REMEDIAL ACTION MASTER PLANFOR FACET ENTERPRISES SITE

Elaira Heights, NY

Work Assignment Z-l-12Under

Contract No. 68-03-1612

February 17, 1983

ByC.C. Johnson and Associates, Inc.

C300582*

cP

L

Irr

REMEDIAL ACTION MASTER PLANFOR

FACET ENTERPRISES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Nos.

Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. (COM) Cover Letter

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. ....................... i

Introduction. ....................... iPurpose of this Report. .................. iGeneral Approach. ..................... iiSite Location ....................... viStatement of the Problem. ................. viBackground. ........................ xRecommendations ...................... xiii

1.0 DATA COMPILATION AND EVALUATION .............. 1

1.1 Objective. ...................... 11.2 Background ...................... 1

1.2.1 Site Location ................. 11.2.2 Site History. ................. 1

1.3 Environmental Setting. ................ 81.4 Hazardous Materials. ................. 151.5 Conceptual Site Model - Haste Migration. ....... 211.6 Data Limitations ................... 231.7 Site Inspection. ................... 231.8 Safety and Health Considerations ........... 25

2.0 REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITES ................ 26

2.1 Initial Remedial Measures. ............... 262.1.1 Objective ................... 262.1.2 Data Analysis ................. 262.1.3 Recommended Initial Remedial

Measures. ................... 272.2 Source Control Remedial Actions. ........... 27

2.2.1 Objective ................... 272.2.2 Potential Source Control Remedial

Alternatives. ................. 282.3 Off-Site Remedial Actions. .............. 32

2.3.1 Objective ................... 322.3.2 Potential Off-Site Remedial Alternatives. ... 33 g

2.4 Post Closure Monitoring. ............... 35 Q2.4.1 Objective ................... 352.4.2 Approach and Type of System .......... 35 o

2.5 Community Relations. ................. 35 *_,2.5.1 Objective ................... 352.5.2 Community Relations Plan. ........... 36 <-•

00roen

'!

u.Page Nos.

3.0 SITE INVESTIGATION WORK PLAN. ............... 37

3.1 Objective. ...................... 373.2 Safety and Health Plan ................ 373.3 Topographic Survey .................. 393.4 Identification and Characterization of Disposal

Areas. ........................ 403.5 Rydrogeological Survey ................ 443.6 Surface Water Investigation. ............. 523.7 Laboratory Analysis. ................. 553.8 Schedule for Remedial Planning Activities. ...... 563.9 Costs. ........................ 58

REFERENCES ........................... 60

ATTACHMENTS

EXHIBITS

APPENDIX A - Revised Proposal to Perform an Investigation of Geologyand Groundwater Conditions at Facet Enterprises, Elmira,New York - Radian Corporation.

L

rCO

r

'-1

I

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. . Page

1 General Approach for Remedial Action. .......... iv

1-1 Location of Elmira Heights, NY. ............. 2

1-2 Location of Facet Enterprises, Inc. ........... 3

1-3 Facet Enterprises - Waste Disposal Site Locations .... 4

1-4 Elmira Heights Subregion Showing Water Table Contoursand Streamlines from Lagoon ............... 14

1-5 Facet Enterprises - Sample Point Locations. ....... 17

3-1 Procedure for Sampling Waste Disposal Areas ....... 42

3-2 Approximate Groundwater Monitoring Well Locationsfrom Radian's Proposal. ................. 45

3-3 Approximate Groundwater Monitoring Well Locations .... 50

3-4 Surface Water and Sediment Sample Locations ....... 53

3-5 Facet Enterprises - Remedial Action Schedule ...... 59

oo

CD

L

L

fCr

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Page

1-1 Nells Producing within the Elmira Heights Subregion. ...... 13

1-2 Streamline Data, Elmira Heights Area .............. 13

1-3 Samples Collected at Facet Enterprises, Inc. ..........16

3-1 Priority Pollutants Proposed by Radian for Analysisin Core Samples Collected at the Facet Site. ..........47

3-2 RCRA Groundwater Analyses Proposed by Radian ..........48

3-3 Facet Enterprises Detailed Site Investigation -Samples Requiring Laboratory Analysis. .............56

ooo

00N>00

1»;LiL

LIST OF EXHIBITS

Exhibits

1-1 Chemung River Basin Aquifers

1-2 Surficial Geology - Newtown Creek Basin

1-3 Cross Sections - Newtown Creek Aquifer

1-4 Aquifer Thickness - Newtown Creek Aquifer

1-5 Potentiometric Surface - Newtown Creek Aquifer

1-6 Well Yield - Newtown Creek Aquifer

ooo

00N>

i.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment

A Facet Detailed Site Investigation - Consultant Direct Labor

B Facet Detailed Site Investigation - Other Direct Costs

ooo

00OJo

i

i

r

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

This Remedial Action Master Plan (RAMP) is prepared in accordancewith the proposed rules of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) (F.R. Vol.47 No. 49, March 12, 1982) originally published pursuant to Section 311 ofthe Federal Hater Pollution Control Act. Remedial actions are thoseresponses to releases on the National Priority List that require long-termand expensive efforts to prevent or mitigate the migration of a release ofhazardous substances. The specific aspects of remedial actions are pre-sented as Phase IV, Section 300.67 of the NCP. This RAMP will form thebasis of a scoping decision to be made by the EPA or the New York StateDepartment of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) as to the remedialinvestigations, feasibility studies and other on-site or off-site remedialactions particularly applicable to the hazardous waste sites discussedherein. The scoping decision allows the implementation of limited remedialactions, where the RAMP has identified such action as appropriate, in ashort time. It is anticipated that this RAMP will serve as the primaryplanning document for all remedial action activities at the site followingEPA Region and Headquarters review. The final version incorporating EPA'scomments is anticipated to form the basis of EPA - NY State cooperativeagreement.

Purpose of this Report

The purpose of this RAMP is to assemble and analyze existing data, toidentify the scope and sequence of remedial projects, and to present acomprehensive schedule for implementing remedial actions. The planaddresses the phasing requirements identified in the National ContingencyPlan and provides order of magnitude cost estimates for each project.A draft work statement for the first project to be initiated at each siteis included along with data limitations, community relations strategies,and identification of any special problems in project implementation.

oo

00u>

I!LL

^

L

L

General Approach

This RAMP is prepared from a review of existing relevant information.This includes research reports, and information from the files in the NewYork State Department of Environemntal Conservation, the New York StateDepartment of Health, the Chemung County Health Department and the Environ-mental Protection Agency. Based on this information, remedial actionmeasures are evaluated. The remainder of this section discusses thevarious types of remedial measures as set forth in the NCP.

There are three types of remedial actions identified in the NCPincluding:

o Initial Remedial Measureso Source Control Remedial Actionso Off-site Remedial Actions

Initial Remedial Measures are used when a significant threat topublic health, welfare or the environment is found to exist and when theproblems causing the threat have a straightforward solution available. Themeasures should be initiated before selection of a final remedy and must befeasible and cost-effective. Initial Remedial Measures require a minimumof planning, can be completed quickly and are consistent with the finalremedy. Examples of Initial Remedial Measures include: fencing of sitesfor security precautions, removal of hazardous waste in exposed drums thatpose a threat of fire or explosion, and construction of drainage ditches toprovide an effective drainage control system.

Source Control Remedial Actions are taken when substantial concentra-tions of hazardous substances remain on-site, barriers to retard migrationof hazardous substances are inadequate, and/or there is a serious threat topublic health, welfare, or the environment. Source Control RemedialActions are not appropriate if all hazardous substances have migrated fromthe area of original location or if the lead agency determines that thematerial cannot be adequately contained. An example of source controlremedial action is the removal of subsurface wastes that are contaminatinga drinking water supply.

oo

00U)

ii

*

I

I:

L

Off-site Remedial Actions are taken when Source Control RemedialActions are inappropriate or not effective in mitigating a significantthreat posed by the migration of hazardous substances from the site.Off-site Remedial Actions may include provision of permanent alternativewater supplies, management of a drinking water aquifer plume or treatmentof contaminated drinking water aquifers. Source Control and Off-siteRemedial Actions can proceed in parallel if appropriate.

The general approach for a remedial action investigation is presentedin Figure 1. The first step in the remedial action activities is tocompile the pertinent existing data on the site and to evaluate the datafor accuracy and completeness. One visit to the site is scheduled toverify existing data, observe first-hand the problem areas, and to meetwith the owner, if appropriate, or local representatives familiar with thehistory of the site. NO air, water, or soil samples are taken from thesite at this time. Limitations of the existing data are also identified.

The second step is to scope the appropriate remedial actions, ifthere is sufficient information. The scoping decision requires a detailedreview of existing data on the site background, environmental setting,hazardous material characterization, and data limitations. Based on thisreview, appropriate Initital Remedial Measures, Source Control and Off-siteRemedial Actions can be scoped in an effort to reduce a threat to thepublic health, welfare, or environment.

The most cost-effective Initial Remedial Measure is selected andimplemented with a minimum level of additional site investigation, feasi-bility study, and engineering design. After the Initital Remedial Measuresare complete, scoping of the next phases for action proceeds. Based on thescoping decision it may be necessary to initiate a remedial site investi-gation and feasibility study for Source Control and Off-site RemedialActions during which a limited number of alternatives are evaluated fortheir feasibility and cost-effectiveness.

2?noo

CD00co

iii

COLLECT AND EVALUATEEXISTING SITE DATA

OBTAINENFORCEMENT PLAN

FIGURE 1 APPROACH FOR

SITE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION

PREPARE REMF.DIAL ACTIONMASTER PLAN (RAMP)

1 r

INITIAL REMEDIALMEASURES

^

IDENTIFY DATAREQUIREMENTS

l

CONDUCTREMEDIAL INV

FEASIBILtAND D

SCOP INCDECISION

^

SOURCE CONTROL[ REMEDIAL PLANNING

^

IS DATA ADEQUATETO PROPOSE REMEDIAL

ALTERNATIVES AND PERFORMFEASIBILITY STUDY?

-e. IDENTIFY ADDITIONALDATA REQUIREMENTS

1

LIMITEDESTICATION,TY STUDY:SICN

4

IMPLEMENTCOST EFFECT I VB

ALTERNATIVE

DEVELOP ANUMBER OF Al

1

LIMITEDTERNATIVES

rSCREEN

ALTERNATIVES

« ————— CONDUCTINVEST

^r

^ f

OFF -SITEREMEDIAL PLANNING

+

IS DATA ADEQUATETO PROPOSE REMEDIAL

ALTERNATIVES AND PERFORMFEASIBILITY STUDY?

1REMEDIALCATION

^DEVELOP A LIMITED

NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES

^ t

SCREENALTERNATIVES

1 1

FEASIBILITY OFALTERNATIVES

1SELECT COST EFFECTIVE

ALTERNATIVES

FEASIBILITY OFALTERNATIVES

1

SELECT COST EFFECTIVEALTERNATIVES

too

DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT___ REMEDY______

DES ICN AND IMPLEMENTREMEDY.

\i\iiir.rr

In some situations, Off-site Remedial Actions may be necessary becausehazardous substances have migrated off the site or are not contained. Theneed for Off-Site Remedial Actions is often dependent on the outcome ofsite investigations and cannot be recommended without additional datacollection and analysis.

Post-closure monitoring is the last phase of the RAMP. This phaseis important because it closes the loop on the remedial action activitiesand provides a basis for judging the need for and the effectiveness ofremedial actions at a site. The post closure monitoring program is depen-dent on the remedial actions implemented and the potential for contaminantmigration from the site.

Critical to any RAMP is the early involvement of the affected commu-nity. A community relations strategy usually includes formation of anadvisory committee and organization of public meetings. The communityrelations plan is designed to involve the public in all stages of activi-ties associated with remedial actions contemplated.

Oo

00U)U1

i

i

r

Site Location

Facet Enterprises is located approximately 3/4 of a mile north ofthe city of Elmira in Chemung County, New York. The plant is situatedwest of Route 14 at 18th Street (see Figures 1-1 and 1-2).

Statement of the Problem

The Facet Enterprises hazardous waste site located in Chemung County,New York is listed on the US Environmental Protection Agency'sList of 418 top-priority disposal sites. The site is eligible for fundsunder the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Lia-bility Act (CERCLA) of 1980, known as "Superfund." Remedial actionsare subject to the requirements of State participation pursuant to Section104(c}(3) of CERCLA. Negotiations are anticipated between the DSEPA andthe current and past site owners over responsibility for cleanup activi-ties. Superfund monies may be used for a portion of the site cleanup.

At the Facet site, the major environmental threat is a result ofimproper on-site disposal of plating waste, grinding waste, spent solvents,oil sludge and waste oil into 3 waste burial areas, a covered oil lagoon,and a sand filter which was also used as a sludge drying bed (see Figure1-3). Sampling investigations conducted at Facet have shown high levels ofa number of metals in all of the disposal areas as well as PCBs in thecovered oil lagoon. These uncontrolled hazardous wastes have contaminatedsurface and possibly groundwaters. Surface water from the Facet site wassampled from the two ditches which carry it to a nearby stream. Highlevels of TCE and other volatile organic compounds were detected in thesamples. In addition, sediment samples collected from the bottom of theseditches contained high concentrations of metals. Groundwater contaminationwith TCE has been detected at the Facet process water wells approximately2500 feet east of the site, and also at the Sullivan Street wells southeastof Facet. There are other potential sources of this aquifer contaminationin the area and the available information is inadequate for identifying £Ja specific source or sources. There is also a lack of information on

oo

00U)

vi

FIGURE 1-1

LOCATION OFELMIRA HIEGHTS, NY [

i FIGURE 1-2 LOCATION OF FACET ENTERPRISES INC

_-«••-' I —V u fri'te. ;^-^- I 0S rf*-.S»r**~ ~~*1 * « B _ -r*- "V.j j?^ei-^ . ^——

*%!/ \ ,iw \TI'WoTA.tStkA '•A *5jJ ^^** '.

OPEN DITCH

NORTH

LEGEND

1-Burial Area II2-Burial Area 123-Burial Area 134-Covered Oil Lagoon5-Old Sand Filter

FIGURE 1-3 FACET ENTERPRISES - WASTE DISPOSAL SITE LOCATIONS

ioo

I'*:(

I

the hydrogeology of the Facet site which compounds the problem. This RAMPaddresses the problem by carefully evaluating the available data anddeveloping a site investigation work plan for obtaining the necessaryinformation for remedial action planning.

Background

Facet Enterprises Motor Components Division is an active motorparts manufacturing firm occupying a 31 acre site. On-site disposalof metal wastes-liquids and sludges, oil wastes, solvent wastes and othermaterials-occurred from at least the 1940's to late 1978 or early 1979.NYSDEC documents indicate that the majority of the disposal was done bythe former plant owner, the Bendix Corporation. Facet Enterprises tookover the plant in 1976, and discontinued all on-site disposal except thatof metal hydroxide sludge from their industrial wastewater treatment plantto a sludge drying bed. This practice was discontinued in 1979. Exten-sive grading was done by Facet in 1979 as well as the construction ofditches to divert surface water around the waste disposal areas. Facili-ties were also constructed for the collection and treatment of leachatefrom the disposal areas. These actions were taken in compliance with aconsent decree entered into by Facet Enterprises and the New York StateDepartment of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC).

The site consists of a relatively flat area containing the facility's30 buildings and an area with slopes of 5 to 10% rising to the west inwhich the disposal areas are located. These disposal areas include threesolid and liquid waste burial areas, one covered oil lagoon, and onecovered sand filter which was also used as a sand drying bed. All ofthese facilities are presently inactive. There is also a pond areawhich collects leachate from the solid and liquid disposal sites. Thisleachate is stabilized with lime and pumped into the plant's wastewatertreatment system. Wastes known to have been disposed on the Facet propertyinclude: cyanide salt heat treating waste, heavy metal sludge from awastewater treatment plant, zinc, nickel, cadmium, chromium, polymer «jcoagulating agents, chloride, sulfides, solvents and various quenching and Ocutting oils. oo

CP*»o

^^/i^m...., ...\*b&V-*rfrM#

. V .•<-\:-n '•"::;;?=- \ \\>/-•. U M>~- >.\

R S.OOfo52OOO

oo

00

POTEHTIQMCTtIC COHTOUR—lliov* apprOltMt* ll-tltude «t which v*t*r vould (tand In tightlycased w*lla. Contour tnttival 10 (cat.HatlonalCcod*ttc Vertical Da tun of HJ». Krrm Indl-catea direction of fround water Clou.

DOUNMIIY—daahed «l>ere lull e.tanl olaquiCer la not ahown

WELL STHBOLS

00414000 COWUNITT MATER stsrm WELL on HELL ritLD-I nunbeied by Hex York stata Department of Health

OATH POINTx

Ol OBSERVATION HELt—veil for which hydroqraph laahown, numbered by U.S. Ceoloflcal Survey

MAJOR INFLOW TO AO.UtrEB.--itrea« and aroundvatar(low alonf «aln valleya beyond entent of mappedaquifer

MAJOR OUTrUW PROM AOUIFCR—atrea* and oround-vater flow beyond extent of «pped aquifer

NOTE

The contouri repreaent the eatlmated averaqa altitude oftha water table In the aquifer baaed on aurface-water levelaand water lavela In limited wella meaaured In the period H)lto ltd with moat of the data from the late UiO'a and earlyIWO'a (Randall, l»'J and Relaenauer. 1*77). Hater levelahave not changed over the yeara other than aaaaonally. Thewaiir table fluctuatee aeaaonally In reaponae to recharge anddlacharqe. Recharge occur• generally over the entire aquiferwhereever the land aurface la permeable. Induced recharqefrom atreaaia occura where pumpinq wella cauae reveraed qra-dlenta. Olecharo/e occura principally aa Inflow to atreama andaa pumpaqe from wella. Seaaonal fluctuatlona are laaat along,•a)or atreama and lakea.

Fluctuation! ate repreaented by the hydroqraph of thaobaervatlon well cm 41 In the eaatern part of the aquifer. Thawater-level fluctuatlona are believed repreaentatIve of theaquifer for the period of record.

Sourca: MHIar at al. 1982

EXHIBIT 1-5

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE-

NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

, I,(.

ri:

i;' I"

Facet site is located on the western boundary of the NewtownCreek aquifer which consists of outwash gravels and alluvial depositsextending fron north of Borseheads to eastern Elraira (see Exhibit 1-5) .Regional groundwater flow in the aquifer is generally fron northwestto southeast. Preliminary indications are that groundwater flow fromthe Facet site would be in an east-southeasterly direction becoming moresoutherly towards the Sullivan Street public water supply wells located inone of the most productive sections of the aquifer.

A high concentration of 44 ppb of TCE has been found in a FacetEnterprises well located 2500 feet east of the disposal areas. WhileFacet may be a contributor to this pollution, other sources upgradient ofthe well may also be partially or full contributory to it. Insufficientdata exists for a definitive answer.

•A public water supply well, the Kentucky Avenue Hell, is locatedabout one mile north (upgradient) of the plant site. This well is part ofa public water supply system which serves over 60,000 residents in Elmira,Elmira Heights, and Horseheads. The well is presently closed due tocontamination by trichloroethylene (TCE) . The exact source of the well'scontamination has not been definitely determined but is more likely to beupgradient sources rather than Facet. Two miles downgradient of the plantsite are the two Sullivan Street public water supply wells. Low levelcontamination with TCE has been detected in these wells. Facet may possi-bly be a contributor to this contamination. Groundwater modeling studiesin 1977 using the Chemung River Basin Groundwater Model have shown thatcontaminated flow from a lagoon probably located at the Facet site would bein the direction of the Sullivan Street Wells and affect 3 wells locatedabout two-thirds of the distance to the Sullivan Street Wells in 14 to 20years from entry into the aquifer.

In summary, the Newtown Creek aquifer is being contaminated by hazar-dous wastes which pose a threat to the public water supply as well asprivate wells. Facet Enterprises waste disposal sites as well as othersnorth of Facet may be contributors to this problem. Detailed site investi-gations are needed to define the problem, identify and characterize thewaste disposal sources, locate the contamination plume and determine theextent of the pollution prior to development of remedial action plans.

oo

00

Migration of pollutants from the Facet site by surface water routeshas been demonstrated. The persistence of the pollution off-site andits significance have not been determined. While this nay be a lesserhazard than the potential groundwater pollution, investigations are neces-sary to define the problem.

Recommendations

This RAMP recommends that no initial remedial measures be undertakenin view of those implemented by Facet Enterprises under the consent decreeof 1979. It also recommends that detailed site investigations be under-taken prior to the development of any Source Control or Off-site RemedialActions. A site investigation work plan has been presented together withcost estimates and a schedule. The site investigation work plan is com-prised of the following sections:

o Safety and Health Plano Topographic Surveyo Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areaso Hydrogeological Surveyo Surface Hater Investigationo Laboratory Analysis

Safety and Health Plan

This would include the collection and analysis of (a) air samples toestablish ambient air quality on and off site, and (b) personal air samplesfrom on-site personnel. Photoionization measurements of organic andinorganic vapors, and a radioactive waste survey (gamma) would also beundertaken. On-site personnel would be required to undergo a baselinemedical profile or a complete physical examination and use appropriateprotection equipment based on the findings of the above surveys.

ooo

00

xiii *

Ir.

Topograhic Survey

A detailed topographic map of the Facet Enterprises site would beprepared to a scale of 1 inch * 40 feet with contours at one footintervals. It would be based on recently flown aerial photography conductedby the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretataion Center (EPIC).

Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areas

This task would use a set of boreholes into and around each disposalsite to define the boundaries and depths of each site accurately, and toobtain waste and groundwater samples for complete priority pollutantscans. An additional effort would investigate an underground tunnel on theplant site.

Hydrogeological Survey

This survey would provide site-specific hydrogeological information onthe Facet site, locate the contamination plume (if any), and analyzegroundwater samples from the plume for the complete set of priority pollu-tants. It would make use of a modified form of the revised Radian Proposal(1982) to Facet Enterprises for such a survey. The Chemung River BasinGroundwater Model would be used to estimate the location of the contaminantplume through the aquifier downgradient from the Facet site.

Surface Water Investigation

A sampling and analysis program would be undertaken to determinethe extent of migration of pollutants via surface water on-site and off-site towards the discharges into Newtown Creek. Samples would be analyzedfor the complete list of priority pollutants.

noo

00

xiv

rr

Laboratory Analysis

The laboratory analyses required for the above tasks would be doneunder the national Contractor Laboratory Program (CLP) using EPA approvedanalytical methods.

Cost/Schedule

Detailed estimates of direct labor requirements and costs are pre-sented in Attachment A. Other direct costs are detailed in Attachment B.It is estimated that the site investigation work plan would require 977manhours of direct labor at a cost of $14,000 - $18,000. Other directcosts would range from $160,000 - $185,000.

A bar chart schedule of the work plan is presented in Figure 3-5.It estimated that all work involved in the site investigations includingthe request for proposal and contractor selection would be completedin 21 weeks. A subsequent feasibility study of remedial actions shouldrequire approximately 12 weeks. The start and duration of the design andimplementation tasks are presently undefinable.

2oo

00XV •**

r

ATTACHMENT A

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

CONSULTANT DIRECT LABOR

Task Description

Estimated Personhours

P P P P Tech Other Totals

1.0 RFP AND CONTRACTORSELECTION

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey

2.3 Identificationand Characterization ofDisposal Areas

2.4 HydrogeologicalSurvey

2.5 Surface WaterInvestigations

2.6 Laboratory Analysis

2.7 Data Evaluation andReport Preparation

TOTALS

12 32 16 8 80

1

8

12

20

45

16

2

16

108

2

40

196

32 24

16

40 120 8

72 128 8

8

16 4

100 32 40 24

316 296 48 76

73

18

192

328

10

20

256

977

xvi03

;l

U

ATTACHMENT A (continued)

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

CONSULTANT DIRECT LABOR COSTS

Task Description

Rates ($ per hour)

1.0 RFP AND CONTRACTORSELECTION

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey

2.3 Identification andCharacterization ofDisposal Areas

2.4 HydrogeologicalSurvey

2.5 Surface HaterInvestigations

2.6 Laboratory Analysis

2.7 Data Evaluation andReport Preparation

Totals

Range

23

Estimated Cost ($)

P P2 P1 Tech Other Total

18 15 13 10

92 216 480 208 80 56 1132

23 288 480 168 959

36 240 276

184 288 600 1560 56 2688

276 1944 1080 1664 56 5020

36 120 156

240 28 268

460 720 1500 416 400 168 3664

1035 3528 4740 3848 480 532 14,163

$14,000 - $18,000

xvii

oo

00

ATTACHMENT B

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TASK Cost Range ($)

1.0 RFP t Contractor Selection $350 - $550

2.1 Safety and Health10 Baseline Medical Profiles I $150 $1,5005 Medical Examinations 9 $350 1,750Sample Collection and Surveys

45 days x 8 hours/day 9 $15/hr40 hours - P e $23/hrDirect Labor (DL)

- Total Labor Cost - D.L. x 2.2Contingency • 20%Subtotal $16,685

Total Cost - Safety and Health $19,935Range - Safety and Health $18,000 - $22,000

2.2 Topographic Survey (Based on Information $3,000 - $5,000from Photoscience, Inc.)

2.3 Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areas- 5 sites x 4 holes per site x 30 ft

depth per hole with sampling -600 ft § $6.50/ft $3,900

- 5 sites x 12 holes per site x 10 ftdepth per hole with sampling »600 ft @ $6.50/ft 3,900

- 5 sites x 4 GW samples per site •20 GH samples 9 $10 200

- 5 sites x 4 holes per site x 2 splitspoon samples per hole - 40 samples9 $12 480

- Surveying, Layout, and Levelling3 persons x 3 days

- Investigation of tunnel on site- Mobilization- Report - 40 hrs 9 $23/hr x 2.2- Subtotal- Contingencies 20%

- Total Cost - Identification andCharacterization of Disposal Areas $19,917

- Range - Identification and Charac-terization of Disposal Areas $19,000 - $22,000

xviii

00itk00

• IATTACHMENT B (Continued)

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TASK Cost Range ($)

2.4 Hydrogeologic Survey and Groundwater ModellingHydrogeologic Survey

Mobilization $ 900Construct 10 wells § $25/ft. 20,000Develop 10 wells § $100 each 1,000Insitu Permeability Testing

5 wells: 8 hrs 9 $90/hr 720Surveying, Layout, and Levelling

3 persons x 3 days10 wells x 1 GW Sample § $10Report - 40 hrs « $23/hr x 2.2Subtotal

j - Contingencies 20% __' - - Total Cost - Hydrogeologic Survey $32,285

- Groundwater ModellingData Collection and Review

P - 24 hours i $23/hr 552Tech - 40 hours § $15/hr 600

Running Model (3 runs 8 2 days each)P - 48 hrs e $23/hr 1,104Total DL $ 2,256

Total Labor Cost « 2.2 x DL 4,963Computer Time 100Miscellaneous ODCs 150Subtotal $ 5,213

Contingencies - 20% 1,043Total Cost - Groundwater Modelling $ 6,256

Total Cost - Hydrogeologic Survey $38,541and Groundwater Modelling

Range - Hydrogeologic Survey andGroundwater Modelling $37,000 - $43,000

2.5 Surface Water InvestigationCollect 10 surface water & 10 sediment

samples >P - 16 hrs 8 $23 $ 368 °Tech - 40 hrs « $15 600

- DL $ 968 5Total Labor Cost - DL x 2.2 2,130 M

Miscellaneous - Transport, ODCs 170Subtotal $ 2,300 £Contingencies - 20% 460 *Total Cost - Surface Hater

Investigation $ 2,760Range - Surface Water Investigation $2,000 - $4,0v«

xix

r

II.I

ATTACHMENT B (Continued)

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TASK Cost Range ($)

2.6 Laboratory AnalysisSafety and Health

24 air samples for particulates§ $30 $ 72024 air samples for semi-volatiles9 $40 96024 air samples for gaseous compounds« $70 1,68040 personal air samples for particu-lates % $30 1,20040 personal air samples for serai-volatiles 9 $40 1,60040 personal air samples for gaseouscompounds § $70 2,800Total Cost Safety and Health LabAnalysis $ 8,960

Identification and Characterization5 sites x 2 priority pollutantscans (GW, waste) i $1800 $18,000

Hydrogeological Survey10 GW priority pollutant

I scans £ $1800 $18,000> - Surface Water Investigation

r

- 10 water (10 sediment prioritypollutant scans 9 $1800 $36,000

Total Cost - Laboratory Analysis $80,960Range - Laboratory Analysis $80,000 - $84,000

Total Cost Range - Detailed Site Investigation (ODC's only) $160,000 - $185,000

xx

3noo

00<J1o

0 4 8 12

WEEKS

16 20 24 28 32 36

1.0 RFP & CONTRACTOR SELECTIONB.O SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey2.3 Identification and Characterization

of Disposal Areas2.4 Hydrogeological Survey2.5 Surface Water Investigations2.6 Laboratory Analysis2.7 Data Evaluation and Report Prepara-

tion3.0 FEASIBILITY STUDY - REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES

3.1 Source Control Actions3.2 Off-site Control Actions

4.0 DESIGN/CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION6.0 COMMUNITY RELATIONS

IIIHIIIIIIII

iiiiiiiiiiiiiii inmiiiimi'IIIIIIIIHI

Illlllllllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIII

iiimniimiiiiiiniiiiii

iiiiiniiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiin iiliilililiiini

FIGURE 3-5 FACET ENTERPRISES

REMEDIAL ACTION SCHEDULE

Continuous Effort

Intermittent Effort

Undefined start and duration

IS8I TOO DVJ

I

I

r

1.0 DATA COMPILATION AND EVALUATION fc. l ^ ^ t

1.1 Objective ^ • ^ i'

The objective of this section is the compilation and evaluationof the available data on the Facet Enterprises uncontrolled hazardous wastedisposal site. Compilation of available data is a necessary step in thedevelopment of an approach to site remedial actions. The available dataserve as a baseline of information which is used in assessing the sitesituation. This evaluation of existing data provides a mechanism fordetermining data limitations. The data are also useful in identifying andevaluating appropriate remedial measures and techniques.

1.2 Background

1.2.1 Site Location

Facet Enterprises is located 3/4 of a mile north of the cityof Elmira in Chemung County, New York (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The plantis situated in a commercial-residential section of Elmira Heights at18th Street just west of Route 14. The approximate latitude and longitudeat the site are 42°08'00" and 76°50'00" respectively. The plant isbordered by residential-industrial areas except to the north where there isa community golf course. Three population centers, Elmira, Elmira Heights,and Horseheads are located within a 5 mile radius of the plant site. Amore detailed site map of Facet Enterprises is presented in Figure 1-3.

1.2.2 Site History

Facet Enterprises Motor Components Division is an active motorparts manufacturing firm occupying a 31 acre site. On-site disposalof metal wastes-liquids and sludges, oil wastes, solvent wastes and othermaterials occured from at least the 1940's to late 1978 or early 1979.NYSDEC documents indicate that the majority of the disposal was done bythe former plant owner, the Bendix Corporation. Facet Enterprises took

ooinNJ

.I

PAC001

1853

r,L FIGURE 1-2 LOCATION OF FACET ENTERPRISES INC.

•x t

'•• - \ ^

- >"

i • ,--.-v-p;^^^^^;--5'^I . '>:^%-t>-^:-<^=---:>.-:-l.• I . ' ] > ' / • • - " • . •'-'- <^< : s AI c -' -^ / -' ^^-^-^ X x'\--''^ ' - • . • ' '-^n ; v;^ i • • ->•; . •- / •/-x / / - i/.•«: mi\j^eau

A' < • •' :' •"'A - 1 ; \ ,-i > -*; ".-A- /. ^ * .'^- -i-•'%\"::JJ> f- -^'"\:

^V'^3 ' '"-;-- - '

Go:

•-•. ^. ,->'--"•- — "*" ^-. i r ..r •v ~'

i^* ^—*- .*' 3 • i— '• j - • .

^-'/.

\" ';. ',\ G! i- T

, .-4 •^^.,,-1*r'~

' .ROUTE 14 -^

_s.i ^

:D" 1-:.

—• ;i

r

I'

X .

\

•• "r *? . - - •> •"><:•

OPEN DITCH

NORTH

LEGEND

1-Burial Area tl2-Burial Area 123-Burial Area 134-Covered Oil Lagoon5-OId Sand Filter

DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE WATER FLOW

FIGURE 1-3 FACET ENTERPRISES - WASTE DISPOSAL SITE LOCATIONS

SS81 100

L over the plant in 1976, and discontinued all on-site disposal except thatof netal hydroxide sludge from their industrial wastewater treatment plantto a sludge drying bed (formerly used as a sand filter). This practice wasdiscontinued in 1979. Extensive grading was done by Facet in 1979 as wellas the construction of ditches to divert surface water around the wastedisposal areas. Facilities were also constructed for the collection andtreatment of leachate from the disposal areas.

The site consists of a relatively flat area containing thefacility's 30 buildings and an area with slopes of 5 to 10% rising to thewest in which the disposal areas are located. These disposal areasinclude three solid and liquid waste burial areas, one covered oil treat-ment lagoon, and one sand filter which was also used as a sand dryingbed. All of these facilities are presently inactive. There is also apond area which collects leachate from the solid and liquid disposalsites. This leachate is stabilized with lime and pumped into the plant'swastewater treatment system. Hastes known to have been disposed on theFacet property include: cyanide salt heat treating waste, heavy metalsludge from a wastewater treatment plant, zinc, nickel, cadmium, chromium,polymer coagulating agents, chlorides, sulfides, solvents and variousquenching and cutting oils (NYSOEC, 1979; EPA, 1982b).

Descriptions of the disposal areas shown on Figure 1-3 follow:Burial Area 11. - This pit, about 50 ft. x 50 ft. x 15 ft. deep

was used from 1960 to 1971 for the disposal of plating waste, oil sludgeand grinding waste. Drums of liquid were emptied into the pit and allowedto seep away and, on occasion, damaged drums were deposited as well.Periodic attempts were made to neutralize the disposed acidic wastes.Lime and caustic solutions were added to the pit when it was permanentlycovered (NYSDEC, 1979).

Burial Area 12. - This hillside area, about 40 ft. wide, 40 to50 ft. long and 10 to 15 ft. deep was used from the early 1960's to 1971.Wastes were dumped over a bank and allowed to soak into the ground.

1 Plating wastes apparently were disposed at the site only during winterI

•months when access to Burial Area fl was difficult. Attempts were made to\ neutralize the area before covering it with soil each spring. Lime andt1 caustic solutions were added to the pit when it was permanently covered

(NYSDEC, 1979). t-»CO

a." L

Ii:

Burial Area 13. - This steep bank, 30 ft. to 40 ft. wide, wasused for disposal of plating wastes and oil sludges from early 1940 toearly or mid-1960. Until recently it was used for disposal of old con-tainers, wood, metal, cinder blocks, and general solid waste along withsome chemicals. The bank was filled outward about 40 ft. to 50 ft. and is15 ft. high. This area was permanently covered and no longer receives waste(NYSDEC, 1979; EPA, 1982b).

Covered Oil Lagoon - This lagoon, about 200 ft. x 60 ft., locatedon the southern side of the plant site, was active from at least 1943 tothe early 1970's when its use was discontinued and it was covered. Duringits active period, it was used to remove insoluable oil from the plant'sdischarge (Herrington, 1981a; EPA, 1982b).

Old Sand Filter - This area, on the northern portion of theplant site, has been in existence since at least 1943. At one time, it wasused as a sand filter to treat the plant's sanitary wastewater. It wasbeing used for the disposal of metal hydroxide sludge from the plant'sindustrial wastewater treatment plant when its use was discontinued in1979. It has since been covered. (Herrington, 1981a; EPA, 1982b).

An underground tunnel at the site, which was constructed in1941 and probably used as an underground firing range, should also beinvestigated for the presence of hazardous materials. The tunnel, believedto have been constructed by Bendix, was probably not used after the mid-1950's. The circular structure, whose present condition is described asexcellent, is 3 1/2 to 4 feet in diameter and is said to extend from 60 to100 yards into the hillside just west of the plant building. A small roommay be located at the far end of the tunnel (by telephone, Mr. ReaveHowland, Facet Enterprises, February 4, 1983).

The plant currently holds two permits issued by the New YorkState Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSOEC). Hastewaterdischarges are regulated by State Pollution Discharge Elimination System(SPDES) permit INY004081 and air pollutant discharges by air permit1073001-0079. The plant currently generates 1200 gallons of metal sludge ^and 100 gallons of waste oil annually. These materials are removed and odisposed off-site by a contractor (Leichter, 1980). o

o

COen

IIr

The following is a brief chronological list of events relatedto disposal practices and contamination problems at the site:

1940 - Haste disposal was initiated at burial area 13(NYSDEC, 1979).

1943 - Approximate time that oil lagoon was constructed andits use as a treatment facility was initiated(Herrington, 1981a; EPA, 1982b).

1960 - Disposal of process waste at burial area 13 was discon-tinued and disposal at burial area 11 and burial area 12was started (NYSDEC, 1979).

1971 - Use of burial area 11, burial area 12 and the wasteoil lagoon was discontinued (NYSDEC, 1979;Herrington, 1981a).

1976 - Facet Company replaced Bendix Corporation as facilityowner (EPA, 1982b).

1979 - On-site disposal of process wastes was discontinued(Herrington, 1981 a).

1979 - NYSDEC required Facet to undertake extensive site gradingand drainage work to reduce leachate generation. Aconsent decree was issued (Leichter, 1980).

February 1980 - Work on leachate reduction system requiredby NYSDEC was completed (Leichter, 1980).

June 1980 - Site inspection and sampling investigation was donefor EPA by Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. (Leichter, 1980).

September 1980 - Discovery of trichloroethylene contaminationprompts closing of Kentucky Avenue public water supplywells (Finster, 1980).

March 1981 - Initial site inspection and sampling investigationwas conducted by NYSDEC (Herrington, 1981a).

June 1981 - Second site inspection and sampling investigationwas conducted by NYSDEC (Herrington, 1981a).

March 1982 - Proposal for a hydrogeologic study of the site was TI!>submitted to Facet by Radian Corporation (Radian Corp., 1982). °

oo

00(Jl00

1.3 Environmental Setting

The climate of the Elmira area is characterized by long, cold( winters; short, warm summers; and abundant rainfall. Precipitation records; I of the D.S. Weather Bureau and the Elmira Water Board show that annuali *~~' rainfall at Elmira has averaged 35 inches over the past 88 years.

The mean annual temperature at Elmira is 9.4 C (49 F), withmonthly averages ranging from -2.8°C (27°F) in February to 22.2 C(72°F) in July. The ground usually remains frozen from late November toearly March (Hazen and Sawyer Engineers, 1969).

The Elmira-Horseheads area consists of steep wooded hills risingeast and west from a small valley along Newtown Creek. The Facet Enter-prises site is west of the creek with the plant buildings situated onrelatively flat land at the western edge of the valley. The disposalareas are located west of the plant buildings on a fairly steep hillsidevegetated mainly with grass and a few trees. An unpaved road runs westfrom the plant buildings and up the hillside providing access to thedisposal sites. All of the disposal sites have been filled and vegetated.

Surface water drainage from the northwest portion of the Facetsite is via a drainage ditch which discharges into May's Creek. Thesouthwestern portion of the Facet property is drained by a small inter-mittent stream. This stream flows east down the hill, enters the stormsewer which flows into Facet's oil separator, and leaves the Facet propertyvia their discharge (002) to an open ditch on 18th Street. The ditchruns south and empties into a storm sewer which discharges into EldridgeLake and eventually flows to Diven Creek. May's Creek and Diven Creek bothjoin Newtown Creek, a tributary of the Chemung River. Surface waterdrainage through these ditches is a potential pathway for contaminantmigration.

The Facet Enterprises site does not support any significantwildlife population. This is due to the fact that Facet has been thesite of industrial activity for about 40 years and the surrounding areais developed and fairly densely populated. %

Environmentally sensitive areas such as prime agricultural areas,wetlands, historical and archeological sites, and endangered species ohabitats are not found on or close to the Facet site and are, therefore,

ooUlVO

irr

not a consideration. The floodplain of a tributary to Newtown Creek islocated adjacent to the plant site on the east side of Route 14, but isnot affected by activities on the site itself.

The Elmira/Elmira Heights/Rorseheads region is a densely popu-lated residential/industrial area. There are approximately 1000 peopleliving within 1/4 mile of the plant site with the nearest house locatedwithin 200 feet of the site. Land use around the plant is residential/industrial except along the northern border where there is a golf course.A public water supply well, the Kentucky Avenue Hell, is located about onemile north of the plant site. This well is part of a public water supplysystem which serves over 60,00 residents in Elmira, Elmira Heights, andHorseheads. The well is presently closed due to contamination by tri-chloroethylene (TCE). The exact source of the well's contamination has notbeen determined. Two miles downgradient of the plant site are the twoSullivan Street public water supply wells. Low level contamination withTCE has been detected in these wells.

The study area is located in the Newtown Creek valley of ChemungCounty. Surface deposits in this and other valleys of the Chemung Riverbasin consist of intermixed stratified sands, gravels, silts and claysoriginating from glacial meltings. These unconsolidated deposits areunderlain by undulating beds of shales and siltstones. The deeper depositsin the Newtown Creek Valley are believed to have resulted from glaciationbefore the Wisconsin ice advance, with the subsequent glaciation formingmoraines, stream diversions and lake deposits (Bazen and Sawyer Engineers,

[ 1969).The study area is underlain by the Newtown Creek aquifer, one

of the six principal groundwater aquifers of the Central MetropolitanArea of Chemung County (see Exhibit 1-1). The others are the Harris Hilland Airport aquifers in the northwest, the Big Flats aquifer in the west,and the Southport and West Hudson Street aquifers in the south (Hazenand Sawyer Engineers, 1969).

The Newtown Creek aquifer consists of outwash gravels and allu-vial deposits extending from north of Horseheads to eastern Elmira wherethe formation seemingly pinches out. A piezonetric divide constitutes

oo<no

LL the northern boundary of the aquifer. The Newtown Creek aquifer is the

most fully evaluated of the County's principal aquifers. Hater levelobservations dating back to 1956 in some cases have been made at the Roy'sDairy, Sullivan Street, Kentucky Avenue and Hestinghouse wells. The BlmiraHater Board has been undertaking a program of test holes, permanent wellsand numerous pumping tests since 1957 (Hazen and Sawyer Engineers, 1969).

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has prepared a summary open-file report on the geohydrology of the valley-fill aquifers of ChemungCounty (Miller et al, 1982). The following are extracts from the report onvarious aspects of the Newtown Creek aquifer in the vicinity of the studyarea. The surficial geology of the aquifer is presented in Exhibit 1-2.Outwash sands and gravels are seen to be predominant. A narrow band ofalluvial silt is located along the Newtown Creek in the eastern section ofthe aquifer. The Facet waste disposal site is seen to be located on Kameand Kame terrace sand and gravel of high permeability on the western fringeof the aquifer.

Cross-sections of the aquifer along alignments to the northt t

and south of the Facet site, Sections C-C and D-D , respectively,are presented in Exhibit 1-3. In Section C-C , the aquifer is seento be totally unconfined, of thickness up to about 40 feet, and overlyingvery shallow bedrock in the west, and deep lake silt and clay and lodgement

itill deposits of low permeability. At Section D-D , west of well 42-12,there are an upper unconfined and a lower aquifer that seems somewhatconfined by low to moderately permeable lake silt and fine sand deposits.East of well 42-12, the aquifer is thickest (up to about 150 feet thick)and seemingly confined to some extent by low permeability alluvial silt.Infiltration rates are moderate (0.63 to 2 inches per hour) throughoutmost of the aquifer including the Facet waste disposal site except inthe alluvial silt deposits along the Newtown Creek where very low rates ofless than 0.2 inches per hour are found (Miller et al, 1982).

A map of aquifer thickness is presented in Exhibit 1-4. Itshows the aquifer to be generally 20 to 40 feet thick but less than 20feet in the Facet area and from 40 to more than 100 feet thick in thesoutheast (Miller et al, 1982).

oo

r oo

10 S

A potentionetric surface map showing contour lines of equalwater table elevations is presented in Exhibit 1-5. Groundwater flowdirection is perpendicular to these contour lines at any given point.Note that in the vicinity of the Facet site the flow direction is approxi-mately east-southeast then becoming more southerly towards the SullivanStreet wells in the thickest portion of the aquifer. Exhibit 1-6 isa contour map of well yields in the aquifer. Note that the highest yield-ing areas (greater than 1000 gallons per minute) are located immediatelyeast of Facet and to the Southeast in the vicinity of the Sullivan StreetWells, both areas being in the direction of flow from the Facet site.

Exhibit 1-5 also shows the location of the Westinghouse Plant(including waste disposal and well field) site, former Horseheads landfill,Kopper Company and Kentucky Avenue well sites upgradient of the Facetsite. Contaminants from the downgradient Facet area are, however, unlikelyto have any effect on the Kentucky Avenue Well.

The Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Boardhas had the entire Chemung River Basin aquifer including the NewtownCreek aquifer mathematically modeled as a part of the Section 208 planningstudy under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Reisenauer, 1977a).The model is a Variable Thickness Transient (VTT) Model using the Boussinesqequation and capable of handling heterogenenous distributions of hydraulicconductivity and storage coefficient. It uses a finite differencealogorithm with the aquifer divided into a uniform grid of small squares1000 feet by 1000 feet in plan view. Data input include the following:

o Potentiometric map;o Aquifer bottom map;o Confining layer and thickness map;o Topography;o Valley cross sections;o Edge flow directly from bedrock areas to sand and gravel aquifer;o Estimated rainfall infiltration;o Transmissivity data from testing of 18 wells;

'flo Estimated transmissivity from specific capacity tests from 80 padditional wells;

oo

00

to

11

Jt

r

o A measured set of groundwater elevations from 90 wells (fallmeasurements); and

o Stress (groundwater withdrawals)Calibration of the model was only possible under steady state conditionsdue to limitations of the available data. The computer program permitssimulation of aquifer systems which are confined in some areas and uncon-fined in others (Reisenauer, 1977a).

The Chemung River Basin Groundwater Model permits the investi-gator to subdivide, extract and expand a part of the overall model thusallowing the study of local detail on a finer grid than is possible inthe regional model. The model has been tested on two regional and fivesubregional cases (Reisenauer, 1977b). Among the latter five cases testedwere a "Lagoon in Northwest Elmira Heights," and a "Sanitary LandfillEast of Roberts Hollow" between Elmira and the Chemung River. The loca-tion of the "Lagoon in Northwest Elmira Heights" relative to the FacetEnterprises wells indicates that it is probably one of the Facet lagoons.The area was expanded by a factor of three from the regional model. Thenorth and south boundaries were arbitrarily chosen and held constantat values designated by the regional model. The east boundary was NewtownCreek and the west boundary Harris Hill. Nine pumping wells in the areaare shown listed in Table 1-1 and on the computer map. Figure 1-4, gene-rated by the model. The map also shows estimated groundwater contoursand flow streamlines from the lagoon. Note that the streamlines travelin a generally southeasterly direction terminating at two sets of wells,the northern one owned by Thatcher Glass and the southern by GeneralElectric. The model generated streamline travel times are shown inTable 1-2. The travel times range from 14 to 20 years and representthe model estimated tines for contaminated groundwater from the lagoonto flow to the wells concerned (Reisenauer, 1977b).

It also seems possible for flow from the lagoon to reach thetwo Elmira Water Board wells in the extreme southeast of the map. Theseare the Sullivan Street Wells. Travel times would be longer. Perhaps ^also, depending on the pumping regime at the Facet Enterprises wells, it °is possible that flow from the lagoon may reach those wells. Note that oo»-•

»-i00

OJ

12

;L TABLE 1-1. Wells Producing Within Elmira Heights Subregion

Line Column Q(GPM) Q(CFD) Owner

28

28

13

121218221515

28

28

344

21

102930

764.

764.

243.

243.

58.

403.

24.

500.

11.

147051.

147051.

46778.

45778.

11088.

77578.

4543.

96250.

2137.

Elmira Water Board

Elmira Water BoardFacet EnterprisesFacet EnterprisesFacet EnterprisesThatcher GlassPepsi ColaGeneral ElectricGeneral Electric

TABLE 1-2. Streamline Data, Elmira Heights Area

r

Streamline Time,NO.

A 1

2

AverageAverage

years

20.1616.02

Time, years -Distance, feet -

Streamline Time,No.

B 1

2

AverageAverage

years

14.3315.47

Tine, years -Distance, feet -

Distance,feet

10230.09390.0

18.09

9810.

Distance,feet

8550.09480.0

14.909015.

"3>noo

00a\

13

<I

00dcX

2

Z31^

0O

1

.

«

»

:t

.Z

;3

,t:l2T

S23•i

r:

J7

«

:j3T

1.V.•1

11

• • -^J>JiL-_l>JrJ:• • • -\

/ ^*/^

\- \ -•'• • -4--t B;'- - - Z^O^, >\v: : : K' ^v^• • :> /\' 'S •' \: :\ / \

i -"-\V'•'•'•{ f \i /. . .' ' * C\N 1•'.'•m^. . . io'c1;/r-.o!.!l!. . . .cc. co j j i :

' ' ' ;\|: : : : : :1. . . . . . i. . . . . .^

; yx; \\ v^

'•'i.x r*i >; i-'i * i> i> 1^

* i > i N i ^ i > i " i s ' ^ j ' ' x ; " • • • * * • • •_- , -x j . . . . . . . . .

<f-r\^8 ^ - • - - • • • - •2 + --^^-i; - - - - • • • • •

^-856 - . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . !x, . . a. . . . . . .

o54^~^ ^-r- j-_^-— ^ "" --' • vx i . . ...

v X $ - . . . . . .\ 852/ $r. . . . . . .^V ^^ >v\\ .x^ !^-" * " " "

\' ^s* > 1

"\^ 4. fv" . . .\ / T »:—' \< \ iill • ' 'y"'%--J ^ •

/ ^.N ^/ ) V ITTf /y i/r"S/ 2±v v v^) ^

V 11' 1x|.''I/: 1 v- N !>••'] VI> l*'lxlxi'' |xlx7[>isTx!

I I 1 4 I * H it a ., n i* n tt .* s 3i s a s, f, a z>LINE N'JMBLRS'

FIGURE 1-4. Elmira Heights Subregion Showing Water TableContours and Streamlines from Lagoon

Oo

00

14

high levels of trichloroethylene (TCE) in excess of groundwater limits werefound in the Facet Enterprises wells in 1981 (Herrington, 1981a). Furtherstudy involving the use of the model seems necessary to examine thesepossibilities.

The model is purely a hydraulic model which can predict flowdirection and flow times but not water quality (by Telephone, Dr. ChinLieu, NYSDEC, June 16, 1982).

1.4 Hazardous Materials

Several visual inspections and sampling investigations were doneat Facet to determine the extent of the hazardous waste problem and theseverity of its associated risk. The following assessment is based on theresults of these inspections and investigations including the followingsources:

Leichter, Irving, June 30, 1980. Hazardous Haste SiteInspection Report - Facet Enterprises, Elraira Heights, New York.Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc., Newark, New Jersey.

- Herrington, Carol, March 25, 1981 a. Sampling InspectionReport - Facet Enterprises, Inc., New York State Department

I of Environmental Conservation, Avon, New York.i

Herrington, Carol, August 7, 1981b. Facet Sampling Data.New York State Depeartment of Environmental Conservation,Avon, New York.

A list of all samples collected, dates, types, and samplingagencies is presented in Table 1-3. Sample point locations are shown onFigure 1-5

Burial area 11, as previously described, was used for about11 years foe the disposal of plating waste, oil sludge and grinding waste.The area was permanently covered and currently supports vegetation.No stains were visible on the surface of the area during a site investi-gation in March of 1981. Two soil samples were collected from the fill on «\July 29, 1980, as part of an investigation by Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc; °one sample was collected at the ground surface (158852) and a second from 2 o

C

to 2 1/2 feet below the surface (158851). Analysis of the sample taken at *

CP

\. 15

• ••pit Ltca*tloa on lilt(lap

1

t

1

<

~~S

t

(

~~ S

11

1-1*1-na-*•M

la.pl abaala-Mtlen

5IIS1

SIIH

11151

li*S4

SIISS/SUM

511 SI/Sllll

Mill/Sllll

•0 14»/H» IDI

•0 IS*/HI I0»

tacatOlapoaalAraa

racat is

fatal «io•l-ttl-OI

•l-lfl-01

• I-KI-H

I1-l«l-0»

la CaMpla CaH

•4 C. Nan At

fa/-plattt4

7-1I-IO

1- H-H

7-11-10

7-11-10

7-11-10

7-11-10

7-lt-M

7-11-10

7-1I-IO

J-1S-OI

1-15-01

3-25-1, ——

1-1I-II

(-10-11

(-10-11

•-10-lt

t-10-01

1 It am lit)*loeUto. In,

(•nrl«J">r

're.. '

n:«A

rc»A

FCNA

KM

rciu

rcM

rou

rou

J WTSMCWTSDIC

wrsoccHISDCe

nsoansiKCHTSOCC

mrioec

mrsnec

mote

r burt«l araie.

luitrlalt».-plM

Soil

toll

Soil

Sol)

toll

s>ei«*nt

S*dl*«nt

W.l.c

••tor

•oil

ttetoi

Mator

IUt«c

Ale

llvdt*

foil

loll _____

HM«r

11* buriAl ftrai

>i Hoi* apacaa 01 tha tabla Indlc.ta that analyala 1

D<«tlptlon of !•*»!•Location

•Ulltl •!«« |1 - tclo*

•jtr.c.

• utf«c<

tjrlal *t*« 11 - btlowcrouf* mutfcci

l.ri.l .rt> 11 - >t ,,ou«4

""«c« _________________

Cov>rȣ oil lAfoon

north <,.ln.,, tilth

South ii.ln.a. diui,

North dr>ln»g« oltch

South dr«ln»« ditch

•orUl it.. |i. burial *r»12 or fcjrlal aiaa 13

north dralnaaa ditch

Outfall 00]-oll trap

Abova covtred oil lafOdN

Old Sand Ml tarConpoilt* - burial ar«a 11and burial araa 11

Ce»arad oil latooo _______

AaHirl

to

00

10

100

110

<.ei

so<.004

(.004

<.004

<.0*4

l.»

M

CrIK«>

110

,,-

»0

S40

1100

iioe

• 40

<.01

410

.040

.onit

.000

1IMM

11

CoCPfl

140

5)0

510

»00

110

<.01

1000

.S40

.000

.014

<.OI

ijeeo

is

South dralnaaa ditch <.I1 «.«J .MJ

11, or burial araa 1).

01 tha paramtar la ouaatlo* »a« not parforM*.

r»(f^i

140

100

140

100

1100

110

,0,

110

<.01

.04

<.0)

<.C1

100

<1

<.Q4

Sa(PP»

10

1

100

100

ItO

110

•

<s<.004

<.004

<.004

<.0(

<.004

Inlf?=>

70

10

1>00

110

11000

SIO

•»7

M

1.1

.075

.054

.ots

1SOOO

.17

.1C

CdIF?=>

4

,

100

1100

.001

.01

.00}

HOMO

11

<.ll

HI

IPP>)

S4

too

100

<-01

<.0]

.01

010

11

<.OI

mIPI")

10

10

1«

100

1C

10

<.l<.l

<.l

<1I

'1

<.s

Kl1111

IP;*!

10000

<.i

«.s110000

<1

Ntt^ylanacMcMdaIff-

to

<5

<)

<5

<10

tio100

s

raIPP»)

„

14

S

44

<10

100 '

<100

<5

1.1.1-II IcMoro-

• Ih.r,. |ppb)

11

<5

<S

CIO

000

<100

0

tianl 1.1-£lcMo(0-

• tt.rlan* (PP>-

<S

<S

S

<10

<100

<100

<5

TABLE 1-3

SAMPLES COLLECTED

too

16

AT

FACET ENTERPRISES INC.

OPEN DITCH

NORTH

LEGEND

1-Burial Area II2-Burial Area 123-Burial Area 134-Covered Oil Lagoon5-North Drainage Ditch6-South Drainage Ditch7-Outfall 0028-Leachate Lagoon9-Facet Well - (well isoff-site)

10-Old Sand Filter11-South Drainage Ditch

(off-site)

DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE WATER FLOW

FIGURE 1-5 FACET ENTERPRISES - SAMPLE POINT LOCATIONS

8981 100

the surface revealed the following concentrations: arsenic, 440 parts permillion (ppm); chromium , 1400 ppm; copper, 530 ppm; lead, 120 ppm; sele-nium, 100 ppm; and zinc, 150 ppm. The sample from below the ground surfacehad high concentrations of chromium, copper and lead with values of 120ppm, 240 ppm, and 140 ppm respectively.

During a sampling effort conducted by the New York State Depart-ment of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) on March 25, 1981, a sample wascollected from each of the three waste burial areas. Two of the sampleswere lost and the remaining sample was not labeled. The area of originof the remaining sample being unknown, it was relabeled "Facet DisposalArea.* When analyzed, the sample was found to have high concentrations ofthe following metals: chromium, 490 ppm; copper, 1000 ppm; lead, 230 ppm;and nickel, 600 ppm.

A composite sample from burial areas 11 and 12 was collectedby NYSDEC on June 10, 1981. The portion of the sample from burial area |1was taken about 2 feet below the surface and the portion from area 12, atthe surface. This sample (181-161-03) was analyzed for a variety ofpriority pollutants and found to have high levels of methylene chloride(610 parts per billion (ppb)) and trichloroethylene (200 ppb). Arsenic,cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel and zinc were found in the sample atconcentrations ranging from 17 to 33 ppm.

Burial area 12 was used for disposal of plating wastes and oilsludge for about 25 years. This area has been permanently covered and issparsely vegetated. During a March, 1981 site visit by NYSDEC, an areawith no vegetation and dark, brown, oily looking stains was noted.

Surface (158854) and sub-surface (158853) soil samples werecollected from burial area 12 by Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. on July 29,1980. The sub-surface sample had high concentrations of the followingmetals: arsenic, 250 ppm; chromium, 360 ppm; copper, 310 ppm; and lead,100 ppm. The ground surface soil sample was analyzed for metals with theseresults: chromium, 540 ppm; copper, 260 ppm; lead, 140 ppm; selenium, 100ppm; and zinc, 2900 ppm.

Two soil samples were collected at burial area 12 by NYSDEC >O

during later sampling efforts. A sample collected on March 25, 1981 wasoo

00o*vo

16

lost or mislabeled as previously described. The second sample was collec-ted on June 10, 1981 and was part of a composite sample of burial areas 11and 42. Results of the analysis of .this composite sample (81-161-03) arediscussed in the previous section on burial area 41.

Burial area 43, situated on a steep hillside, was used forover twenty years for the disposal of all types of liquid and solid wasteThe area is now covered. During NYSDEC's March 26, 1981 site inspection,it was noted that orange-yellow colored water was ponding at the base ofthe fill area and that no vegetation was present for about 20 ft. down-gradient of the area's southern boundary.

On July 29, 1980, Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. took a soilsample from burial area 13'a open face. Analysis of this sample (45885S/58884) for metals revealed their presence in the following concentrations:cadmium, 200 ppm; chromium, 3200 ppm; copper, 580 ppm; lead, 100 ppm;nickel, 100 ppm; selenium, 200 ppm; thallium, 200 ppm; and zinc, 290 ppm.

The results of a sample collected by NYSDEC on March 25, 1981and labeled "Facet Disposal Area" could apply to burial area 43. Circum-stances surrounding collection and results of analysis of this sample aredescribed earlier in this section where sampling results for area 41 arediscussed.

Soil samples were collected from the surface of the covered oillagoon during an investigation at the Facet site. The lagoon, which hasbeen covered for years, was noted to have oily material oozing through thesurface by NYSDEC during a March, 1981 site visit. Fred C. Hart Assoc-iates, inc. collected a soil sample (458856) at the covered oil lagoonduring their July 29, 1980 sampling effort. Analysis of the sample re-vealed the following concentrations of metals: arsenic, 800 ppm; cadmium,1200 ppm; nickel, 100 ppm; selenium, 160 ppm; and zinc, 32,000 ppm. Inaddition to metals, PCB-1248 was found to be present with a concentrationof 10,000 ppb.

On June 20, 1981, NYSDEC collected a soil sample from the coveredoil lagoon where the oily material was surfacing and an air sample directlyabove that point. Analysis of the soil sample (481-161-04) revealedhigh concentrations of PCB-1248 (320,000 ppb) and methylene chloride (200 >ppb). Analysis of the air sample (481-161-01) did not detect the presence

oof any pollutant. o

M00

o19

A grab sample of metal hydroxide sludge (ft81-161-02) was takenfrom the pile on the old sand filter by NYSDEC on June 10, 1961. Analysisfor thirteen priority pollutant metals showed high concentrations ofcadmium (130,000 ppm), chromium (130,000 ppm), copper (13,000 ppm), lead(180 ppm), nickel (880 ppm), and zinc (35,000 ppm).

A water sample (FACET ft 9) was collected by NYSDEC on March 25,1981 from the leachate lagoon which collects leachate from burial areas 11and |2 and surface water drainage from the northwestern portion of theFacet property. The water in the lagoon was noted as having a bright greencolor on the day of sampling. Analytical results indicated 16 ppm chro-mium, 29 ppb 1,1,1 - trichloroethane, and 180 ppb trichloroethylene (TCE).

Facet's process water supply well located east of Route 14 wasused by NYSDEC to obtain a groundwater sample on March 25, 1982. Metalconcentrations in this sample (FACET 110) were low but two volatile com-pounds were detected. Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene was present at 5 ppb andTCE at 44 ppb.

Both surface water and bottom sediment samples were collectedfrom the drainage ditches which convey surface water drainage, leachate,and treated plant wastewater from the site. The northern drainage ditchdrains the northwest portions of the site. Sediment from the bottom of theditch was collected by Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. on July 29, 1980.Analysis of the sample (158857/58881) revealed high levels of these me-tals: chromium, 940 ppm; copper, 680 ppm; lead, 160 ppm; selenium, 220ppm; and zinc, 580 ppro. A surface water sample (ftBO 149/MB 8038) was alsocollected during the same investigation. Analysis of this water sampleshowed relatively low concentrations of metals (less than .3 ppm for allmetals analyzed) but notable levels of TCE (31 ppb) and methylene chloride(13 ppb). NYSDEC collected another water sample from the north drainageditch (FACET 15) on March 25, 1981. No metals were present in the sampleat concentrations above 2 ppm, however, analysis did detect 21 ppb 1,1,1-trichloroethane and 34 ppb TCE.

The south drainage ditch drains the southwestern portion ofthe Facet site. Hater from this ditch flows into a storm sewer, throughan oil trap, and off the plant site through outfall 1002. A sediment oo

v-1CP

20

sample (58858/58882) from the bottom of the ditch was collected on July 29,1980 by Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. Analysis of this sample revealedhigh levels of arsenic (80 ppm), cadmium (76 ppra), chromium (780 ppm),copper (540 ppm), lead (280 ppm), selenium (140 ppm), and zinc (380 ppm).A surface water sample (BO 150/MB 8039) was collected during the sameinvestigation. Results of metal analyses at the south ditch, like thenorth, showed less than .3 ppra for all metals analyzed. Methylene chlo-ride concentrations of 60 ppb were also found.

Additional surface water samples were taken from the southdrainage ditch by NYSDEC on March 25, 1981 and June 10, 1981. The earliersample (FACET 17) was taken from the final chamber of the oil separatoron the southern portion of Facet's property near outfall 1002. Results ofmetal analyses showed concentrations less than 2 rag/1 for all metalstested. TCE was present at a concentration of 5 ppb. The June 10, 1981water sample by NYSDEC (81-161-06) was collected just outside of the plantfence near 18th Street. Concentration of metals from this sample were verylow. Other compounds detected included 1,1,1-trichloroethane (8 ppb) andmethylene chloride (5 ppb).

Results of sampling efforts at Facet reveal that some of thecontaminants present in soil samples from Facet's waste disposal areasare also present in samples of leachate, drainage ditch sediments, andsurface and ground waters. Existing evidence indicates that contaminantsare leaving the Facet site by way of surface waters and drainage ditchsediments. Groundwater sample results indicate that contaminant movementthrough the groundwater is possible at Facet but not definitely attribu-table to Facet's activities since there are also several other potentialcontamination sources in the aquifer. Any of these potential sources couldbe affecting Facet's well. Further discussion concerning the migration ofcontaminants from Facet is provided in section 1.5.

1.5 Conceptual Site Model - Waste Migration

^Based on the results of sampling efforts at the site, two pos- >sible major pathways for off-site movement of contaminants have been

oidentified: surface waters (and associated sediments) and groundwater. o

CO

21

tI

High concentrations of trichloroethylene (TCE) were found ina composite soil sample from burial areas 1 and 2 and high methylenechloride concentrations were also found in soil samples from the coveredoil lagoon. Soil samples from each of the five disposal areas containedhigh concentrations of metals. Hater samples taken from the leachatelagoon contained notable concentrations of chromium, TCE, and 1,1,1-trich-loroethane, indicating that contaminants are leaching from the disposalareas.

A total of five surface water samples were collected from thenorth and south ditches draining the site. All of these samples containedhigh levels of one or more of the organic compounds listed above, confirm-ing suspicions that volatile organic compounds are leaving the site via thesurface waters. It is not known how persistent these compounds are indownstream waters, but there is a high probability that the natural turbu-lence and aeration associated with surface water flow will cause some ofthese volatile organic compounds to volatilize, reducing their negativeimpacts downstream.

One sediment sample was collected from Facet's north drainageditch and one from the south drainage ditch. Analysis of these samplesshowed the presence of high concentrations of a number of heavy metals.These results indicate that metals are escaping from the disposal areas,binding with soil particles, and migrating downstream in the bottom sedi-ments of drainage ditches. The movement of metals in this fashion isvery slow except during periods of heavy rainfall when the force of largequantities of water moving through the drainage ditches could move signi-ficant quantities of sediments. Unlike volatile organic compounds, heavynetals are very persistent.

It is possible that volatile compounds are escaping from Facetthrough the groundwater, although this cannot be confirmed by currentlyavailable information. A groundwater sample collected from Facet'sprocess water well located about 2500 feet east of the plant site revealedhigh levels of TCE, the source of which may or nay not be Facet. Thepresently available information is not sufficient to determine the sourceof the Facet well's contamination. Based on examination of presently oo

00-J

22

available data, some contaminants (possibly volatile organics) are probablyescaping from the Facet site via the groundwater. Volatile organic com-pounds would be likely to be more persistent in the groundwater than thesurface water. This is due to the slow flow of groundwater along with itslack of exposure to the air which combine to inhibit volatilization ofthese compounds.

1.6 Data Limitations

Site inspections and sampling investigations done at Facetprovide good general information on the location and content of wastedeposited on the site. Detailed information concerning the characteristicsand area! extent of wastes, the characteristics of the soil and ground-water, the extent of surface and groundwater contamination and the subsur-face geology at Facet is not available. This information is necessarybefore the extent of the surface and groundwater contamination problem canbe accurately evaluated. Completion of the detailed site investigationoutlined in Section 3 will satisfy these data requirements. This investi-gation will include the following studies and surveys:

o Safety and Bealth Plano Topographic Surveyo Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areaso Hydrogeological Surveyo Surface Water Investigationso Laboratory AnalysesThe information generated by these studies is necessary to

determine what types of waste materials are present, the areal extent ofdeposited wastes, and the extent to which contaminants are escaping fromthe site. The information is also necessary for a feasibility study ofremedial action alternatives.

1.7 Site Inspection

A preliminary site tour of the designated waste disposal areas >O

of Facet Enterprises Inc was made on May 11, 1982 by personnel from EPAoo

00•vl

23

Region II, Chemung County Health Department, Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc.and C. C. Johnson and Associates, Inc. The purpose of this site visit wasto observe existing conditions including a first-hand look at the problemareas, and to meet with the current owner who is familiar with the historyof the site. No sampling was intended or undertaken during this sitevisit. The following section summarizes the observations resulting fromthe preliminary site tour.

The official of Facet Enterprises who guided the site inspectionon May 11, identified three wastes burial areas, one sand filter and onecovered oil lagoon at the site which lies on a hillside west of the plantbuildings of Facet Enterprises Inc. All disposal areas were found pre-sently inactive. Access to the site is limited by fencing. The site isadjacent to a predominantly residential area. The Mark Twain CommunityGolf Course adjoins the site on the north.

Facet Enterprises has installed a leachate collection pond atthe site. The leachate is pretreated in the pond, treated at the indus-trial wastewater treatment plant of the facility and discharged into theexisting sanitary sewer system. The leachate in the lagoon showed adistinct green color. The surface drainage from the site after oilseparation enters local creeks via existing storm sewers.

The waste burial area No. 1 as shown on Figure 1-3 is locatedon a hill on the northwest portion of the Facet property west of theaccess road. This area was found to be vegetated with grass and shrubs.There was no visible surface stain in this area.

Waste burial area No. 2 as shown on Figure 1-3 lies east of theaccess road. This area is gravelly and sparsely vegetated.

Waste burial area No. 3 as shown on Figure 1-3 is located onthe southwest portion of the Facet property. It is on a steep slopecovered with some grass and shrubs. Some wood and paper wastes werevisible near the base of the fill. It appeared that final cover, gradingand seeding of this area has not yet been completed. The steep surfaceslope at the face of this area will require considerable additional cover ^and grading to bring it to a well designed slope. n

ooM

M00

en

24

I

There is a covered oil lagoon east of burial area No. 3 whereextensive soil discloration was observed. It appeared that oily materialwas oozing to the surface at this location. Presently, none of theseareas is used for hazardous waste disposal.

1.8 Safety and Health Considerations

The health and safety of persons involved in investigations orremedial work at the Facet site can be ensured with adequate precautions.The majority of the materials deposited at the site has been there for10 to 40 years and all of the disposal areas have been covered and vege-tated. These factors make an ambient air hazard highly unlikely. An airsample was collected at the site by NYSDEC directly over the area onthe covered oil lagoon where oily materials were oozing to the surface.The results of analysis of this sample for volatile organic compounds werenegative, reinforcing the belief that contaminated air is not a hazard forthose working on-site.

The nature of the wastes deposited makes the occurence of anexplosion or the presence of a radiation hazard quite unlikely. Workershaving direct contact with the hazardous materials should take appropriateprecautions including use of protective clothing and safety equipmentdepending on the task undertaken. Protective clothing and equipmentinclude full face respirators with cartridges for particulates and organicvapors and Tyvec protective suits, including boots and gloves.

I Site cleanup activities should not pose any danger due to airI or drinking water contamination for residents living in nearby areas.

Problems have been encountered with contamination of public water supplywells in the area but the contamination problem is being monitored and sitecleanup activities should not increase the hazard.

oo

00JON

25

2.0 REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITES

2.1 INITIAL REMEDIAL MEASURES

2.1.1 Objective

Initial remedial measures are straightforward, require a minimumof planning, can be implemented quickly and are consistent with the finalremedy. The measures are used to clean up or alleviate situations thatimpose significant safety or health problems.

2.1.2 Data Analysis

Several samples collected at Facet indicate the presence ofa trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination problem (see Section 1.4). Agroundwater sample collected by NYSDEC from Facet's process water well wasanalyzed and found to have a TCE concentration of 44 ppb. Such concentra-tions of an organic compound are cause for serious concern since Facet'swell taps an aquifer which supplies drinking water to a large number ofpeople. The actual location of Facet's well is east of Route 14 about2500 feet from the plant site. Thus, the high TCE concentration is anindicator of the presence of contaminants in the aquifer without indicatingits source. A hydrogeologic study of the Facet site will be required toassess Facet's role, if any, in the contamination of the aquifer.

Pollution of surface waters may also pose a threat to nearbyresidents, although possibly not as serious as that posed by groundwatercontamination. Two water samples were collected from the plant's northdrainage ditch. Results of analysis of these samples revealed TCE levelsof 31 ppb and 34 ppb. Three water samples were collected from the southdrainage ditch; one of the samples had 60 ppb methylene chloride whichwas the only pollutant detected with a concentration greater than 10 ppb.It is not known how persistent these compounds are and what their effectsare on the downstream water quality. Additional investigations of surface 5

owater quality, discussed in Section 3.6, will be required to determinethe full extent of the surface water contamination problem. §

oo-j

26

2.1.3 Recommended Initial Remedial Measures

Some actions have already been taken at Facet to prevent theescape of contaminants and minimize hazards to local residents. Dischargeof waste materials to on-site disposal areas was discontinued in 1979and all of the waste disposal areas have been covered and vegetated.Extensive grading has been done at the site along with the constructionof a leachate collection system and ditches to divert surface water runoffaround the disposal areas. Leachate is collected, pretreated in theplant's leachate pond, treated in the plant's industrial wastewater treat-ment plant and discharged to the existing sewer system. In addition,access to the site is limited by a fence. These measures have stabilizedthe situation at Facet and in view of the information currently available,additional Initial Remedial Measures are not necessary and are thereforenot recommended.

2.2 SOURCE CONTROL REMEDIAL ACTIONS

2.2.1 Objective

Source control remedial actions are necessary where substantialconcentrations of hazardous substances remain at or near the area wherethey were originally deposited and inadequate barriers exist to retardmigration of the substances into the environment. Criteria used inassessing the need for and type of source control remedial actions are:

1. The extent to which the substances pose a danger to publichealth, welfare or the environment considering (a) popula-tion at risk, (b) amount and form of the substances present,(c) hazardous properties of the substances, and (d) hydro-geologic and other factors that affect the migration of thesubstances into the environment.

2. The extent to which the substances have migrated or arecontained by either natural or man-made barriers.

3. Environmental effects. 0o

00J00

27

ri

V I

As stated in Section 1.6, the identification of the areal extentand the characterization of the waste disposal areas are inadequate foran evaluation of source control remedial alternatives. Further study isalso needed to determine the extent to which the disposal areas are con-taminating the groundwater and posing a threat to public health. It istherefore recommended that consideration of source remedial actions bedeferred until after the completion of the detailed site investigationsproposed in Section 3. The remainder of this section discusses somealternatives that may be considered following completion of the detailedsite investigations.

2.2.2 Potential Source Control Remedial Alternatives

Most of the methods described in this section are based oninformation presented in "Guidance Manual for Minimizing Pollution fromWaste Disposal Sites," by Tolman, Ballestero, Beck, and Enrich,EPA 600/2-78-142, August, 1978. Evaluation and selection of a combina-tion of one or more of these methods may be indicated by the detailedsite investigations.

Isolation of Waste On-site

One alternative method consists of isolating the wastes in thethree burial areas, the covered oil lagoon and the old sand filter.There is a wide assortment of measures which can be used to isolate a wastedeposit and also a variety of techniques and structures available toimplement these measures, some of these techniques are described below.

Since the disposal areas are located on the upgradient portion ofthe Facet site, drainage ditches may be used to divert surface water flowaway from most of the site and discharge it into existing storm sewers.Such ditches were constructed at the site in 1979 and should be in goodcondition. Efforts to upgrade and enlarge them should be undertaken asdetermined necessary in the future. Retention basins to collect thesurface runoff from the site may also be considered.

15>ooo

M oo~J

Another method of isolating the wastes involves capping thedisposal areas with a layer of impermeable material to prevent rainfallfrom infiltrating the contaminated areas and leaching contaminants from thewaste or soil. These capped surfaces should also be graded such thatsurface water runs off them quickly into the drainage ditches. A widevariety of materials are available for construction of an impermeable layerincluding clay, asphalt, fly ash, soil cement, and an assortment of plasticand rubber liner materials. The decision on whether or not to use a linerand selection of liner material would depend on factors such as cost andcompatibility with the waste materials present.

An additional method of waste isolation involves the constructionof an impervious barrier to divert groundwater that may be flowing throughthe contaminated area. The size and location of this barrier will dependon characteristics of groundwater flow and subsurface geology as well asthe quantity, location and characteristics of wastes deposited. Severaldifferent techniques are available for construction of a groundwaterbarrier. The first method involves construction of a slurry-trench cutoffwall. The construction process entails digging a trench, filling it with aslurry containing bentonite (or similar material) and, as excavationprogresses, backfilling the slurry-filled trench with the excavated material.When placed in the trench, the slurry enters any exposed voids in thewalls. The hydrostatic pressure created by the slurry forces the waterfrom the voids, and the bentonite particles begin layering to form a cakethat blocks the interstices of the aquifer materials and prevents flowthrough them. A properly constructed slurry-trench cutoff wall could be adurable, effective barrier which would require minimal maintenance.

A second type of impermeable barrier is a steel sheet pilingcutoff wall. This involves driving lengths of steel sheet piling perma-nently into the ground with a pile-driving hammer. When first installed,the sheet piling wall is not watertight due to mill tolerances in thesheet's interlocking edges. With time, these edges self-seal with the finesediment carried by seeping water. This method is relatively simple andinexpensive requiring no excavation or maintenance after construction.

oo

CDCDO

29

A steel sheet piling cutoff wall should not be used at a disposal sitewhich contains exotic chemicals which may attack the steel. Although thistype of barrier has been used for depths up to 100 feet, the feasibilityof their use for this application cannot be determined at this time.

Another type of impermeable barrier is a grout curtain whichis constructed by injecting solutions or water/solid suspensions underpressure into soils and underlying earth materials. The grout solutionfills the voids in the soil and thereby minimizes or stops the flow ofwater. The most common types of grout are cement, bentonite, and chemicalalthough there are also other specialized grouts available. The types ofgrout and the number and location of injection points required depend uponthe characteristics of the soil and waste material at each specific site.Grouting has been used over a long period of time and has proven to bequite successful. Grouts could be used effectively in a wide rangeof soil types although no grout would be effective if soil permeabilityis too low. Based on the soil permeability data presented in Exhibit 1-2,the permeability of the soil at Facet's disposal areas is high and probablywell suited to grouting.

Grout curtains may be extended to seal the bottom of a wastedisposal area as well as the sides. Methods used are the same as thosedescribed for construction of a vertical grout curtain. The resultingbowl-shaped seal should contain the leachate within the disposal area. Theleachate contained in the disposal area can either be pumped out andtreated, or remain isolated with the waste. In areas with high watertables, a vertical grout curtain would probably have to be used along with

the bottom seal.The sediments lining the drainage ditches north and south of

the Facet site may have accumulated high concentrations of metals necessi-tating remedial action. Removal and disposal of the top couple of inchesof sediment may eliminate most of the metals present. The ditches are notextensive and sediment removal could be done by one or two plant workers ina couple of weeks. Sediments removed from the ditches could be added toone of the existing disposal areas and isolated with its waste by one ofthe methods described previously or disposed of off-site. This determina-tion would be a part of the recommendations of the detailed site investiga-tion.

CO00

30

Ii

A permanent collection system such as a subsurface drain or wellpoint system may be used to control leachate flow away from the disposalareas. A subsurface leachate drain consists of a trench backfilled withsand or gravel and containing a perforated plastic or ceramic drain pipe.The backfill material is slightly more permeable than the surrounding soil,allowing leachate to collect in the drain pipe. A well point systemconsists of a series of shallow wells spaced 3 to 5 feet apart and con-nected to a pump. The pump evacuates air from the well points creating avacuum which forces groundwater to flow through the well points. Either ofthese systems would probably be effective in collecting groundwater,however, the drain system would have lower operation and maintenancerequirements. After collection, leachate could be pumped to the plant'sindustrial wastewater treatment plant with or without pretreatment.

Well locations would be determined by the results of the proposedhydrogeologic investigation. Monitoring wells to detect changes in ground-water quality should probably be constructed on site. A continuousprogram of groundwater sampling and analysis should be developed to deter-mine the effectiveness of the remedial actions.

iI Some of the methods described above could be used in conjunctioni

with removal of a limited amount of highly concentrated waste materialI from one or more of the waste sites. Removal of small quantities of

the most troublesome wastes could be cost effective by making furtherefforts to isolate remaining waste materials much easier.

Removal and Off-site Disposal

Another method of controlling contamination at the Facet sitewould entail removal of all of the waste and other contaminated material.The material removed would have to be transported to an approved disposalsite; this can be an off-site location or a properly engineered on-sitearea prepared for this purpose. Potential off-site disposal areas includetwo landfills in Niagara County, New York and one in Schuylkill County,Pennsylvania. Excavation may be done by front end loaders or other suit-able equipment depending on the characteristics of the waste. Dump trucks,

noo

oo00ro

31

fr I

lined to prevent leaking, may be used for transport. A groundwater moni-toring program should be implemented after completion of this process toensure the absence of contamination. The excavation and reburial processcan be a viable method of cleaning up a contaminated area if proper precau-tions are taken to control nuisances and contamination of the surroundingarea during excavation. Costs and difficulties associated with thisprocedure are considerable. Prediction of the volume of material tobe excavated is extremely difficult and quantities ultimately removed areoften significantly greater than anticipated. In addition, the presence ofsome types of hazardous materials can prevent the use of conventionalexcavating equipment. These variables in excavation procedures, along withthe high costs of transporting large quantities of hazardous material overlong distances and ultimate disposal of contaminated material in anapproved landfill, make excavation and reburial an extremely expensive anddifficult procedure. If a less involved alternative is available whichappears capable of success, it should probably be utilized.

No Action

A third alternative which could be implemented at Facet wouldinvolve taking no source control remedial action, initiating a monitoringprogram to track groundwater contamination and using off-site remedial

( measures as deemed necessary. Selection of this alternative would beinfluenced by the extent and significance of the contamination as deter-

• mined by the detailed site investigation and the cost-effectiveness ofI source control actions compared to other alternatives.

I 2.3 Off-site Remedial Actions

2.3.1 Objective

In the event that source control remedial actions may not effec-**]

tively mitigate the threat to public health, off-site remedial actions nay >be necessary and should be identified. Off-site measures may include (1)

oprovision of permanent alternative drinking water supplies, (2) management oof a contaminant plume in a drinking water aquifer, or (3) stream

32

oo00Ul

modification. The following criteria should be used to determinewhat types of off-site remedial actions are required: (1) contributionof contamination to an air, land, or water pollution problem, (2) theextent to which the substances have migrated or are expected to migratefrom the area of original location, (3) the extent to which natural orman-made barriers currently contain the hazardous substances, (4) environ-mental effects, and (5) experience and approaches used at similar sites.

The detailed site investigations proposed in Section 3 arenecessary to provide the information with which to determine the need forand evaluate off-site remedial actions. The following is a discussion ofalternatives that may be considered in a feasibility study followingcompletion of the detailed site investigations.

2.3.2 Potential Off-site Remedial Alternatives

Should it be confirmed that contaminants from the Facet wastedisposal sites are entering the groundwater aquifer, it is possible thatmany wells located between the site and the Elmira Water Board's (EWB's)currently operating Sullivan Street water supply wells might be affected bythe contamination plume. Even if effective source control measures wereinstituted, contaminants which have already left the site and entered theaquifer could continue to cause serious contamination problems if they arepresent in high enough concentrations. Off-site remedial actions would benecessary under such conditions.

One such action is the closing of all affected wells and theprovision of a permanent alternative water supply. Potential alternatesources include new or existing wells in uncontaminated aquifers or anuncontaminated portion of the polluted aquifer, surface waters, and a blendof contaminated and uncontaminated water depending on the nature of thecontanminants. The feasibility of using new and existing uncontaminatedwells and abandonment of contaminated ones depends upon the extent of

"9aquifer contamination in the area and the availability of uncontaminated *Jgroundwater. Conversion to surface water supplies nay not present any

ogreat difficulties. The EWB has a drinking water supply intake on the 2

oo00

33

Chemung River in Elmira which it uses for part of the public supply (bytelephone, James Barr, Chemung County Health Department, June 9, 1982).

The EWB, however, prefers using its water supply wells whenpossible because of the added expense of treating the river water. Anotherpotential expense associated with the use of surface water for the publicwater supply would be that required for the construction of facilitiesneeded to treat the additional quantities of river water used. Blendingwater from contaminated wells with uncontaminated well water or treatedsurface water can dilute contaminants to a level safe for drinking. Anyattempt to blend water for drinking, however, must be accompanied by athorough water quality monitoring program including priority pollutantscans to ensure public safety. This alternative may not gain publicacceptance.

Another potential off-site remedial action alternative involvesmanaging the plume of contamination and keeping it isolated from un-polluted portions of the aquifer. This alternative involves accuratelylocating the plume of contamination and installing a series of wellsacross the contamination front. Continuous pumping of adequately designedwells would effectively intercept the plume. Water removed by the wellsmay either be treated and used, treated and returned to the aquifer, orsuitably disposed of without treatment. Potential treatment processes forremoving organic compounds from water include granular activated carbon(GAC), aeration, and steam stripping (Althoff et. al, 1981).

Several options exist for the disposal of removed contaminatedgroundwater, among which are discharge into the municipal sewer system foreventual treatment at a wastewater treatment plant or direct discharge tosurface waters. Feasibility of discharge for treatment at a municipaltreatment plant depends largely on the available hydraulic and treatmentcapacity of the wastewater transmission and treatment facilities in thearea. Feasibility of direct discharge to surface waters depends on theremoved groundwater's contaminant concentration as well as the flow of thereceiving water body. A large river or stream would probably have enough ^

>flow to dilute contaminants such that they are no longer a threat to Ohealth. o

o

COCOLn

34

A final option for Off-site remedial action would be to take noaction. This alternative would only be feasible if the contamination werefound to be insignificant and likely to remain that way.

2.4 POST CLOSURE MONITORING

i

2.4.1 Objective

The objective of the post closure monitoring plan is to ensurethat remedial actions are effective at either removing or containingcontaminants and that pathways previously taken by pollutants escaping fromthe site remain acceptably free of contaminants.

2.4.2 Approach and Type of System

The content of a post closure monitoring program could onlybe determined following the identification of the problem by the detailedsite investigation and the selection of the remedial actions to be imple-mented. It may include the monitoring of surface water, groundwaterand/or sediments for a selected set of parameters. Sampling locationsmust be placed on- and off-site to detect residual contaminants and theextent and significance of any migration. Post closure monitoring wouldprovide the means of anticipating the need for any future remedial actions.

2.5 COMMUNITY RELATIONS

2.5.1 Objective

The objective of the community relations effort is to achievecommunity understanding of the actions taken at the site, to obtaincommunity input, and to seek the concurrence of the community for theselected remedial actions.

roo

0300

35

2.5.2 Community Relations Plan

A community relations plan should be developed during the courseof the remedial action activities, and include the formation of an advisorycommittee consisting of interested persons in the community, consultants,and government officials. The advisory group meetings should be open tothe public and provide opportunity for public comment. The group shouldmonitor the progress of the project and become familiar with relevantissues as the project develops. Awareness of community attitudes towardsproposed actions and responsiveness to issues as they arise are otherresponsibilities of the advisory committee.

Public meetings should be held to provide information on, butnot limited to:

o Regulatory framework of the Comprehensive EnvironmentResponse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), alsoknown as the Superfund Law.

o A review of research conducted at the Facet site on thecontamination problem.

o Alternative remedial action measures considered,o Effects of actions considered on water quality of public

and private wells.This information may be presented through fact sheets, slides, exhibits,news releases or other graphic communications.

oo

COCO

36

r

Ir

3.0 SITE INVESTIGATION WORK PLAN

3.1 Objective

The objective of this section is to present a detailed work planof the site investigations that must be completed at the Facet Enterprisessite before remedial activities can be effectively planned. These investi-gations would determine the present extent of contamination at the site aswell as identify the pathways for migration of contaminants to the sur-rounding environment. The five major contaminant sources at the Facetsite are:

o the three waste burial areaso the covered oil lagoono the old sand filterAll of these areas would be considered in the investigations

recommended for the site. These investigations are described in thefollowing sections and include:

o Safety and Health Plano Topographic Surveyo Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areaso Hydrogeological Surveyo Surface Hater Investigationo Laboratory Analysis

3.2 Safety and Health Plan

Prior to commencement of any field investigation or remedialwork at Facet Enterprises, an air sampling and analysis program mustbe conducted to identify and quantify potentially toxic and/or hazardousambient air contaminants. A single air sample previously collected at thesite during a sampling investigation by NYSDEC did not detect any contami-nation. Nevertheless, additional samples should be collected and analyzedas a precautionary measure to ensure the safety of workers on-site.The results of this additional sampling effort would determine the level ^of protection necessary for personnel involved in investigations andcleanup activities. §

oo00

37 oo

Air samples would be collected using modified high volume sam-plers for particulates and semi-volatile materials (PCBs, etc.) and solidadsorbents for gaseous compounds. The site air sampling program shouldconsist of the following:

o Collection of samples up-wind, on-site and immediatelydown-wind from the site for eight (8) to twenty-four(24) hours each for three (3) consecutive days. The sampleswould be transported to a laboratory for analysis followingcollection in the field. The resulting data would be usedto establish the site safety plan, determine sampling andoperationial protocols for remedial field work and establish

I ambient air quality both on and off site.' o Collection of personal air samples using calibrated, indivi-

I dually carried air sampling equipment would be performed byon-site personnel. Such equipment generally consists of asmall, battery-powered air pump which hangs from the wearer'sbelt. A cassette designed to trap specific contaminants isattached to the pump's intake hose. These cassettes usually

I contain a filter or charcoal tube designed to capturespecific pollutants for subsequent analysis. The cassetteattaches to the wearer's shirt collar such that the device'sair intake is in the general proximity of the wearer'smouth. The pump's air intake rate is adjusted to duplicatethe respiration rate of the average human as closely aspossible. Samples collected would be used to provide

r 8-hour weighted average values for particulates, semi-volatiles and gaseous compounds. One of these samples

I would be collected during each day that work takes place ateach site. It is estimated that a total of 40 of thesesamples would be collected.

o Collection of samples down-wind from the site duringaugering operations at the waste disposal areas. Theresulting data would be used to determine the effects ofwaste sampling on air quality in the area. It is estimatedthat a total of 15 of these samples would be collected.

oo

0003

38 «>

Additional tasks to be completed during the safety and healthassessment of the site include:

o Photoionization measurements to detect "hot spots' (regionsof high concentration of organic and inorganic vapors), ifany, would be conducted during the initial site walk-over.Monitoring would be continued while samples are beingcollected from the waste burial areas,

o Evaluation of the presence of radioactive wastes (gamma) bya site walk-over using a Geiger-Muller (G-M) instrument.

Finally, all personnel scheduled for a site visit should be ingood general health; further, those spending a significant amount of timeat the site must have undergone a baseline medical profile specificfor hazardous waste work authorized by the office-in-charge. Such medicalprofiling normally includes the following tests: pulmonary function, bloodchemistry, urine analysis, and liver and kidney functions. Results ofmedical profiling may indicate the need for further testing. The appro-priate personnel protection equipment needed for a site visit must becoordinated through a certified health and safety officer. This equipmentwould include full face respirators with cartridges for particulates andorganic vapors and Tyvec protective suits (including gloves and boots) forthe initial site walk-over or any other activity bringing personnel intodirect contact with the hazardous substances on-site.

3.3 Topographic Survey

The preparation of a detailed site topographic nap is an inte-gral part of the Facet Enterprises site remedial investigation. Thetopographic map is to establish baseline topographic conditions necessaryin locating the waste disposal areas and sampling points and in preparingsite drainage plans as well as for recording field information.

The topographic map of the site area should be prepared at ascale of 1 inch - 40 feet with one foot contour intervals. The surveyshould show all building foundations, paved areas, disposal areas, streams

oo

00vo

39 o

and other important features. The best currently-existing topographic mapshowing the site is the USGS, 1:24,000, 7.5 minute, Borseheads quadranglewhich has a contour interval of 10 feet. This map is not detailed enoughto satisfy the project's requirements. The required topographic map shouldbe based upon the aerial photographic survey currently being conducted byEPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC). EPICcompleted an interim report on Facet in July, 1982 (EPA, 1982a) and a finalreport in October, 1982 (EPA, 1982c).

3.4 Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areas

The purpose of this survey is to determine the exact location,areal extent, and depth of contaminated material as well as the waste'scharacteristics and relationship to water table levels in each of thefive disposal areas. Information concerning the location of waste mate-rials would be used to develop a waste profile, which, when combinedwith water table data and chemical characteristics of wastes dis-posed, would provide the necessary understanding of existing site condi-tions. This information would be used to estimate cost, difficulty, andtechnical limitations associated with possible on-site source controlremedial measures and to identify possible hazards associated with wastematerials present in the disposal areas.

If one of the remedial measures under consideration were isola-tion of waste materials in-place, knowledge of the waste profiles and watertable levels at the disposal areas would enable reasonably accurate esti-mates to be made of groundwater control structure requirements and costs.For example, the waste characterization would be helpful in screeningconstruction materials which may be chemically incompatible with disposedwastes.

If wastes were to be excavated and removed, the waste profilewould allow accurate estimates of waste volumes to be removed as wellas removal costs. Currently established boundaries for the disposal areasare estimates, especially in the cases of the covered oil lagoon and

"3>O

oO

.«40

r-

old sand filter. Depths of waste at burial areas 1, 2, and 3 are said tobe 15 feet, however, the accuracy of this estimate is questionable. Thevolume of waste material to be dealt with at these sites could be signifi-cantly greater than originally anticipated. Waste depths at the coveredoil lagoon and the old sand filter are unknown, reinforcing the need forsuch an investigation. The waste characterization would aid in determiningthe safety hazards and equipment requirements associated with excavationshould that prove to be a feasible alternative.

Samples of waste from each of the disposal areas obtainedand analyzed to date provide a limited characterization of contaminantspresent and their concentrations, as discussed in Section 1.3. Theselimited data would be helpful in anticipating potential problems andsafety hazards to be encountered during the detailed investigation.

The five disposal areas at the Facet site all contain wastematerials with physical consistency similar to that of soil. This is, inpart, because of all of the areas have been filled and vegetated. Onesmall area has been noted which may be an exception to this statement. Itis a portion of the covered oil lagoon where oily material has been observedoozing through the soil surface. This area is small and can probably besampled, along with the rest of the waste disposal areas, with standardsoil sampling equipment. Appropriate sampling devices include an auger anda split spoon core sampler.

The following procedure is recommended to be followed at eachof the five disposal areas:

1. Using historical aerial photography and other availableinformation, outline the preliminary boundary of the dis-posal area on the topographic site map and then accurately•ark this "suspected" boundary on the site.

2. Do a magnetometer survey of the area to locate any burieddrums or metallic waste containers in and around the area.This would permit consideration of the removal of thesecontainers as a remedial measure. The locations of thesecontainers would also be avoided in siting boreholes. ^

3. At the midpoint of each side of the suspected boundary,conduct borehole investigations as shown in Figure 3-1

oovo

41

FIGURE 3-1

PROCEDURE FOR SAMPLING WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS

O-- -o

6

LEGEND

O" Initial boreholes to confirm disposal area boundariesQ-Additional boreholes to confirm disposal area boundaries (to be

installed on either side of initial boreholes at 5 foot invervalsas needed)

^-Inner boreholes for waste characterization and groundwater loca-tion and characterization (actual location is based on quarteringfollowing disposal area boundary revisions)Suspected disposal area boundary

•"Dividing line separating waste disposal area into auarters (locationis based on boundary revisions following analysis of initial andadditional borehole results)

oo

COIOUl

42

r

fII

to confirm or revise the boundary as necessary. Drillthe initial borehole just inside the boundary taking splitspoon soil samples immediately below the topsoil or over-burden and thereafter at 5-foot intervals or changes inmaterials penetrated. Use visual observation of samples tonote top and bottom level of wastes in the borehole.Preserve and log samples for later laboratory analysis asconsidered necessary. Drill additional boreholes outwards orinwards at 5-foot intervals (depending on whether wasteswere detected or not in the first borehole) examining thesamples for the presence of wastes and using the informationto refine the location of the waste disposal boundary at themidpoint of each side. Use these locations to prepare arevised boundary of the waste disposal site (not shown inFigure 3-1). It is estimated that 12 boreholes at anaverage depth of 10 feet would be required at each site.

4. Drill 4 boreholes, one at the center of each quadrant ofthe site as shown in Figure 3-1, penetrating the wastematerial and extending to points just below the water.Sample materials penetrated as in (3) above and recorddepths to top and bottom of wastes and to the water table.Sample groundwater in each borehole. Prepare composites (oneeach) of waste samples and groundwater samples from the 4boreholes for laboratory analysis of all priority pollutants.

The above procedure should provide a cost-effective means ofidentifying and characterizing the waste disposal areas with sufficientaccuracy for an evaluation of remedial actions.

In addition to the efforts described above, an investigationshould be undertaken to characterize the previously discussed undergroundtunnel present at the site (see Section 1.2.2). This investigation shouldinclude the collection and evaluation of all pertinent information relatedto the installation and use of the tunnel. A site inspection and samplingand analysis of samples from the tunnel may be undertaken if such activi-

^ties seem warranted by the results of initial investigations. >

oo

oo10

43

It

3.5 Hydrogeological Survey

There is a lack of site-specific hydrogeologic information onthe Facet Enterprises site that is necessary for a determination of theextent of groundwater contamination (if any) and the evaluation of remedialaction alternatives. EPA Region II has been in consultation with FacetEnterprises on a proposal for an investigation of the geology and ground-water conditions at the site to be undertaken by Facet Enterprises. Arevised version of that proposal prepared by Radian Corporation for FacetEnterprises is included in Appendix A.

The hydrogeological survey proposes a number of modificationsand expansion of the Radian proposal. It incorporates the use of theCh em Ling River Basin Groundwater Model described in Section 1.3.

Radian Proposal

The following is a description of the Radian Corporation'sproposed hydrogeological investigation for the Facet site (Radian, 1982).The proposed data collection plan consists of a program of coring, monitor-ing well installation, sampling, and chemical analysis to determine thefollowing:

o subsurface lithology;o presence or absence of groundwater;o depth to groundwater, if present;o groundwater flow directions;o presence or absence of subsurface contamination from on-site

waste disposal; ando potential for off-site migration of contaminants.

The proposal provides for the installation of five monitoring wells withapproximate locations as shown in Figure 3-2.

Well 0-1 is located to be upgradient of all waste disposalactivities and to represent background conditions. Wells D-1, D-2, D-3 andD-4 are downgradient wells based on regional groundwater flow in the Newtown ^

•pCreek aquifer. O

CD

44

Disposal Area HIAroa «2

Dir.pos.il Aica W3I loldinq PondInactive LagoonSolllnu) TankInaclivi; hnlioll Tank

.-inkInaclivo Slud()C DisposalLnyoon

PLANTBUILDINGS

FIGURE 3-2 APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER MONITORING

100 WELL LOCATIONS FROM RADIAN'S PROPOSAL

Each of the five wells specified would be drilled to bedrockusing a hollow stem auger. Core samples would be collected at five footintervals using a split spoon sampler. Samples would be labelled, appro-priately preserved, and stored. After drilling to total depth, wellcasings and screens would be emplaced and wells would be gravel packed andgrouted with cement to land surface.

Based on the field descriptions of the lithology and the pre-sence or absence of groundwater at each location, a determination would bemade as to which samples (or composite samples) should be analyzed.Because none of the drilling is actually through a waste disposal area, itis not likely to be necessary or cost-effective to analyze each sample.However, selected samples or composites may provide data on lateralmigration of groundwater perched above clay layers or on infiltration ofcontaminated runoff in the area.

Following well installation, the drilling locations and eleva-tions would be surveyed to an accuracy of +0.01 feet by a qualified localsurveyor for use in accurately evaluating the groundwater flow directionand subsurface geology at the site.

On the day following completion of well installation, waterlevels would be measured and groundwater samples collected from each wellusing EPA-approved sampling and analytical techniques.

Based on a review of available data from samples previouslycollected at the site, Radian recommends that the following chemicalanalyses be performed on groundwater and selected core samples collectedon-site. Core samples would be analyzed for the parameters listed inTable 3-1. Radian states that because acid extractable and base-neutralextractable organics and pesticides have not been detected (and are notexpected to be present in the wastes at the site), complete prioritypollutant analyses are not recommended and the parameters identified inTable 3-1 should encompass the range of expected contaminants. In additionto the parameters in Table 3-1, groundwater samples would also be analyzedfor the RCRA groundwater parameters, as identified in the Federal Register, ^May 19, 1980, Part 265.92 (see Table 3-2). O

oo

CO\0-J

46

TABLE 3-1. PRIORITY POLLUTANTS PROPOSED BYRADIAN FOR ANALYSIS IN CORE SAMPLESCOLLECTED AT THE FACET SITE

VOLATILE ORGANICS

Ac roleinAcrylonitrileBenzeneTolueneEthylbenzeneCarbon TetrachlorideChlorobenzene1,2-Dichloroethane1,1,1-Tr ichloroethane1,1-Dichloroethane1,1-Dichloroethylene1,1,2-Tr ichloroethane1,1,2,2-TetrachloroethaneChloroethane2-Chloroethyl vinyl etherChloroform

1.2-Dichloropropane1.3-DichloropropeneMethylene chlorideMethyl chlorideMethyl bromideBrorooformDichlorobromoethaneTr ichlorofluoronethaneDichlorodifluoromethaneChlorodibromonethaneTetrachloroethyleneTr ichloroethyleneVinyl chloride1,2-trans-Dichloroethylenebis(Chloromethyl) ether

METALS

AntimonyArsenicBerylliumCadmiumChromiumCopperLead

MercuryNickelSeleniumSilverThalliumZinc

MISCELLANEOUS

Aroclor 1016Aroclor 1221Aroclor 1232Aroclor 1242Aroclor 1248Aroclor 1254Aroclor 1260Total Cyanides

TJ>O

oO

00VO00

47

TABLE 3-2. RCRA GROUND-WATER ANALYSESPROPOSED BY RADIAN

GROUND-WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS

ChlorideIronManganesePhenolsSodiumSulfate

GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION PARAMETERS

phSpecific ConductanceTotal Organic CarbonTotal Organic Halogen

WATER SUPPLY SUITABLITY PARAMETERS

ArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumFluorideLeadMercuryNitrateSeleniumSilverEndrinLindaneMethoxychlorToxaphene2,4-D2,4,5-TP SilvexRadiumGross AlphaGross BetaTurbidityColiform Bacteria

noo

00vo

48

Upon completion of the chemical analyses of groundwater andcore samples, Radian will prepare a report which will be submitted toFacet, describing the results of the study and making recommendationsregarding the need for any further study or remedial action at the site.The following information will be included in the report:

o Description of subsurface lithology, including boring logs;o Assessment of site hydrogeologic conditions including discussion

of the occurrence, depth, and flow of groundwater, if present;o Map of water table elevations;o Discussion of the effects, if any, of pumping in nearby wells

on groundwater flow at the Facet site;o Presentation and interpretation of analytical data on core

samples and/or groundwater samples;o Assessment of the occurrence or potential for groundwater

contamination; ando Reconunendations for further action.

Recommended Modifications Of Radian Proposal

The following are recommendations for enhancing the Radianproposal:

1. Install wells U-1, D-3 and D-4 essentially as proposedby Radian (see Figure 3-3} but, in addition, performin-situ permeability tests to determine the permeabilityof the aquifer at the site. This would provide informationon the rate of groundwater flow through the aquifer atthe disposal site at litte additional cost. The informationwould be a valuable input to the modeling process.

2. Use the water table levels observed in these three wellsset out in a triangular pattern to plot water table contoursand determine hydraulic gradients in the vicinity of thewaste disposal areas and thus determine the basic ground-water flow direction from the area. Assume this direction tobe along the line through 0-1, D-1 and D-2. Install wells • >oD-1 and D-2 adding in-situ permeability determinations asfor wells U-1, D-3 and D-4. o

rvooo

49

' T

PLANTBUILDINGS

x A-5

"•>„

LEGEND

Disposal Arm HIr)in|>or.;il Arm M2nisiins.il Ainn W3Inkling Pond

Inaclivn l.nrioonSolllmri TankIn.'ichvn Imhnll Tankr>nlllinn TnnkInnclivn Slii(l(|C Dispnsal

SuspectedContaminantFlow Line .. vm

n HT

FIGURE 3-3 APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS

1061 tooINCLUDING ADDITIONS TO RADIAN'S PROPOSAL

3. Add wells A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-5 to the five proposedby Radian with approximate locations as shown in Figure 3-3.Nells A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4 would provide additional infor-mation in defining the contamination plume. Well A-5is located between U-1 and the Facet Enterprises well eastof Route 14 and is intended to provide information on waterquality changes in the direction towards that well in whichTCE contamination has been observed. No in-situ permeabilitytesting is proposed for these wells.

4. Analyze one water sample from each of the 10 wells forthe full range of priority pollutants including acid extrac-table and base-neutral extractable organics and pesticides.Contrary to Radian's claim, all three of these types ofpollutants have been detected in samples taken from thesite. In addition, the proposed sampling represents thefirst set of borehole and groundwater sampling to be under-taken on the disposal site and should be subjected to acomplete priority pollutant scan. Such a scan is alsoindicated because the character of the wastes disposed atthe site is not fully known.

5. Omit the Radian proposed analyses of core samples fromthe wells since the really significant migration of pollu-tants is likely to take place through the groundwater.

6. Omit the Radian proposed RCRA groundwater analyses sincethe analyses of real relevance to this remedial action plan,the priority pollutant scan, would be undertaken.

Model Application

The above modified Radian proposal would provide information onthe geology and hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer and locate thecontamination plume and its direction of flow on the Facet site. Informa- ^

>tion from this set of site investigations may then be input to the Cheraung oRiver Basin Groundwater Model to estimate the contamination flow path and o

o

o10

51

I location of its front in the aquifer. This would indicate the likelyextent to which the aquifer and specific wells are being contaminated andare likely to be contaminated in the future. Existing and/or new wells maybe used to sample water quality in the vicinity of the computer predictedplume and thus refine the location of the plume. With the plume locatedand characterized, a feasibility study of remedial actions may then pro-

} . ceed.i [_ Application of the model would require a review and updating; of data input used by Reisenauer (1977b). Any newly developed data on

the hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer from recent pumping testsshould be incorporated. Changes in groundwater extraction as a result ofnew and abandoned wells need to be incorporated.

The model should be run with boundaries similar to those shownin Figure 1-4 but with an appropriately wider range of flow lines beingexamined to explore the widest range of effects depending on pumping ratesof vicinity wells. For costing purposes, three computer runs have beenincluded in the hydrogeologic survey.

3.6 Surface Water Investigation

Surface water from the Facet Enterprises site is drained bytwo networks of ditches which flow to Newtown Creek as shown in Figure3-4. The first set, which drains the northern portion of the site, forms asingle ditch which is located along the plant's northern border. Thisdrainage ditch goes underground and discharges into May's Creek near Route14. May's Creek is an intermittent stream which parallels Facet's nor-thern boundary just beyond the plant property. Upon reaching the endof Facet's property. May's Creek turns south and follows Route 14 beforeturning east again and joining Newtown Creek.

Surface water collected by the plant's southern network ofditches passes through an oil separator before leaving the site via outfall002. This outfall is located at about the midpoint of the plant site'ssouthern boundary. After leaving the Facet site, this water enters an openditch and flows south eventually joining a tributary to Eldridge Lake. Thelake discharges into Diven Creek which flows east and empties into NewtownCreek, a tributary to the Chemung River.

52

vooCO

FIGURE 3-4

SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS

\1-May's Creek - upstream of disposal areas2-May's Creek - downstream of disposal areas3-Facet's northern ditch - downstream of sites4-Facet's drainage ditch - across from Facet on east side of Route 3285-Facet's leachate lagoon6-Ditch receiving flow through Facet discharge 002 at 18th Street7-Ditch receiving flow through Facet discharge 002 at 14th Street8-Tributary to Eldridge Lake, downstream of its confluence with theditch that receives flow from Facet discharge 002

9-Eldridge Lake near confluence with the tributary carrying flow fromFacet discharge 002

Note: Large arrowheads indicate direction of surface water flow

oo

10o

53

i l

During previous sampling efforts within the plant boundaries,high levels of volatile organic compounds have been detected in water fromthe drainage ditches. In addition, high concentrations of metals havebeen measured in the sediments of these ditches. Additional surfacewater and sediment samples should be collected to ascertain the extentof contaminant migration from Facet through surface water and accompanyingsediment movement through drainage ditches.

A surface water sampling program is recommended that wouldutilize the set of sampling points proposed by the New York State Depart-ment of Environmental Conservation (Carol Rerrington, Memorandum toBob McCarthy, March 16, 1982). Collection of surface water and bottomsediment samples from the following locations (see Figure 3-4) are pro-posed:

1. May's Creek - upstream of disposal areas2. May's Creek - downstream of disposal areas3. Facet's northern drainage ditch - downstream of disposal

areas4. Facet's drainage ditch - across from Facet on the east

side of Route 145. Facet's leachate lagoon6. Ditch receiving flow through Facet's discharge 002 at 18th

Street7. Ditch receiving flow through Facet's discharge 002 at 14th

Street8. Tributary to Eldridge Lake, downstream of confluence with

the ditch which receives flow from Facet's discharge 0029. Eldridge Lake near confluence with the tributary carrying

flow from Facet discharge 002It is recommended that a complete priority pollutant scan be

performed on each of the samples collected rather than the more limitedlist of parameters proposed by NYSDEC for analysis in a Mobile Laboratory.This change would provide a more complete characterization of the water andwould be consistent with the parameters recommended for analysis in otherparts of the site investigation. o

o

IOo

54

The data generated by analysis of these samples would be used todetermine the extent and significance of contaminant migration from thesite. Based on these determinations, appropriate remedial measures maythen be planned.

3.7 Laboratory Analysis

Analytical support for Superfund's Hazardous Waste remedialaction investigation is routinely provided by the national ContractorLaboratory Program (CLP). This program is coordinated by VIAR (Alexandria,VA), a management consultant firm under contract to EPA's Sample ManagementOffice (SMO). All CLP analyses are performed by private laboratories ofproven ability which have won competitive contract awards. Continuedlaboratory performance is assured through ongoing quality assuranceevaulations conducted by the Environmental Monitoring and Support Labora-tory/Las Vegas (EMSL/LV). EMSL/LV is also responsible for developing allmethods, standards and protocols used by contractor laboratories. Finaldata review and evaluation is conducted by the CLP support staff withassistance from EMSL/LV.

Although the majority of samples collected can be analyzedunder the standardized laboratory protocols, the Sample Analysis Programalso provides the capability for specialized or custom analytical ser-vices. Requirements for tissue, non-priority pollutant quantification orother types of analyses not yet provided by standardized laboratory con-tracts may be scheduled under the Special Analytical Services (SAS) pro-gram. All analyses performed under this program are subject to the samequality assurance and data review requirements stipulated for standardanalyses.

A list of samples and analyses required for the detailed siteinvestigations is presented in Table 3-3. As noted previously, somesamples in addition to those listed in Table 3-3 would be collected but notimmediately analyzed. Certain of these samples may be analyzed later

^depending on the results of the planned sample analyses and observations in >the field.

oo

55

TABLE 3-3

FACET ENTERPRISES DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION - SAMPLES REQUIRINGLABORATORY ANALYSES

SAMPLE TYPEt OFSAMPLES ANALYSIS REQUIRED

RELATEDINVESTIGATION SAMPLE LOCATION

AIR - Participates- Semi-Volatiles- Gaseous Compounds

Safety & Health Up-wind ofdisposal areas

AIR

AIR

AIR

SEDIMENT

18

40

10

SOIL

- Particulates- Semi-Volatiles- Gaseous Compounds

- Particulates- Semi-Volatiles- Gaseous Compounds

- Particulates- Semi-Volatiles- Gaseous Compounds

Priority PollutantScan

Priority PollutantScan

Safety & Health

Safety & Health

Safety t Health

Surface Hater

Identification andCharacterization ofDisposal Areas

At disposal sites

Downwind ofdisposal sites

Personal sampleby Safety andHealth Officer

Facet drainageditches and tribu-taries to NewtownCreek

One composite fromeach waste disposalarea

loo

..... r

TABLE 3-3 (Continued)

FACET ENTERPRISES DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION - SAMPLES REQUIRINGLABORATORY ANALYSES

SAMPLE TYPE* OPSAMPLES ANALYSIS REQUIRED

RELATEDINVESTIGATION SAMPLE LOCATION

HATER

HATER

HATER

10

10

Priority PollutantScan

Priority PollutantScan

Priority PollutantScan

Identification andCharacterization ofDisposal Areas

Hydrogeolog ical

Surface Hater

One groundwater com-posite from fourboreholes at eachwaste disposal area

One groundwaterfrom each ground-water monitoringwell

Facet drainageditches and tribu-taries to Newtown Creek

806t too

rtI 3.8 Schedule for Remedial Planning Activities

I A preliminary bar chart schedule by task for the Work Planis presented in Figure 3-5. Detailed site investigations would proceed

I over a 17 week period following the selection of a contractor(s) for the< investigations by means of a Request For Proposal (RFP). The scheduling of

sub-tasks of the site investigations is shown. It is anticipated that theI feasibility study of remedial actions would start 3 weeks after completion

of the site investigations report and be completed in 12 weeks. Schedulingj of the tasks for preparation of design and contract documents and imple-

mentation of remedial actions is presently indefinable.

3.9 Costs/i, Estimated consultant's direct labor requirements and their

associated costs for the detailed site investigations at Facet Enterprisesj are shown in Attachment A. Estimated manhours required total 977 at

estimated cost in the range of $14,000 to $18,000. Other direct costsof the investigations are within the $140,000 to $165,000 range asdetailed in Attachment B. Costs of the remaining tasks are presentlyundefinable.

SB

WEEKS

12 16 20 24 28 32 36

1.0 RFP & CONTRACTOR SELECTION2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey2.3 Identification and Characterization

of Disposal Areas

2.4 Hydrogeological Survey

2.5 Surface Water Investigations2.6 Laboratory Analysis2.7 Data Evaluation and Report Prepara-

tion3.0 FEASIBILITY STUDY - REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES

3.1 Source Control Actions3.2 Off-site Control Actions

4.0 DESIGN/CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION6.0 COMMUNITY RELATIONS

•••

•

Illllllllllllll

•minium

Illlllllllllllll

Illllllllllllll

mmimniiM

—

mmmmi

•

•PHM

--Tiiiiiimmiiliiiiiinii

Illllllllllllll

immiinmIllllllllllllll

Illllllllllllll

millllMBl

Illlllllllllllll

•

Illlllllllllllll

•••"•• | | |

Illlllllllllllll Illlllllllllllll Illlllllllllllllll

--»•- -^

iiniiiiiiiiiinii

FIGURE 3-5 FACET ENTERPRISES wmmmmmm continuous Ef for t

REMEDIAL ACTION SCHEDULE Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Intermittent E f fo r t

__ ^ Undefined start and duration

OT6I 100

FACET ENTERPRISES REFERENCES

Althoff, W.F., Cleary, R.W., and Roux, P.H., September, 1981. AquiferDecontamination for Volatile Organics: A Case History. Groundwater,September - October, 1981, Volume 19, Number 5.

Finster, Bruce, August 28, 1980. Memorandum to Bruce Butler, RegionalWater Engineer - subj.: Contamination of the Kentucky Avenue wellwith TCE. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,Avon, New York.

Hazen and Sawyer, April, 1969. Report on Comprehensive Water Supply Studyfor Chemung County, New York. New York State Department of Health,Albany, New York.

Herrington, Carol, March 25, 1981a. Sampling Inspection Report - FacetEnterprises, Inc., New York State Department of EnvironmentalConservation, Avon, New York.

Herrington, Carol, August 7, 1981b. Facet Sampling Data. New York StateDepartment of Environmental Conservation, Avon, New York.

Herrington, Carol, March 16, 1982. Memorandum to Bob McCarty, AssociateSanitary Engineer - subj.: Use of Mobile Lab for a Sampling Projectin Region 8. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,Avon, New York.

Leichter, Irving, June 30, 1980. Hazardous Waste Site Inspection Report -Facet Enterprises, Elmira Heights, New York. Fred C. Hart Associates,Inc., Newark, New Jersey.

Miller, T.S., A.D. Randall, J.L. Belli, and R.V. Alien, 1982. Geohydrologyof the Valley - Fill Aquifer in the Elmira Area, Chemung County,New York. Open File Report 82-110, Department of the Interior,United States Geological Survey. Albany, New York.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, April 11, 1979.Information Dossier 79.6. Avon, New York.

Radian Corporation, June 10, 1982. Revised Proposal to Perform anInvestigation of Geology and Groundwater Conditions at FacetEnterprises, Elmira, New York.

v*vP

60

iI! I! 1 Reisenauer, A.E., November, 1977a. Groundwater Model Application to the

Chemung River Basin 208 Study Area, New York State. Southern Tier•*• Central Regional Planning and Development Board. Battelle Pacific! I Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington.• I

Reisenauer, A.E., November, 1977b. Groundwater Model Test Cases for the/ Chemung River Basin 208 Study Area, New York State. Southern Tier

: I, Central Regional Planning and Development Board. Battelle PacificNorthwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington.

I Tolraan, Ballestero, Beck and Emrich, August, 1978. Guidance Manual for• '• Minimizing Pollution from Waste Disposal Sites. EPA 600/2-78-142.

Cincinnati, Ohio.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, July, 1982a. Site Investi-gation Facet Enterprises, Inc. Elmira Heights, New York - InterimReport. TS-PIC-2030. Las Vegas, Nevada.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, July 1982a. Facet Enter-prises, Inc. Site Investigation - Elmira Heights, New York - InterimReport. TS-PIC-2030. Las Vegas, Nevada.

United states Environmental Proteciton Agency-Region II, November 1982b.Letter to Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc.: Comments on Draft FacetRemedial Action Master Plan. New York, New York.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, October 1982c. FacetEnterprises, Inc. Site Investigation - Elmira Heights, New York.TS-PIC-82030. Las Vegas, Nevada.

I

61

ATTACHMENT A

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

CONSULTANT DIRECT LABOR

0300582/

Estimated Personhours

Task Description

1.0 RFP AND CONTRACTORSELECTION

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey

2.3 Identificationand Characterization ofDisposal Areas

2.4 Hydr©geologicalSurvey

2.5 Surface HaterInvestigations

2.6 Laboratory Analysis

2.7 Data Evaluation andReport Preparation

TOTALS

P4 P3 P2 PI Tech Other Totals

12 32 16 80

1

8

12

20

45

16

2

16

108

2

40

196

32 24

16

40 120 8

72 128 8

8

16 4

100 32 40 24

316 296 48 76

73

18

192

328

10

20

256

977

oo

r

i ,

Task Description

Rates ($ per hour)

ATTACHMENT A (continued)

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

CONSULTANT DIRECT LABOR COSTS

03005822

Estimated Cost ($)

P4 P3 P2 PI Tech Other Total

23 18 15 13 10

1.0 RFP AND CONTRACTORSELECTION

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS

2.1 Safety and Health

2.2 Topographic Survey

2.3 Identification andCharacterization ofDisposal Areas

2.4 HydrogeologicalSurvey

2.5 Surface HaterInvestigations

2.6 Laboratory Analysis

2.7 Data Evaluation andReport Preparation

Totals

Range

92 216 480 208 80 56

23 288 480

36 240

184 288 600 1560

276 1944 1080 1664

36 120

240

168

56

56

28

1132

959

276

2688

5020

156

268

460 720 1500 416 400 168 3664

1035 3528 4740 3848 480 532 14,163

$14,000 - $16,000

ooo

vo

ATTACHMENT B Q30Q59

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION P^rtrtCO

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TASK Cost Range ($)

1.0 RFP i Contractor Selection $350 - $550

2.1 Safety and Health10 Baseline Medical Profiles 9 $150 $1,5005 Medical Examinations 9 $350 1,750Sample Collection and Surveys

45 days x 8 hours/day 9 $15/hr40 hours - P § $23/hrDirect Labor (DL)Total Labor Cost * D.L. x 2.2Contingency - 20%Subtotal $16,685

Total Cost - Safety and Health $19,935Range - Safety and Health $18,000 - $22,000

2.2 Topographic Survey (Based on Information $3,000 - $5,000from Photoscience, Inc.)

2.3 Identification and Characterization of Disposal Areas- 5 sites x 4 holes per site x 30 ft

depth per hole with sampling «600 ft 9 $6.50/ft $3,900

- 5 sites x 12 holes per site x 10 ftdepth per hole with sampling -600 ft 9 $6.50/ft 3,9005 sites x 4 GW samples per site *20 GW samples § $10 200

- 5 sites x 4 holes per site x 2 splitspoon samples per hole « 40 samples0 $12 480

- Surveying, Layout, and Levelling3 persons x 3 days

- Investigation of tunnel on site- Mobilization- Report - 40 hrs 9 $23/hr x 2.2- Subtotal ^- Contingencies 20% 2,653 O

- Total Cost - Identification and gCharacterization of Disposal Areas $19,917 i~>

- Range - identification and Charac-terization of Disposal Areas $19,000 - $22,000 <-"\o

ATTACHMENT B (Continued)

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION 0300582S&

! OTHER DIRECT COSTS• I .it I TASK Cost Range ($)! I 2.4 Hydrogeologic Survey and Groundwater Modelling

Hydrogeologic SurveyMobilization $ 900Construct 10 wells 9 $25/ft. 20,000Develop 10 wells 9 $100 each 1,000Insitu Permeability Testing5 wells: 8 hrs 9 $90/hr 720

Surveying, Layout, and Levelling3 persons x 3 days

10 wells x 1 GW Sample 9 $10Report - 40 hrs 9 $23/hr x 2.2SubtotalContingencies 20% _____Total Cost - Hydrogeologic Survey $32,285

- Groundwater ModellingData Collection and Review

P - 24 hours 9 $23/hr 552Tech - 40 hours 9 $15/hr 600

Running Model (3 runs 9 2 days each)P - 48 hrs e $23/hr 1,104Total DL $ 2,256

Total Labor Cost - 2.2 x DL 4,963Computer Time 100Miscellaneous ODCs 150Subtotal $ 5,213

Contingencies - 20% 1,043Total Cost - Groundwater Modelling $ 6,256

Total Cost - Hydrogeologic Survey $38,541and Groundwater Modelling

Range - Hydrogeologic Survey andGroundwater Modelling $37,000 - $43,000

2.5 Surface Water InvestigationCollect 10 surface water t 10 sediment

samplesP - 16 hrs « $23 $ 368Tech - 40 hrs 9 $15 600 2

- DL $ 968 OTotal Labor Cost - DL x 2.2 2,130Miscellaneous - Transport, ODCs 170 ®Subtotal $ 2,300 t->Contingencies - 20% 460Total Cost - Surface Water £Investigation $ 2,760 t-,

Range - Surface Water Investigation $2,000 - $4,000 <*

I Ii

FACET DETAILED SITE INVESTIGATION

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

i1 L ATTACHMENT B (Continued) ..

0300582ft:

TASK Cost Range ($)

2.6 Laboratory AnalysisSafety and Health

24 air samples for particulates§ $30 $ 72024 air samples for semi-volatiles§ $40 96024 air samples for gaseous compoundse $70 1,68040 personal air samples for particu-lates § $30 1,20040 personal air samples for semi-volatiles « $40 1,60040 personal air samples for gaseouscompounds § $70 2,800Total Cost Safety and Health LabAnalysis $ 8,960

Identification and Characterization' 5 sites x 2 priority pollutantI scans (GW, waste) 9 $1800 $18,000

Hydrogeological Survey{ 10 GW priority pollutant

scans g $1800 $18,000- Surface Water Investigation

10 water & 10 sediment prioritypollutant scans 9 $1800 $36,000

Total Cost - Laboratory Analysis $80,960Range - Laboratory Analysis $80,000 - $84,000

i Total Cost Range - Detailed Site Investigation (ODC's only) $160,000 - $185,000

i

oo

« i

oCO

00roo

1-1CHEMUNG RIVER BASIN

8161 TOO

HI

EXPLAHATIOH

A r t i f i c i a l f i l l

Op*n-Mt*r Area

A l l u v i a l sand and qrawl: sttean, fan, channel, andtviraci* deposits of poslqlacial to recent aqei hlqhprrmeahi1ity

Alluvial silt and (or I very fine sand) floodplalndeposits of postqlacial to recent aqei low per-neability

Lake silt and clay: offshore deposits in proqlactalor pnstqlacial lakes; thin bedded to Massive; lowperneability

Lake silt and fine sand; offshore deposits In pro-qlacial or postqlacial lakes; thin bedded to «as-Slve; low to Moderate pernieabil Ity

Lodgement t l l l i qlaclal deposits of unstratlfledclay, silt, and sand, with occasional pebbles, cob-bles, and boulders deposited at base of qlacieri lowpermeability

Outwash sand and qravel; swltwater deposits; stra-tified and well sorted; hiqh peraieabllity

(we and kasw terrace sand and qravel; ice-contactdeposits: some sortlnq and secondary calclte ce-mentation; hiqh persteabil Ity

Horalnal t i l l ; qenerally stony with llKlted ad«l«-ture of poorly sorted qravel deposited at edqe ofIce sheet; low perieablIIty

Till over bedrock lundlfferentlated)i qlaclal depo-Sltes of unstratlfled silt and sand, w i t h occasionalpehb'es, cobbles, and boulders, qenerally less thanJO feet thick; low permeability

Bedrock (undlfferentlated); shale and stltstone; lowto moderate permeability In fractures and ]oints

GEOLOGIC COKTACT--dashed where appronimately located

LINE OF SECTIO»--see sheet 2, 'Geologic iectlon«-

AQUIFER BOUNDARY—dashed where full e«tent of aqui-fer is not shown: aquifer entends up some smallvalleys and up and oojn valley of principal stream.Aquifer Is continuous with Corninq aquifer to west

EXHIBIT 1-2

SURFICIAL GEOLOGY - NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

Source: MIMtr •! al. 1982

6*6T TOO

£I58

z•t

ra

EXHIBI'

Sourc

EXPLANATION

0 rArtificial fill V-

*~Ipml Peat, marl, muck, and clayi bag deposits of postglacial toL- — 1 recent aget low permeability <", —— , 0. 150-|alg| Alluvial sand and gravel; stream, fan, channel, and terrace ^' —— ' deposits of postglacial to recent age; high permeability O qrw-y

lalsl Alluvial silt and (or) very fine sand: floodplain deposits of ^• —— ' postglacial to recent agei low permeability z 850"

1 —— 1 ***llssl Lake silt and fine sand; offshore deposits In proglaclal or * Rod

permeability < ?5

llsc Lake silt and clayt offshore deposits in proglacial or post- {Jj' —— glacial lakes) thin bedded to massive: low permeability u. 700'

0 Outwash sand and gravel) meltwater deposits) stratified and "V ,,.well sorted) high permeability UJ 0;>U

Iksgl Rame and kame terrace sand and gravel; ice-contact deposits; ^ 600*

ability < 55O

0 Horalnal till; generally stony with limited admixture ofpoorly sorted gravel deposited at edge of Ice sheet; lowpermeability

1 —— |lltl Lodgement tllli glacial deposits of unstrattfled clay, silt.

^J —— ' and sand, with occasional pebbles, cobbles, and boulders

— 1 r I Bedrock lundlfferent latedl i shale and siltstone; lowtomoder-' —— ' ate permeability in fractures and joints IOOO-

,- —— — -* GEOLOGIC COHTACT--dashed where apprommately located ISO

....... WATER TABLE *)0°

HSO-

V///S///// WIHCIWO, AQUIFER -Q_

/////

750

700r 1-3 CROSS SECTIONS THROUGH THE NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

•so

e: Miller at al. 193?

c 5

J "S I I ~l *^ «J^P 0 ™ •

y, ~> "y^ ^ M **0 JO 2 ? Qo. 0.0.0. °- «j

X^ J? •• S"T 8 1^>\. ' i -> ri » — -a ' *S

\^>^_?7L_^^ als S^N '»i xll'* v ' >-^«-rr. . ."T,/~T. .A»-vr* ^^^ *T~^ 1 /• \/ I/ I' ^

* » i

\ s /\ ^^^ _x ' ,r \ '

\s " /r^ ^ -

~?"»^es1C

D 1 *- ^"!^ ?r ^"f-ji v» is.

V\ ?5«8 • f£ 5?

Zv^sT"1 — [^Toso — «-N<^\A i^ ~^~~^z^r'~ ~ ^ •'r N*^.;^S iss i' ^<y tT^- -~<~-Cf'//

r ~ '

,,,

r? (? ?VlVi ^ ^

-5-J O*i*«^'7/^'C^* /^

tyu

Iir

•«jy

o

to«•

/ //OS3 >r

...

-j'

'

150

100

-QtnDjU

-JOO

•750

•700

-6SO

-Wo

,Q

rIOOO

ks9-w

^-TO

</-,«y'r "fo°

-TV)

-700

0261 TOO

—IT" If) - "~1

R S- O O f o 3 2 0 O O

OO 4-1 4 OOC

EXPLANATION

porrHTio«rr«ic coMTOU«--«hovititude at which v*t?r would stand In tightlyca*>-d w-IU Contour intvivil 10 le«t .M«t ion«lGrodrtlc Vrr t ica l Datum of 1111. Arrow Indi-cates direction of qround water flow.

AQUIFER BOUNDARY--d»shed whet* full Mtint ofaqulffr is not shown

WELL SYMBOLS

00414000 COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM WELL OR WELL FIELD-) numbered by New York State Department of Health

X DATA POINT

Cm 46 OBSERVATION WELL—well for which hydroqraph liI shown, numbered by U.S. Geological Survey

MAJOR INFLOW TO AQUlFER--stream and qroundwaterflow along main valleys beyond entenl of mappedaqui fer

MAJOR OUTFLOW FROM AQUIFER—stream and qround-water flow beyond extent of napped aquifer

The contours represent the estimated average altitude ofthe water table In the aquifer based on surface-water levelsand water levels In limited wells measured In the period 1»32to Ittt with most of the data from the late HSO's and ea lyHSO's IRandall. 1»7J and Reisenauer, 1»77). Water levelhave not changed over the years other than seasonally. Thwat i r table fluctuates seasonally In response to recharqe anddischarge. Recharge occurs generally over the entire aqu ferwhereever the land surface is permeable. Induced recharqfrom streams occurs where pumping wells cause reversed qr -dients. Dlscharqe occurs principally as Inflow to streamas pumpage from wells, seasonal fluctuations are least amajor streams and lakes.

onq

Fluctuations are represented by the hydroqraph ol theobservation well Cm 4« In the eastern part of the aquifer. Thewater-level fluctuations are believed representative of theaquifer for the pel iod of record.

Source Miller cl il. 1982

EXHIBIT 1-5

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE-

NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

1261 TOO

' ''/1> • / - • ' . - '• • . - v! V •• , -~_X '-' i 7 /I "•"-.'- - I \ tf ^K

, £r -1 /=-^.-£--»v-'^- ' • * * / • • - '- 1 " - x -• :•••• : ' • • -:•«•». <' • V

• - . , -.'": -U-v

F»^irlh

•\^ \ tv

T, \ \• V v: S

EXPLANATtON

ESTIMATED WATER YIELD FROM A PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED WELL,in gallons per minute

[T] L*-5S than SO

[7] 50 to SCO

Q] SOO to 1.000

[T] Gr^ati-r than 1,000

BCHfNnARY OF HELL-YIELD UNITS--apprOK i«at«lylocated

„ AQUIFER BOUNpANY-'dashed wher* Full extent ofaqui f*r is not shown

0041400 COfWUNITY WATER SYSTEM WELL OR WELL TIELD-\ numbered by Hew York State Department of Health

X DATA POINT

Map !• based on data fro» wells (Randall, 19^2}t 20 pump-V -j '"^a^x"",!*'* V'.V ' • "N O | -- - '"9 tests, and specific capacttie

,*^' 7"*) '."'• i \ ^ *J- \ *-'-,' 1 tants for public water and indust\ \ ,t^-t •i-".XT«.% .- • -»J|? • O 1 * transmissivity map constructed

.* .i — '' -r 1 \* -• \' '» f *•-':' * L £ of the area is considered low yie"•'•""•" V r.riiV<; *i- '-'•,«"» •• " ' ^ "'- » -• thickness of the more perae ble •

'JkW*Vv • ; - "^-- \— V •* — ( ^— " ' '* "C0"' •<*i«ent to Urge tream

t"|RV "11 ETC ITT 5* "J+ \ ' ' "" " '"""' water fro* the stream occur unde%. . *l -1* ^ " ^ 5' " ** " \ * ' -^» •" ' y i e l dsa reon l yen t imates o the• '-' ll * . *" " — •"• ' ft.-' * • ' ) "2 \ , individual wells completed n the

~^<~?*f**l '*' "•' ^V ; * " *I J- n-" \\ ' r- OO 4 \ 4 OOO

vS .:."-'%^<

from engineering con sol -ial water supplies, and fromy Reisenauer ll»77|. Mostd because of the relativete r ta l . High yields general-where Induced recharge ofpumping conditions. Wfll

aximuHi long-term yields ofaquifers.

EXHIBIT 1-6

WELL YIELD-

NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

Source Miller •! al. 198?

-0300562^-

^-i I 03005827/! '-

APPENDIX A

r

O

oo

Ul

r

I L.y.i ?_-- , '•ovr "i c

Submitted to:Mr David V. JacksonFacet Enterprises Inc.

7030 South Yale, Suite 800Tulsa, Oklahoma

Prepared by:Radian Corporation

o

10 June 1982 §

vo

i . o I:;TKODUC~IO:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 . 0 ?ZG:C::.-J. GICLCGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

A.O PROPOSED FIELD rF.OGP.AM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -

5.0 SA:--PLE COLLECTION A:;D CHEMICAL ANALYSIS . . . . . . 15

6.0 HZPORT TO FACET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

noo

IO

ii S

1.0 INTRODUCTION

On 22 February 1P£2, an initial r.eeting vas held be-tween Facet Enterprises and E?A Region II personnel regardingthe status and need for further action at an inactive waste dis-posal site on the Facet property in Ilr.ira, "=-.: Ycrk which wasformerly cvr.ed and operated by Bencix Aviation, Inc. In respcr.seto these discussions, F.edian Corporation, under contract toFacet, prepared a plan for collection cf cara on geology andrrrur. c-vrater conditions at the site. This plan is designed ~crrcvice si te -specif i c inf ci— .a tier. frcr. -.rhich an assessr.ent canre race as to the occurrence and potential fcr (or existence of)crr.tarlnation of ground water in the area. Sasec on the resultsof this study, Radian- will evaluate the need for re— .edial acticnat the site and reco~- end alternatives for such action as isdetermined to be necessary. Following review of the proposalby EPA, an additional meeting vas held on 12 Hay 1982 betweenrepresentatives of Facet, Radian, and EPA technical and enforce-ment personnel. In response to cements discussed at that meet-ing and transmitted to Radian by letter dated 18 Nay 1982, Radianhas prepared a revised proposal for studies at the site.

The proposed data collection plan consists of a pro-gram of coring, monitoring well installation, sampling, andchemical analysis to determine the following:

• subsurface lithology;

i• presence or absence of ground vater;

• depth to oround water, if present;n

• ground-water flow directions; 0o

<T\

CMOl

oo

uss

I1

53 3 r .in. 3 CTl 3 ZO 30U3SC3 J.O 33U9S3:td ' •L

fc-

I• 2.0 KZGIGSAL GEOLOGY

L c e t si te is I cca t ec on tr.e -.-rest sice cr tne•Cewtcwn Creek valley in Ilr.ira H e i g h t s , !^e-.>- York. Glac ia l out-wash and alluvium consist ing prir.arily of i n t i r r edded gravel,sand, silt, and clay ccrn^rise the valley fil l deposits (Figure2-1). levcr.iar.-age r.arine shales and sil tstcr.es cf the lever"/rest 7alls Group underlie the glacial ~=ttr i = ls. Bedrock cut-crops f~rr. the p rcn inen t hills on e i ther r i d e of the val ley.

Accc rc inz tc re r i r r . = _ U . S . G £ C _ C ' ~ i c a _ Survey cata ,certr. tc t = crcc.< "."itr.in the va_l = v in tr.e Z_r_ i r a .-.eii.'.ts area

alcr.g the v:est sice of the valley at a dep-'r. cf 70-100 feet .r.cvrever, because available geological data are regional inna tu re , the geologic condit ions beneath the ~acet disposalsites are not specifically knovn. Because the disposal areasare on the extreme vestem edge of the valley, at approximatelythe point ;chere a break in slope occurs, it is -unknovm whethera significant thickness of glacial material underlies the site(see Figure 2-1). The slope break suggests that the site naylie near the contact between bedrock and glacial deposits.

Ground water in the area occurs principally in uncon-solidated sand and gravels within the valley fill deposi ts .Ground water is found under artesian and water table conditions,typically at depths of several tens of feet or less. Regionalground-water flow is generally north to south (Figure 2-2) .The consolidated bedrock is generally not considered an aquiferbut -:ay locally yield snail quant i t ies of water . The occurrenceof ground water beneath the Facet site and its relationship tothe regional ground water system is not known.

oo

IOto00

,>S>.\ • / • ! ' \ : ^sJ II VA.AW ' M - • ' < • > : , ?' V^Vl

EXPLANATION

_„_ _ LINT OF EQUAL SATURATED THICKNESS OFdar.hed where approximately. Interval 20 feet.

AQUIFER BOUNDARY--dashed where f u l l e«tent ofaqui fer is not shown

__ |» ' LINE OF SF.CTION--SM »he*t 2, "Geologic Sections"

HELL SYMBOLS

DO 4 \ A O O O

00414000 CnwUNITV HATER SYSTPM HELL OR WELL FIELD-I numbered by New York State Department of Health

X DATA POIWT--wel l or test hole used to dtawIruchnrss l ines

•*l>95 Hell on which qeoloqlc sections, sheet 2, are•^ banedi numhered by Hnndward-Clyde-Sherard and

Assoc.

Hell on which geologic sections, sheet 2. alebased; seconds of lat i tude-lonqitude from wellnumbered by U . S . Geological Survey

Aquifer thickness represents the estimated saturatedthickness of permeable sediments from the water table to thetop of the t i l l or bedrock. The sediments ranqe from veryf i n e sand to coarse q r a v e l . Discontinuous deposits of lakes i l t and clay occur in the aquifer m a t e r i a l and for con-venience are considered part of the aquifer. See also theqeoloqic sections on Sheet 2.

Source: Miller •! al. 198?

EXHIBIT 1-4

AQUIFER THICKNESS-

NEWTOWN CREEK AQUIFER

6261 100

Jo o

c ••{ CD NJ

R c

n(-•

n3

~i-1-

roM

301

BJ

raQ o n >t o w en i en ra n O ra V) r>

C5?

'EL

EVA

TIO

N (F

eet A

bov»

Msa

n Se

a Le

vet)

:—

Face

t D

ispo

sal S

ites

^^•^

^g^^-—

— F

acet

Sup

ply

Wel

l

•;'r-"j

r----T

i:."-.T

c5i

-^ :'•

!'-i*

^«':

C.'^

~~

ft»

fc

i

M:~J.~'

-• Kentucky

a V/'^-^r V *•:v -. -j|

Flov lines derived from '";.\-.:preliminary nap of po- , . . nc ivanojter.tionetric surface, rf I I ' ' ' -*^^prepared by U.S. Geo- |.;> !.-/' / f ^^^.logical Survey, (Geohy- ;•crology of the Valley-Fill Acu i f e r in theElirdra area. CheaungCounty, New York., pre- plizinary open filereport, 1981.)

Figure 2-2. Regional Ground Water Flow.

Design of the f ield progra- desc r ibed below is ai...= dat obtaining information on si t e - s t e c i f i c gec log ic anc r.ydro-Cicondit ions at the Facet s i te . B a s e d or. the resul ts or tr.is s f.an assessment can be -ace as to the occurrence or potential fo:o f f - s i t e nitration of contaminants in gr:-jnc vater.

oo

voU)

.. 3

3.0 DZSIG:: OF ;-:O:;ITGRI::G •.•:ELL NE"•::•?:•:

Radian proposes to install five r.cr.i torir.g wells atthe site. Figure 3-1 is a sketch r.ap of the site shoving approMi~ = te locations of. the proposed veils. !-!cnitcr veils locationsvrere se l ec tee based on the folloving ccnsi dera t ions:

o s t i o n relative tr V.ncv— cis-csal areas

• .-.-parent grsur.c water r _ ~ v c i rec t^cns , ^asec or.inference from regional c = ta;

• Drill rig access; and

• Location of Facet prcper ty lines.

Exact locations will be determined at the initiation of fieldactivities, based on several factors including access andclearance from utilities. Because of the age of .this facility,composite snaps showing locations of underground utilities in thearea of concern are not available. However, available recordswill be reviewed and appropriate plant personnel consulted priorto initiation of drilling.

Well U-l is located to be upgradient of all disposalactivities at the site. Well U-l will be situated as close aspractical to Facet's northwest property comer and to elevation940 feet. Data from this well will represent background condi-tions. Wells D-l, D-2, D-3 and D-4 are downgradient wells.Although regional ground-water flow in the Newtown Creek Valleyis north-south, there could be an easterly co-.ponent to flow atthe Facet property. The four downgradient wells will be si tuatedto intercept any ground water flowing northeast, east, southeast,or south from the site.

10u>CO

PLANTBUILDINGS

12n•ir^

d7I)9

10

LEGEND

Dir.|>or,;il Ar«n ff I«2

llolllllMI I'f.M.I

hi;ir.livi< I n(|onnSrliliiui I linkln.ic live Inilioll TnnUr,(-llllii(| r.-ink

I ;i(|ooii

« D-2

rr.fcr

Figure 3-1. Approximate Locations of Propor.rd Hnnilnr Uc I I s/Trn I: HorJnj-.r.

TOO

4.0 PROPOSED FIELD 'KOG?.-_X

Eased on available dita en gec lcgy ar.d hvdrcgeolcgvrear the site, Radian has desigr.ed a coring.'~o~i.tor veil programto evaluate the scil/grcur.d-vater conditions and to deterr.ine ifthe vaste disposal site has a f f ec t ed the subsurface scils ar.d/orgrcurd-v.-ater quality. Xor.itcr veils vere designed •.•:ith ccr.sider-ation of drilling r.ethocs and -.aterials tc provide high qualitysar.ples for chenical ar .a lys is . Qua l i f i ed d r i l l ing con t rac to r sand surveyors have been iden t i f i ed and cc;t e s t i m a t e s cb:ained.

A F.edian hydroreclogist vill be provided for the fieldcoordination, and supervision cf the drilling/installation activ-ities. The hycrcgeologist vill supervise geological descriptionsof each hole, soil/ ground-water sarr.olins: and sa~t>le control after* ' C » ^ *

collection by the drilling contractor. He vill also be respon-sible for ensuring that proper safety precautions are observedby all field personnel, including the use of any personal pro-tective ecuipr.ent he deer:s necessary based on actual conditionsencountered during the field program. A log of drilling opera-tions will be maintained as shown on Figure 4-1.

Each of the five holes specified in Figure 3-1 will bedrilled to bedrock using a hollow stem auger so as not to intro-duce contamination (i.e., drilling mud or air). Core sampleswill be collected at five foot intervals using a split spoonsampler. If ground water has not been encountered in overburden,then core drilling will continue 30 feet into bedrock usingclear water for core barrel wash down. The water source usedby the driller will be approved by Radian and a sample obtainedfor chemical analysis.

ooo

10Ul

L

I

I

Ir

Azter Grilling to total c=p -'-, two-inch r.c-iter -..-ellcasing and five-foot screen will be er.-laced. The veils willbe gravel-packed and grouted v:ith cer.ent to land surface.Figures L.-2 end 4-3 depict the pr tpcsec "niter well cer.struc-ticn. The r;onii:or well screen v.-ill be located in the top partof the upper rost aquifer (or perched water table) unless cb-.vitus cc~ tar.ir.ation Ceppearar.ee or cfcr) is noted at scrr.e dearerlevel, which wculc be screened instead. ~cr these wells ctrtpleted

. , in the becrock, the screen xcill be located towards the better: off the drill h-rle tc -a.xirire po ten t i a l greund water capture fcr' { sa-rling ("ieure ^-5) . If -cssible, the well will be bai lee ~o1 l . . . . .{ c.ean tr.e we_i prier tc sa-pling. .'-lir.ir.al cevelcprent is e::-* I pectec to be needed cue LC the relatively "clean" auger f l ighti drilling r.ethoc. It is e:-.-pectec that seite wells will be ccrr.pletec

I in low perr.eability strata which r^y ir.pact cevelcp-ent and sam-pling efforts. All of the monitor veils will be bai led, as prac-tical, 1C volures.

, In the event that no saturated water-bearing zone is( encountered, the hole will be plugged with cement after collec-

tion of the core samples.

In order to assess the potential for subsurface con-' tamination, particularly in the event that ground water is not

encountered at the site, Radian will collect core samples at/ five foot intervals during drilling. Based on the field descrip-l """

tions of the lithology and the presence or absence of groundwater at each location, a determination will be made as to whichsamples (or composite samples) should be analyzed. Because noneof the drilling is actually through a waste body, it is not likelyto be necessary or cost-effective to analyze each sample. How-ever, selected samples or composites nay provide data on lateral

I migration of ground water perched above clay layers or on infil- ^tration of contaminated runoff in the area. o

I °1 510

vou><3\

,1"'

J"

I Jnl

• J

t '•

00 d M n> > o o H-

00 O *u ro M IU rt H-

O

• M

???»

1 A " £

' i s*

i••i

*iji'

j*4t '; 5 ij • ! si ( 1

J j {3 U n !• ll 9 t } 1 • i i ? • : t i*• •* U Si ii ! * '(' i M .i I i- 3 ? 2 » si Kt « ft < •» i' i j i > \

i i n

1 i-t-i~i

1 i |-|-

r| ,-,-( |-|-n |j |-ri~|—

i I-TM

r r

:j ;" :i

_ .

.

_

Min

e(M

llll.iry

)

IP M

M O

fS n

ti|iln

"lyi-iliT

"ri.

iiM[tif

if.

it i-

n

in n ^

_^

O , M !,! „;

rot

»i' P' ,V t»

u

" " «

tt 1

n i t , ,1 n " i • i i i » u 1 i

«

•

r~ i ri it IP • i r j ii

H

1 » b i n j it* •; "

r~ i i n i i n *i i j w t i i

it b

jj^

"i *M

«

••*

4

X

» *

r> l f

r* o |Q o "" *• n .-J

V 0

i •"

1

It* PI r> '"

10 III III 0 "^

l\ •

• f ,

H '

i i

;W

.J

; i ,

££61

TO

O D

MA

•5

Land Surface

Static Water Level

•i-6 inch StEe! SurfaceCasing with Locking Cap

CirncfVi

2-inch Schedule 40PVC Casing

Eentonite Cap

Gravel Pack

2-inch StainlessSteel Screen

Bedrock

Figure 4-2. Proposed Monitor '.veil Construction for0v e rb ur u en We 1i s.

nIT

12 vO^00

iL

Land Surface1 i

"* ' • • i

* • i •

'i f •*. :"• '

p ' * *

* "* *

__ £-5 Incr, Stss' SurfaceCasing With "Locking Ca:

—— Ce-sr,t Grcutr..f/(. *

2-inch Schecjie 40PVC Casing

Eedrock " ~^^iStatic Water Level o£__ 2-Inch Stainless

•?| Steel Casing

Gravel Pack

2-Inch StainlessSteel Screen *

Figure 4-3. Proposed Monitor Well Constructionfor* Bedrock Veils.

vo

Following v.-ell installation or auger hole plugging.-he drilling locations and elevatirns -.-rill be surveyed tc anaccuracy of +0.01 feet by a qualified local surveyor. Tr.is in-formation is required in order to accurately evaluate the grcur.d--..-eter flow direction and subsurface geology at the site.

I I

! II*

! i

M. . !i

t

1A

oo

I

r.

5 .0 E AMPLE COLLECTION AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

On the day relieving cor.pleticr. cf veil installation,vater levels vill be m e a s u r e d £r.c ground-vater sar.plss vill becol lec ted fr:r. each v.-ell. Prior te sample cc l l ec t ion , each veilvill be bailed tc remove vater 5ts.-r.i-g ir. the veil EC that arepresenta t ive sample cf errum.c veter car. be cbtair.ed. All sam-rli-g eruicme-t vill be thercurhly c l e a r e d r = r.: = er. samples tcensure that cress-err.tam.inaticr. cf sample; dees net occur be-

III.

I.L.- Ground-water samples will be collected in containersI provided and prepared by the Radian laboratory. Appropriate( preservatives will be added and sar.ples vill be packed in iceI chests for shipment to Radian's Austin, Texas, laboratory. Core

samples will be placed in glass jars or wrapped in plastic inI core crates and shipped on ice to Austin for analysis.

t

| Eased on a review of available data from sar.ples pre-viously collected at the site, Radian recom-jends that the fol-

\ loving chemical analyses be performed on ground-water and core' samples collected on-site. Core samples will be analyzed forr- the parameters listed in Table 5-1. Because acid extractable1. and base-neutral extractable organics and pesticides have notr been detected (and are not expected to be present in the wastes[ at the site). coEplete priority pollutant analyses are not

recommended. The parameters identified in Table 5-1 are expectedf to encompass the range of expected contaminants. In addition to

the parameters in Table 5-1. ground-water samples will .also be.( analyzed for the RCRA ground-water parameters, as identified in* the Federal Register, Kay 19, 1980, Part 265.92 (Table 5-2). o

o

10*.15 M

iL'I 6 • ° REPORT TO ?AC£T

•% I Upon completion cf che—ical analyses of gro\r*.d-veter" *-- and core samples. E.adian will prepare a report vhich will be

submitted to Facet, describing the results of the study andraking reco^r-sn cat ions regarding the need for any further study'or re-edial action at ths site. The following ir.for—.ation villbe included in the report:

o Description cf subsurface lithology. includingboring logs;

c Assessment of site hydrogeologic conditionsincluding discussion of the occurrence, depth.7-and flow of ground water, if present;

• Map of water table elevation;

• Discussion of the effects, if any. of pulpingin nearby wells on ground-water flow at theFacet site;

• Presentation and interpretation of analyticaldata on core samples and/or ground-water samples;

• Assessment of the occurrence or potential forground-water contamination; and

*

• Recommendations for further action.

I\[

3O

oO