasdetermined to be zero, the present worth 0 & M cost Is also zero, ForAlternative 1, the total project cost Is equal to the Initial capital cost, as there Isno 0 & M cost,

17 000024

P

v.,.i,

DRAFT '

3,0 ALTERNATIVE II: TREATMENT OF EXISTING WATER SUPPLIES

3,1 Existing Conditions

The residential wells and monitoring wells have been sampled and analyzed for bothorganic and inorganic contaminants, Results Indicate that elevated levels oforganics are present in some wells and in the aquifers that are used by residents forwater supply, The organic contaminants of concern In the residential wells arelisted In Table 3-1, Levels of Inorganics are generally below the drinking waterstandards for each substance, with the exception of iron and manganese, whichshow elevated levels in some wells, Iron and manganese are naturally high In localaquifers of this area and are probably not related to the landfill, A report entitled,the "Health and Risk Assessment for Residential Wells, Tybouts Corner Landfill,New Castle County, Delaware," dated September 1983, provides an evaluation ofhealth risks associated with continued long term use of some of the currentresidential water supplies, Thl» report Is on file at local public repositories in theTybouts Corner area,

3,2 Proposed Raaoonsa

In determining the appropriate treatment method to reduce the contamination ofresidential wells, the types and concentrations of contaminants must be examined,Any method devised must reduce the levels of contaminants at each residentialwell to acceptable levels,

As previously shown, the majority of chemicals present are volatile organlcs.Although air stripping of volatlles Is the favored treatment method over carbonadsorption, It cannot be Implemented on an Individual well basis, since units thissmall are not readily available, In addition, the removal of volatile organlcs fromthe water by this process requires that they be emitted to the atmosphere, Thiswould necessitate monitoring of the gases, and possibly treatment of the gases,

18

f p_

Ifc''p,TABLE 3-1

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN DETECTED IN RESIDENTIAL WELL WATERTYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL, DELAWARE

. (Based on Well Samplings of April and July 1983)

Maximum Concentration'_____Contaminant_____ Detected (ua/ll

Benzene 1.01,2-dichloroethane 1.2Chloroform 9,51,2-transdlchloroethene 14Methylene chloride 4,9Fluorotrlchloromethane 3,8 .Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 40Toluene , . . 24Tflchloroethene.(TCE) 1.4Tetrahydrofuran 1-10Cls-1,2 Dlchloroethene ' 1-10Aceiona 1-10Dlchlorofluoromathane 1-10Dlchlorodlfluoromethane 1-10Bromodlchloromethane < 1-10

0019

OQ002G

.

I'$£':

.,F

DRAFT

which would significantly Increase the cost of this system, Based on themonitoring requirements of air-stripping and the infeaslbllity of constructing smallresidential units, carbon adsorption was chosen as the treatment method for theorganlcs In the individual wells,

Individual carbon filters for residential use are readily available commercially,The units come in a variety of configurations, but basically require Installing theunit on the main water line leading into the residence/facility, The organlcs in thewater entering the unit would adsorb onto the carbon, resulting In a reduced levelof organlcs in the drinking water leaving the filter (effluent), The carbon In theunit would need to be replaced on a regular basis to .assure the quality of thedrinking' water, To determine costs and provide for effectiveness In the system, Itwas assumed that the carbon would be replaced every six months,

The presence of Iron and manganese in elevated levels in some residential wells,while not a, health risk at these levels, is also of concern, Both of these elementsare regulated in the Secondary Drinking Water Standards (40 CFR Part 143.3,,revised July 1,1982), which primarily govern the aesthetic qualities of drinkingwater, An excess of either of these elements gives a brownish color to porcelainfixtures and laundered goods, and may Impair the taste of the water. It wasdetermined that a treatment method should be devised to remediate this problem,

A unit similar to the type described for the removal of organics may be used forthe iron and manganese removal system, but with a synthetic resin instead ofcarbon as the filtering media, The synthetic resin would filter the Iron andmanganese from the water, Depending on the concentration levels, the filtermedia would need to be replaced regularly, For costing purposes, It was assumedthat the resin would be replaced annually,

20. fv •

41- I - , . , . °00027

'Si?m

?!'•

' ?m

•i--> DRAFT

' S.,A filtering -system has been Installed at the Woytko residence to remove ;'•contamination from the well water. Analyses from samples collected before andafter the treatment unit Indicate that it Is effective In removing contamination.Reports from the resident Indicate that the filtering system has malfunctionedseveral times.

The implementation of Alternative II Includes providing treatment to 9 of the 11 .v ,:residences/facilities In the Target Area, The well on the Wagner property has . ;w;'collapsed since being abandoned and Is no longer usable, It was assumed that new j.^wells would be screened into an uncontaminated aquifer to service these.two ' •''•''residences. No water treatment would be required for these wells,In Implementing this treatment system, it is assumed that the carbon filters will

: effectively remove all organic contaminants to acceptable levels In the water, Theonly Inorganic contaminants of concern are Iron and manganese, which will also beremoved. The filtering units are assumed to last for 30 years for costing purposes,

i""""; with regular replacement of the filtering media,

Sampling would be performed quarterly at each home, with both the influent andeffluent water to the treatment units being sampled, Samples would be analyzedfor volatile organics, iron, and manganese three quarters per year, During thefourth quarter, samples would undergo a full Hazardous Substance List (HSL) scan,

! • including organics and inorganics. The quarterly sampling performed at each homeshould determine the efficiency of the filters In removing contaminants from thewater, as well as Indicate the frequency at which the media In the units should bechanged. It was assumed that the samples would be collected by the State as part .

1 I -X1'.of the operation and maintenance of the system. ™

If a breakthrough in the carbon filter or clogging of the Iron/manganese filter Isnot detected and the units continue to be used, water of a poor quality is likely tobe consumed, The units, even when functioning properly, may not remove all

21 002992-

•I 18 000023

DRAFT

contaminants to acceptable levels, and may not work on certain contaminants,which may appear In the water at a future time, Proper operation andmaintenance of these units would be costly because of the large amount ofsampling to be performed,

3,3 Costs

Table 3-2 presents the summary of cosm for Alternative II, Construction,operation, and maintenance costs were determined for providing treatment ofexisting water-supplies for the 9 residences/facilities In the'Target Area andproviding new walls to the Wagner residences, Costs were also prepared forproviding treatment to all 42 residences/facilities In the Expanded Area adjacentto the landfill property (Including 2 wells at the Wagner residences).

Initial Capital Costs

Initial capital cost estimates Include .the, cost for the purchase and Installation of5-gallon-per-mlnute (gpm), residential, carbon filter units and the Iron/manganeseremoval system, Both systems Include an automatic backflush system, The cost toInstall the wells for the Wagner residences was also Included as a capital cost Itemfor this alternative, As summarized In Table 3-2, the total Initial capital cost forservicing the Target Area was estimated at $137,300, The total Initial capital costfor providing service to the Expanded Area adjacent to the landfill was estimatedat'$244,300.

Operation and Maintenance Costs———————————————

The operation and maintenance (0 & M) costs Include semi-annual rebedding of thecarbon, annual replacement of the Iron/manganesa filter madia, laboratoryanalyses, labor for sample collection, and general maintenance for the Wagnerwalls. Expected maintenance on the Wagner wells, Including replacement or

00299322

•I is 00002?

TABLE 3-2

. COST SUMMARYALTERNATIVE II: PROVIDE TREATMENT TO INDIVIDUAL WELLS

TARGET AREA EXPANDED AREAS(11 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES! (42 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES)

Initial Capital Costs Initial'Capital Costs

Carbon Filter Unit Carbon Filter Unit9 units @ $1500/unlt $ 13,500 40 units @ $1500/unlt $60,000

Iron/Manganese Treatment Iron/Manganese Treatment9 units @ SlOOO/unlt S 9,000 40 units @ SIOQO/unlt $40,000

Install Wagner Wells Install Wagner Wells2 wells @ $38,5QO/well $ 77,000 2 wells @ $38,500/well $77.000

Subtotal $ 99,500 Subtotal $177,000with 20% Contingency 119,400 with 20% Contingency 212,400with 15% Engineering 137,300 with 15% Engineering 244,300TOTAL $ 137,300 TOTAL $244,300

Annual Operation & Maintenance Costs Annual Operation & Maintenance Costa

Replace Carbon Filters Replace Carbon Filters9 filters @ $100/fllter $ 900 40 filters @ $100/fllter $ 4,000

Replace Iron Filters Replace Iron Filters9 filters @ $50/fliter $ 500 40 filters @ $50/<liter 2,000

Monitoring (water quality) $ 22,300 Monitoring (water quality) $ 93,600

Labor (sample collection) $ 2,000 Labor (sample collection) $ 8,000General Well Maintenance General Well Maintenance

2 wells @ $100/well $__200 2 wells @ $100/well $__200TOTAL $ 25,900 TOTAL $107,800 i

*!Present Worth 0 & M Cost Present Worth 0 & M Cost >.;,

•,feFor 30 years, 10% Interest $244,200 For 30 years, 10% Interest $1,016,200 •:•<'«

I TOTAL PROJECT COST* $381,500] | TOTAL PROJECT COST < $1,260,500 |

•Total Project Cost Includes the Total Initial Capital Costsand the Present Worth O&M Cost,

23 002,994if ., 000030

. \ :$•• , :':':{W%*j$M.

^ -> DRAFT\~

cleaning of pumps and/or the Iron treatment system, was converted to an annualcost of $100 per well, Annual 0 & M costs were estimated at $25,900 for theTarget Area and $107,800 for the Expanded Area, Operation and maintenancewould extend for a 30 year period,

: Present Worth Costs and Total Protect Cast

For purposes of comparison of the cost of this alternative to the other threealternatives, the present worth cost of 0 & M was determined. The present worthcost of 0 & M was amortized over a 30 year period with an Interest rate of 10percent. The present worth of 0 & M costs for treatment of the Individual wellswithin the Target Area (and provide water to the Wagner residences) was estimated

: at $244,200, The total project cost (Initial capital costs and present worth 0 & M• costs) to Implement Alternative II within the Target Area was estimated at

$381,500.

'' • §4'; i , ' The present worth cost of 0 & M fpr all residences/facilities within the ExpandedArea was estimated at, $1,016,200, Tha total project cost to ImplementAlternative II with the Expanded Area was estimated at $1,260,500.

K'lMfr

002995

I

I•ly. •'&

24 . . 'M:

II 000°3J. •!™ " lft...

f

•:•..' ,, ..•...,.:..»'.-I :lK>;IW-?-

I 11000032

iffl:'

DRAFT

4.0 ALTERNATIVE III: INSTALLATION OF INDIVIDUAL WELLS INTO THE. DEEP AQUIFER

4.1 Existing Conditions

The residents near the Tybouts Corner Landfill along Routes 71 and 13 obtain theirwater trom Individual water supply wells, These wells are located within severalgeologic formations at the site, The well serving the Wagner residences wasabandoned, due to poor water quality, and It has since collapsed,

Several geologic formations comprise the unconsolldated materials In this area,The lowermost Is the Potomac Formation, This formation Is overlain by theColumbia Formation, Sediments of the Merchantvllle Formation, and thewater-bearing Middle sand are located between the Columbia and PotomacFormations at some locations In this area, The Middle sand may belong either tothe Magothy Formation or the Potomac Formation. For purposes of this discussion,the Middle sand will be assumed to be located at the base of the MechantvllleFormation, ' '

' IThe Columbia Formation contains sand and gravel and the Potomac Formationcontains sand, silt, and clay, Both formations are significant water supply aquifersfor this region and residential wells near the Tybouts Corner Landfill, ThePotomac Formation Is further subdivided Into two aquifer zones, the UpperHydrologlc Zone (UHZ) and the Lower Hydrologlc Zone (LHZ), The boundarybetween these zones In this area Is not distinct. Generally, the LHZ begins atelevations of 3SO to 400 feet below mean sea level (msl),

A generalized geologic cross-section for the landfill area Is depicted In Figure 4-1,The cross-section was produced from geologic Information gathered during Phase Iand II drilling programs of the ongoing Remedial Investigation and from existingwell logs obtained from the State of Delaware, Borings In the Phase I and IIprograms did not extend Into the Lower Hydrologlc Zone,

, Q02396

25

,.<~n~.,.

APPROXIMATELEVATION(FEET MEANSEA LEVEL

50-

0-

•50-

-100-

-150-

-200-

-250-

•300-

•380-

-400-

•450-

•500-

•550-

•600-

-650-

—

V

kl>!

uU

R4

EKC£U;OX

a

'

"

13i<i

i

XM

|j

'" GEOLOGIC FORMATION

COLUMBIA FORMATIONMERCHANTVILLEFORMATIOMAQOHTY OR POTOMAC FA

POTOMAC

1

1

FORMATION

•

——————

DESCRIPTION •

SAND AND GRAVELSANDY SILT AND CLAY.WHERE PRESENTSAND REFERRED TO AS THE MIDDLE SAND'•\hUJ< THjaHbHOHL/"111'11 ' "

INTERBEDDED SAND.SILTAND CLAY. UNITREFERRED TO AS THE UPPERHYDROLQgiC,.ZQ.Ne. FOR THIS REPORT.UNIT IS A SOURCE OF MUNICIPALAND INDUSTRIAL WATER FOR THEREQION.

CLAY. UNIT IS NOT A SOURCE OF WATERSINCE IT IS RELATIVELY IMPERMEABLE.

INTERBEDDED SAND,. SILT. AND CLAY, UNITREFERRED TO AS .THE L0J&BHYDp.QLQ.qjC. ftPNE' . UNIT IS ASOURCS OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIALWATER FOR THE REGION.

MCTAMORPHIC ROCK

^002997FIGURE 4-1

GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC PROFILETYBOUTS CORNER LANDFILL.NEW CASTLE CO..DE

28 'I U

IMUSCORPORATION

Qj|jl]Mlljiirton Company

't .1;','.'.; t * i''" i«'.*wf«Vf-- M; •-"""',••)- •.'

DRAFT fcl

Information on residential wells adjacent to tha Tybouts Corner Landfill Indicatethat the residents are currently obtaining their water from the ColumbiaFormation, the Middle sand aquifer and the upper sands of the Potomac Formation(UHZ) as depicted In Figure 4-1,

Results of residential well samplings during the current Remedial InvestigationIndicate that only a few of the residential wells are contaminated by organic andInorganic contaminants, Results of monitoring well samplings during the currentRemedial Investigation though, indicate that the Columbia Formation and Middlesand aquifers are significantly contaminated near the landfill, The UHZ may becontaminated In the vicinity of the landfill by low levels of organic compounds,The potential for contamination of water wells does exist for the residents who liveIn close proximity to the landfill,

4,2 Proposed Response

The third alternative Includes tha construction of Individual water supply wells Intothe Lower Hydrologlc Zone for all of the eleven residences/facilities within theTarget Area, The wells would be Installed to a depth of approximately 450 feet toensure that an uncontamlnated source of water will be provided. Availableinformation Indicates that water of adequate quality and quantity Is available fromthe Lower Hydrologlc Zone, Locally, high iron content may necessitate treatmentto improve water color, odor, and taste,

Each well would be approximately 450 feet In depth with a 4-Inch steel casing, Itwas estimated that a 20 foot steel screen would be installed, To effectively guardagainst future contamination a double cased system would be used, A separate10-Inch outer steel .casing would ba placed In the upper 100 feet of the well, Theouter casing will be permanent and will be grouted In-place, Tha steel casingprovides back-up protection against cross-contamination from the upper aquifers(Columbia Formation and the Middle sand), A submersible pump would be Installedin each well, Hook-ups to the Individual homes would then be provided, Inaddition, an iron treatment filter would be provided for each well.

27

;. OOOC5J

DRAFT

Samples will be collected annually from each home to ensure the quality of thewater supply, Samples will be analyzed for the complete Hazardous SubstancesList organic and Inorganic parameters, It was assumed that samples would becollected by the State as part of tha operation and maintenance of the system,

4.3 Costa

Costs to Install the wells and provide 30 years of operation and maintenance wereprepared for the Target Area and for all residences/facilities adjacent to thelandfill property In the Expanded Area, These costs are summarized In Table 4-1,

Initial Capital Costs

Construction costs for Alternative III Include Installation of 11 wells of 4-Inchdiameter to an average depth of 460 feet constructed of steel riser and screen,One hundred feet of 10-Inch steel casing would also be provided In the upper 100feet of the well to prevent cross-contamination from the shallow 'aquifers,Additional Installation and 'material costs Include Installation of a submersiblepump In each well, the connections to the homes, and Installation of an Irontreatment system In each well, Drilling coats were estimated based on currentprices from drilling contractors, As Identified In Table 4-1, tha cost forconstruction of the 1 1 individual water wells for the Target Area was estimated atapproximately $583,700. The cost to Install 42 wells for all theresidences/facilities adjacent to the landfill property In the Expanded Area wasestimated at $2,228,600,

Operation and Maintenance Coats

Annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for Alternative III Include watersample monitoring, replacement of the iron treatment system filter, general wellmaintenance, and labor for sample collection, Expected maintenance on the wells,including replacement or cleaning of tha pumps and/or tha Iron treatment system,

TABLE 4-1

COST SUMMARY\ ALTERNATE III; INSTALL INDIVIDUAL HATER SUPPLY HELLS

STUDY AREA ADJACENT AREAS(11 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES) . (42 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES) ,:';

Initial Capital Costa Initial Capital Costs

Drilling Drilling11 wells 9 450', $65/ft $321,800 42 wells 9 450', $65/ft $1,228,500

Materials Materials .,11 wells 8 $6,900/well 75,900 42 wells 8 $6,900/well 289,800 f^

Pump Pump !y,'v(11 wells 8 Sl.OOO/well 11,000 42 wells 8 $l,000/well 42,000 ^

Private Residence/Facility Hookups Private Residence/Facility Hookups '^11 units 9 $300/unit 3,300 42 units 8 $300/unit 12,600 $;%

Iron Treatment for Hell Iron Treatment for Hell11 wells 8 $l,000/well 11.000 42 wells 8 $l,000/well 42.000

Subtotal • $423,000 Subtotal $1,614,900 .....with 207. Contingency $507,600 with 20X Contingency $1,937,900 <*|vwith 15% Engineering $583,700 with 15X Engineering , $2,228,600 lv'"

TOTAL . $583,700 ' . TOTAL ' $2,228,600.I

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs Annual Operations S. Maintenance Costs life'!iff-

Monitoring (water quality) $ 8,800 Monitoring (water quality) $ 33,600 , '!4:

Replace Iron Filter Replace Iron Filter11 filters 9 $50/filter 600 42 filters S $50/filter 2,100

General Hell Maintenance General Hell Maintenance11 wells 9 $100/well 1,100 42 wells 8'$100/well 4,200

Labor (Sample Collection) 500 Labor (Saraple Collection) 2.000

TOTAL $ 11,000 TOTAL $ 41,900

Present Worth 0 S, H Cost Present worth 0 & M Cost

For 30 years, 107. interest $103,700 For 30 years, 10% interest $ 395,000

| TOTAL PROJECT COST* $687,400 | | TOTAL PROJECT COST* $2,623,600 |

*Total Project Cost Includes the Total Initial Capital Costs andthe Present Worth O&M Cost.

V;'ft; -

...:_.':...: Vir.iS .•.::• !;\-]::!..itl!il :iliSf ^

DRAFT

was converted to an annual cost of $100 per well, The high Iron content within theLHZ may cause the pumps to become clogged more rapidly than from water with alower Iron content. The water quality, monitoring was assumed to IncludeHazardous Substances List organlcs and Inorganics, The annual operation andmaintenance costs for Alternative III were estimated at $11,000 for the TargetArea and $41,900 for the Expanded Area adjacent to the landfill property.

Present Worth Cost

For comparative purposes, the present worth cost of 0 & M was calculated, 0 & M.costs were amortized over a 30 year period at a Interest rate of 10 percent, Thepresent worth of 0 & M costs for the Target Area was estimated at $103,700,Including the Initial construction and the present worth 0 & M costs, the totalproject cost for Implementing Alternative III within the Target Area was estimatedat $687,400

The present worth of 0 & M costs when supplying new. wells to all 42residences/facilities adjacent to the landfill In the Expanded Area was calculatedat $395,000. The total project cost, for the Expanded Area was estimated at$2,823,600,

GO30

00003G

*'•&•'.

I

f-I

mffe:

,WTOWW,: .-nrIM';Vf;lt;Jf:|t;J

':• . • v'.I; |'\Y /.'V '','

DRAFT

approximate depth of 500 feet, and distributing the well water to the elevenresidences/facilities in the Target Area, The well would be drilled Into the LHZ to. • • ,provide an uncontaminated water supply source, Water pumped from this deep 'well

' , , ' ,would be stored In an elevated tank and distributed to the study area homes in8 inch water lines.

The proposed well and storage tank location as depicted in Figure 5-1 is about1000 feet north of the Wovtko residence on U, S, Route 71, The size of the tank Isestimated to be 100,000 gallons with the capability to contain a 7 day water supplyreserve. Water tank capacity and size of the distribution lines was based on ausage rate of 100 gallons per capita per day, An average of 4 occupants perresidence was used, A factor of 2.5 was used to Increase the required storagecapacity to account for peak usage,

From the water tower, the water distribution line would extend to the Woytkoresidence along Route 71, then to the east along Route 71 to the Operating

31

(

•*>.:•,-m'/*.«':

In5,0 ALTERNATIVE IV: INSTALL CENTRAL WATER SUPPLY WELL AND

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM . •

5.1 Existing Conditions

As described previously, residents along Routes 71 and 13 obtain water suppliesfrom the Columbia, Middle sand, and UHZ aquifers, Current data Indicate thatthese aquifers are contaminated and the UHZ may be contaminated, The potentialfor using the Lower Hydrologlc Zone (LHZ) as a source of potable water for acentral water system Is Investigated In this alternative, •

5,2 Proposed Response

. Implementation of Alternative IV involves drilling a 10 Inch diameter well to an ,

•life','.'.i1''';

f'1

, rnurvKu r /-- WATER SUPPLY WELL i / SCHOOL ANDAND WATER TOWER-p,7 V\MEETIN8 HO!

———— EXISTIN3 16 INCH MUNICIPALWATER LINES

Illlllll PROPOSED WATER LINEEXTENSION

rREFERENCE' SAINT OEORQE3 QUAORANQLE, DELAWARE- NEW CASTLE CO,, 7,5 MINUTE SERIES, I9S3.PHOTOREVISED1970, US, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,

003003ALTERNATIVE gi CENTRAL WATER SUPPLY FIGURE 5-1

WELL AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMTY BOUTS CORNER LAND FILL,NEW CASTLE CO..DE

SCALE'!"=1000'

32

'ORATION

IfEngineers school and Meeting House, As shown in Figure 5-1, the water line would !';

',K1>thon extend over to Route 13 and continue along the Route 13 right-of-way to theWagner residences,, A total of approximately 5700 lineal !cac cf water linn wouldbe required, Sufficient head would be supplied by the elevated "crage tank tooperate the distribution system by gravity flow.

The supply well will be of S-inch steel water pipe, For costing purposes, it wasestimated that a screen of SO feet In length would be used to achieve the required .pumping rates, In order to protect against potential cross-contamination from theshallower aquifers a double cased construction will be used, The upper 100 feet ofthe well will be cased with an additional 10-Inch diameter steel water pipe,

Prior to drilling the water supply well, an exploratory borehole will be drilled tothe approximate depth of the proposed well, During drilling, cuttings will becollected to geologically characterize the borehole, Cuttings will also be sent to alaboratory for a grain-size analysis. The grain-size analysis will be used to 7.,accurately size the openings In the well screen, and size the gravel pack around the ••';''•screen to achieve the proper flow rates, Additional data to determine thesubsurface geology and evaluate the aquifer characteristics will be gathered bygeophysically logging the borehole. The geophysical logs and cuttings logs will beused to size the length of the screen, Pumping tests may also be conducted todetermine the well capacity and hydrologlc data for the aquifer,

In addition to the deep well and the distribution system, an observation well will beinstalled to a depth of approximately ISO feet into the Upper Hydrologlc Zone,The observation well will be used to determine the hydraulic affects on the shallow , ...aquifer by pumping from the deep well and evaluate the potential forcross-contamination between the two aquifers, The observation well will beconstructed of 4-Inch diameter steel casing and screen,

33

000040U 18

?>'

DRAFT

5.3 Coitta

The costs (or 'Alternative IV were also prepared for the two evaluation approaches,These approaches Include providing service to the Target Area only, and providingservice to all residences adjacent to the landfill property In the Expanded Area.

Initial Capital Costs

Initial capital costs for Alternative IV Include the exploratory program, Installationof the supply well and observation well, connections to the residences/facilities,Installation of the storage tank, Installation of the distribution lines, acquisition ofproperty for the well and storage tank areas, and the acquisition of right-of-waysthrough private property or the highway construction area, The total capital costshave been estimated at $759,100 for the Target Area. The total capital costs havebeen estimated at $1,447,200 to provide service to all residents In the ExpandedArea adjacent to the landfill property. A breakdown,of Initial capital costs jsprovided In Table 5-1, . • ' '

Operation and Maintenance Costs

Operation and maintenance costs for Alternative IV Include annual monitoring(Hazardous Substance List parameters) of the water supply and observation well toInsure the quality of the water, service charges for use of the system, and generalservice and upkeep charges for maintenance of the system. Annual service andupkeep costs have been estimated at 3 percent of the Initial capital costs. Asoutlined In Table 5-1, annual 0 Ex M costs for Alternative IV were estimated at$28,200 for the Target Area, Annual 0 & M costs were estimated at $54,400 whenserving those areas adjacent to the landfill In the Expanded Area. Followingconstruction, It Is anticipated that the entire system will become property of theState of Delaware and will be operated and maintained by the State,

34 ;,.

u

'••,*•

000041,

TABLE 5-1

COST SUMMARYALTERNATIVE IVi INSTALL CENTRAL HATER SUPPLY HELL

AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

STUDY AREA ADJACENT AREAS. (11 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES) (42 RESIDENCES/FACILITIES)

Initial Capital Costs Initial Capital Coats

Hell Installation $ 60,000 Hell Installation $ 60,000Drilling and Materials Drilling and Materials

Pump Pump1 Submersible, installed $ 6,000 1 Submersible, installed $ 6,000

Exploratory & $61,000 Exploratory & $ 61,000Observation Hells , Observation Hells

Exploratory borehole, Exploratory boreholegeophysics pump test geophysics pump testobservation well observation well

Hater Tower & Hater Line $386,500 Hater Tower & Hater Line '$ 866,500Distribution System _ Distribution System

Individual Hookup , • Individual HookupH Units '8 $600/unit . $ 6,600 42 Units 8 $600/unit ' '25,200

Property Acquisition S 30.000 Property Acquisition " $""30,000

Subtotal $550,100 Subtotal $1,048,700Plus 20R Contingency $660,100 Plus 20% Contingency $1,258,400Plus 15X Engineering $759,100 Plus 15X Engineering $1,447,200

TOTAL . $759,100 TOTAL $1,447,200

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs Annual Operations & Maintenance Coats

Service Charges Service Charges11 units 19 5200/unit $ 2,200 42 units 8 $200/unit $ 8,400

Monitoring MonitoringHater Quality Analysis $ 1,000 Hater Quality Analysis $ 1,000

General Service/Upkeep $ 25.000 General Service/Upkeep $ 45,OOP

TOTAL $ 28,200 TOTAL $ 54,400

35

•I 18 000042

.-

i,

,'\"!iMLi

'TABLE 5-1COST SUMMARYALTERNATIVE IV: INSTALL CENTRAL HATER SUPPLY HELL AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMPAGE TWO

Present Worth 0 i. M Coat* Present Worth 0 & M Cost*

For 30 years, 10% interest $262,800 For 30 years, 10% interest $ 512,800

I TOTAL PROJECT COST* $1,024,9001| TOTAL PROJECT COST* $1.960.000 |

* Total Project Cost Includes Total Initial Capital Costs,and Present Worth 0 d M Cost.

oo^36

» „ OI)CO«

"

WJV"

DRAFT

Present Worth Costs and Total Project Cost

For comparative purposes, the present worth of 0 & M costs for Alternative IV wascalculated. The 0 & M costs were amortized over a 30 year period at an Interestrate of 10 percent, The present worth of O&M costs for the Target Area wereestimated at 5255,800, Including the Initial capital costs and present worth O&Mcosts, the total cost project cost to implement Alternative IV within the TargetArea was estimated at $1,024,900.

For supplying alternate water service to all residences/facilities adjacent to thesite In the Expanded Area, the present worth of 0 & M costs was estimated at$912,800, Including Initial capital costs, and present worth of O&M costs, the totalproject cost to Implement Alternative IV to the 42 residences/facilities In theExpanded Area was estimated at $1,960,000.

37

.'I *• OOCC44

s

I$:•!IE

*>"

VF'1

Vr ^ DRAFT

6,0 SUMMARY

This Focus Feasibility Study has been an Investigation of possible alternatives bywhich residents near the Tybouts Corner Landfill could receive an alternativewater supply, Currently, residents and other facilities obtain their water fromIndividual supply wells In shallow groundwater aquifers, These aquifers have beenIdentified as contaminated or have a potential to be contaminated In the area ofthe landfill,

In evaluating the feasibility of the various water, supply alternatives, twoapproaches were Investigated, The first approach evaluated the cost andfeasibility of supplying alternate water supplies to 11 residences/facilitiesIdentified within a Target Area near the site, These 11 residences/facilities wereIdentified as having a water supply source that Is contaminated or may becomecontaminated. The residences/facilities .identified in the Target Area wouldreceive an alternate water supply whatever alternative is chosen.

I By the second approach, alternate water supplies for all residences/facilitiesadjacent to the landfill property was investigated, Forty-two residences/facilitiesare located adjacent to the landfill properties, The degree to which all theseresidences/facilities may be affected by future contamination can not bedetermined at this point, Future remedial measures at the landfill may also affectcurrent groundwater flow regimes for some intermediate period, thereby affectingareas where groundwater Is not currently contaminated, For these and otherreasons, the Expanded Area was Included as a second approach In evaluating thepotential alternatives,

Several advantages and disadvantages can be Identified for each alternative.Alternative I provides a reliable source of water, has low operation andmaintenance costs, and would not be affected by the proposed highway

(&38 000040

' > 13

!a*»-ife

'•$ '••ftlitI

I?*.••i.

i

„. „.„.-,-.. ";'.' ' <v

Vx- ^ • DRAFT

construction or future remedial actions to be Implemented at the site, Thisalternative appears to have few disadvantages, except for the higher Initial capitalcost that is required for construction.

Alternative II may be the quickest alternative to Implement, and it has a low Initial'capital cost, Monitoring requirements to insure the reliability of the filteringunits, however, would be costly. Since contamination has already been Identified Inaquifers used by residential wells, this appears to be the least reliable of thealternatives In providing a long-term source of uncontamlnated water supply, Theuse of carbon filters to remove organic contamination may not be the mosteffective treatment methodology, Other more effective treatment methods (air'stripping) are not applicable to individual residences,

The reliability of Alternatives III and IV, which utilize the Lower Hydrologlc Zone(LHZ) of the Potomac Formation, may also be questionable, Contamination of theLHZ may oc'cur with time, Monitoring requirements of Individual wells tatAlternative III would also be costly, Implementation of Alternative IV assumes theState will' operate and maintain the water supply and distribution system, this [!'

1 function would probably be better performed and less costly If provided through alocal water authority,

Table 6-1 Is a summary of the total project costs that were developed for each of1 ' the four alternatives to provide alternate water supplies, The total project costs

Include the Initial capital costs for construction, and the present worth of theoperation and maintenance (0 & M) costs for each alternative, As describedpreviously, the present worth of the 0 & M costs is calculated so that a cost Incurrant dollars can be evaluated over 30 years to represent the long term monetaryaffect of 0 & M, By determining the present worth cost of 0 & M, and calculatingthe total project cost, the alternatives can be compared on an equal basis,

39

<& 13

,„• -...wiviii..-__n '

'""V ' • •\- TABLE 6-1

TOTAL PROJECT COST SUMMARY* FOR ALTERNATIVE HATER SUPPLIES feS,TYBOUTS CORNER .LANDFILL !'•'"'NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DE

TARGET AREA EXPANDED AREA(11 RESIDENCES/ (42 RESIDENCES/

ALTERNATIVES FACILITIES) FACILITIES) ._

Alternative I: Extend ExistingPublic Hater Lines $795,800 $976,700

Alternative II: Provide Treatmentto Individual Hells > $381,500 ' $1,260,500

Alternative III; Install IndividualHater Supply Hells $687,400 $2,623,600

Alternative IV; Install CentralHater Supply Hell andDistribution System $1,024,900 $1,960,000

"',•,'• t''/','.fc

. . ^.Total Project Cost includes Total Initial Capital Costs and Total PresentHorth Operation and Maintenance Cost. '«,,;.M'.-

€&•

1.

40

; 000047t if

i&L)

DRAFT

As Identified In Tabla 6-1, Alternative II, Provide Treatment to Individual Wells,has the lowest total project cost at $381,500 for providing alternate water suppliesto the Target Area, Based on the extent of monitoring that Is required to ensurethat the treatment units are functioning properly, the majority of the total projectcost for this alternative Is for 0 & M costs, Total project cost for the other threealternatives Is within the range of $700,000 to $1,000,000, Costs for thesealternatives were predominantly for Initial capital outlays, The total project costfor Alternative I Extend the Existing Public Water Lines, Is entirely Initial capitaloutlay,

41

4 ia

o

000043

ff jWhen evaluating total project cost (or. the Expanded Area, It can be seen that theranking of the alternatives by cost changes dramatically, It can be seen that anIncrease In cost of only approximately 20 percent is required for Alternative I toprovide service for all 42 residences/facilities within the Expanded Area. Theother alternatives require an Increase in cost of 100 to 300 percent to provideservice to the Expanded, Area, These Increases are associated with the degree ofmonitoring that Is required or the amount of additional 'construction that isrequired for these alternatives to service the Expanded Area. ' ' j$