Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutenvironmental assessment 1998BpxxErr n ,REIL Inc. E ngrneenng, Sanitary Site Developmenr Waste Watcr Treatrncnt Water Supply Enrironrn"ntal & S urveying S ervlces Propcrty Line SuMivision Land Coufl Trial Coun Wimess 2lBSite Remediarion Hydlogeologic Survcy water Qualiry Morf toring Consulting 1573 Main Street PO Box 1667 Brewster, MA 02631 508-896-6630 508-896-4687 Fax July 2, 1998 B098-1852 Mr. Joseph Salvetti, LSP ENSR 95 State Road Bnzzards Bay, MA02532 Dear Mr. Salvetti, BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC., bas prepared the following Report and Supporting Documentation as a surnmary of findings relative to the lmmediate Response Action (IRA; corryleted a tbe above referenced hcatbn in the period ofAprfl 8, 1998 tbrough June 11, 1998. The IRA was completed to mitigate environmental and health hazards identifed with the release of an unknown quantity of fuel oil from a leal<mg 275 gallon underground storage tank as discovered by A&znced Environmemal Servic€s in Apnl 1997. Tbe IRA conducted by BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC., included: 1) the remoral of fJ.f,{ 16ns 6fgonhminded soils in the area of the former UST and extending to the cellar area under the dwelling, 2) the evacuation of 660 gallons of irnpacted groundwater from the groundwater interhce within the excavation, and 3) the construction atrd capping of a passive Soil Vapor Exraction System (SVE) to serve as a subslab venting system within the area of excavation These remedial actions were accoryanied by an environmental assessrned progam to evahute the effectiveness ofcleanup activities and evaluate risk to identified environmental and human receptors. The contaminated soils generated were tralsported to the Bardon Trimount Facility in South Dennis, MA for licensed recycling under an approved Bill of Lading. The contaminated groundwater was mnsported for recycling to the licensed Olson's Greenhouses in Raynham, MA under a Hazardous Waste Manifest. This report is an addendum to, and essential part oi the modified lmmediate Response Action Plan verbally approved by the MA DEp (SERO); BWSC/ERS [Dan Crafton] as set forth in correspondence filed with the Department dated April 8, 1998. 1 6 AU RE: IMMEDIATE RI,SPONSE ACTION PLAN COMPLETION RESPONSE ACTION OUTCOME STATEMENT, RTN#4-13054 Wollerman Residence 12-14 Appleby Road, West Yarmout[ MA JUNE 30. 1998 PAGE 2 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO9t.It52 IRAC/P"AO RTN# +I3054 This work proceeded with your oversigh in a rnp',ner consistent with 309 CMR 4.02 (2), the MCP Response ActionPerbrmancc Standards (RAPS) pursuaot to 310 CMR 40.0191 and QA/QC policies of BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC. This report specifically excludes, and makcs no representation for, the work ofothers previously invofued in the project. The facts ad statements hereiq to the best ofour knowledge, arc a tnrc and accurate representation oftle site activities, rmdial rcsponse actbns and envirorental conditbns associated with the project at tlhe time of rhis report. SITE F'EATURES [Ref* toAppendixA] The W'ollerman property, shown as Lot A22 on the Yarmouth Assessors Map 20, is located immediately south of Route 28 between Hudson Road ond Appleby Road in West Yormouth some 1,000'west of the Pokers River [refer to Figwe 1]. The property contaira some 0.83 aoes of land oea od is developed by fow ingle storey wood frome dupl* cottages strrounding a cental pool area. Two of the cottages (12-14 ond 18-20) are located on Hudson Road and the rernaining two cottages ( 7-9 and 11-1j) are located on Appleby Road. The two cottages along Hudson Road are ctrren y rented os residcntial dtcllings [refer to Figre 4]. The two cottages on Appleby road are currently vacant. The sabject Yollerman property was originally a portion of the Seagull Beach Motel properly to the north operated as the 'Vacationland Resort" through the mid-1960's. The Wryrties vEre seryded tn 1967 ,i,hen Valtet Wollem@, prchased the subject site and contimted to operate the cottage colony as the "Arcadia Cottages". The seasonal rental use of the property as o cottage colony was discontinued in the early 1990's. The abutting properties to the north along Route 28 are in high density commercial use as a restautant @lack Rock Grill) otd motel (Seagull Beach Motel), as consistent with the Route 28 corridor between llyannis od Dennis. The properties to the soUh are primarily in high density residential use with single family dwellingt on 0.2 to 0.3 acre parcels. The area is generally low lyingwith sMtow groudder (<15' 4L) associaed with the tidal esuay represented by Parkers River [refer to Figure j]. Detailed consideration of the MA DEP/BYSC GIS mqs shows lhe area along Route 28 is within the nopwd Non-Potential Drinhng water source area (NPDYSA). This mapping is consistent wii the W and LIC classifications for trbanized oeas along a mdiol transportation corridor where there is a high density of commercial development as descibed abow [refer to Figqe 21. The stbject ite falls within the B-1 Business Zone shown on the Yormouth Zoning map i*rifng 500, in enhei stde of Route 28 [refer to Figwe 5]. Because the wbiect property has historicallj o,roted as a com;elciat toigi* business, origirutly in comnon annership with yrrrrtoge iorg Rord, 28, ctrret bning Bylaws interpret the busincss zoning distict boundory' as JI.JNE 30, I 99t PAGE 3 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO98-1852 IRAC/RAO RTNI,t-11054 represented by the reor property line of the subject site wilhin 500' of Route 28. Therefore, the mapped NPDWSA does apply to the subject property and the GW-2 and GW-j groundwaer categories oe considered in Metlad I - Risk Characteization to evalude yapor entry to buildings ord impacl to receiving wetland receptors. Lil'ewise, based on the speciJic site conditions relative to frequency/intensity of use and accessibility, the S-2/GW-2, S-2/GW-3, *3/GW-2 and s3/GW-3 soil categoies are considered in Method I - Risk Choacterizotion to evaluate dermal contact, vopor entry to buildings and leaching potential to groundwater. BACXGROT]ND In Apil of I 997 , Advarced Ewironmental inspected the Wollerman property to iwestigate fucl oit mntanination as noted by the staining of a concrete block foundotion wall adjacent to the undergromd fuel oil stomge tank (LET). Monitor wells were subsequently installed by Advanced Ewironmental ond corfirmed groundwater impact. On May 27, 1997, Advonced Ewironmental Semices removed a 275 gallon UST adjacent to the bulkhead at the rufr of the subject h'eilinC (duplex), as witnessed by the Yomouth Fire Department. Inspection of the wssel showed ybstantial conosion and several holes upon the removal of loose scaling. Soil samples collected at the base of the *cavation showed gloss soil contamination, with pholoionization detector rcspowe > lM ppm indicating a 72 how Notification Requirement. The MA DEP (Spence Bretman) *ws twtified of site brditiotts. As Wt of the l@tk rettpval, sorne j . 27 tons of contoninaled soil was generaed od stxleiled d tlp site. Thit material vss ffansported to Bodon Timount in Dennis, MA, for aqlult recycling on Septenber 24, 1997. On July 2j, 1997, Yogo & Associaesfiled an Immediate Response Action Plan (RA?) for biorenudidion to ted gronMo ard soil contanination idetified as unfurlying the area of the former (JST and within tIre capillory fringe, underlying the dwelling in the rea of the cellaf . Due to tack of stryporting docwnentation, the MA DEP denied the IRAP in conespondence to the proryrty owner futed August 11, 1997. Commstications with the yoperty owrer indicates tlmt Advorced Eaviromwtol irctallet ditiorul txlls as injection points in otticipdion of proceeding with horenudiaion hn tha &ficierctes in tle IRAP were rct ad*essed in ory rupplemental Jiltngs with the MA DEP. Based on a disp*e ovet fees associated with this additional work withottt Department approval, no funher remcdial reqtonste actions were talcen at the site in the period between September 24, 1997 otd Febntary, 1997. on Febn'wy 2, tggs, BEIIIMTT & o,REILLY NC., ws autlnrized by the property owner' Wayre Wollermot, to re-assess eryironmental conditions and develop a remedial strategt for site ctian p. In coneqondence to the MA DEP (SERO)/BWSCJERS dated Februry 18, 1998, the *6"rrtr*, oarised ttwt BENNETT & ?'REILLy, tttc., ath Joseph salveni, ISp., had been reiained to take-over the project and would cluracterize cltrrent et vironmental conditions otd develop on Immediae Response action to mitigate the etwironmental and lrunan lpalth hazards identifed JIJNE 30, I 99t PAGE 4 OT I3 WOLLERMAN/BOg& I t52 IRAC/RAO RTN* +I3054 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMETTT/REMEDAL STRATEGY [refer ,o Appendix Bl On Febntary 23, 1998, BENNETT & O'REILLY, NC., proceededwith an initial series of six (6) hand borings to delineate the extent and magniude of residual soil contdmination. Additional hotd boings were con&tcted on i/l l/98 and 4/2/98 to firther qualify the dovmgradient limit of significant capillary fringe impact. Two foot soil samples were collected at each location from the rurface to the groundwater interface for field photoionization (PID) screening by "jor headspace" oulysis in accordonce with MA DEP Policy WC-94-400. Subwrface soil conditions and the PID field testing results ore represented on the Borehole Logs enclosed. Representative soil sanples vcre collected for TPH GC/FID "Jingerprint" laboratory analysis as represented on Table l. I R,vkions to MCP 310 CMR40.000, Effecttue 10/i1/97 Bold tetl indbates rcflrlts that erceed applicable soil and/or grotndwatet calegoties These test results show that resi&ul soil contaminotiott is ptesent within lhe vadose zone, below 4, (4L) o rte groundwater inrerface in tlc tea of the former usT as defined by HB'| and tIB-3. iontaninatiin within the cellar uea, under the dwelling, is present in the capillary finge with tt e qtent of impaa deJined by HB-7 and HB-*. It tnuld appear that residual soil impact is ,est iAra q pfiti4 tranel to ihe oea approimating the dimewions of the cellar oea due to diswbance of soils dtring construction acttvities. TABLE 1: SIIMMARY OF TPH GAFID ANALYSIS lor SOIIS P REI.IMINAR Y AS S ES S MENT LOCANONS/ EXPOSURE PONT CONCENTRANON fPH GCMD (ng/*g - Wn) ASTM M.rhod D3328-78 S-lWSM hrEA) I l0 CllR 10.97t (6No) GY-lEY-2/eV-t S2 Sorl Standa (nshd JI0 CMR 10.975(6)0) GV-1/GY-2/GV.3 S-3 Soll S@dord(nck) 3 I0 CMR 10.97 5(6Nc) GV-t/GV-2/CV-3 HEI: 4 - 6'!<1.0 NT 200,400/800 200/2000n00d 20w5000/t0001 s,900 20a800/80d 200/2000/2000r 200/5000/50001 HB-3: 4 - 6.5'<1.0 NT 200fr00/800t 200D000/2001t 200/5000/500u HB-l: 1-6.5'27,eA0 200,6@/E00 200n000n000t 200/5 000/5000' H&5:0-I (5 - 6' GL) I5 200/2000D0M HB4:0- I' a - 6'GI) 20 200n00/800 200D000n0001 200/5000/50M HB-?: t .6.5'1.2 70 200/E0M00 200i2000n00d 200/3000/5000' HB-E: 1 - 6'0.2 NT 2Mn0uE00 200D000n00d 200/5000/500d PID .R,6,sPoxsE (PPn) wsc-91400 HB-2: 4 - 6.t't3.6 4E 7,500 2UnN/800 20a5000/5000t 20,un ,uNE 30, l99t PAGE 5 OF I3 WOLLERMANiBO98-IE52 IRAC/RAO RTN# +13054 On February 23, 1998, BENNETT &O'REILLY, INC., alsogauged, purgedandsampled the uisting monitor ynlls MW-2, MW-j, MW-4, W-3, W-4 and IW-S fol MA DEP EPH anolyis as coruistent with the MA DEP 'EPH4VPH Inplementation... " policies (10/31/97). Laboratory results for this testing is sronmalized in Toble 2. t Revlrions to MCP 310 CMR 40.000' Effective 10/31/97 2 EPH - E*acmble Petroleum Hy&ocobons Shaded Areas Designales,lppropriate GW'2/GW'3 Groandvater Categories This daa finher defines a discrete oea of groundwater imwct as assoc-iate( wrth clnillart frrnge ioiit continrnarroi aefidwithin the Mfi-2, MW-3' MW-4' IW-i and Iw-4 monitor *ell "i;;;;;;. significont grou;dwater impact is restricted to-the immediote area of release wherein';;rW i"* ;tamlnsted soils re*lt in o chronic re-contamination of groundwater by contact TABLE 2: SAMMARY OF EPH ANAIYSIS FOR METEOD I - iuSK CIIARACTERI;ATION. GNOUNI'VATER LNlnONS/ D(PoSUNE POINT CONCENITANON EPU RFSuI,S (/4tU EPII . EPA EIOO (MA DEP nodificd) tbt &r tn(4L) 3r0 cM 10.971Q) GV-2 nfitur&,d(dr) 3 t0 cuR t0.974(2) Gr-3 ltv-2 c,-c,, c,,- c-BRL (<tN) BRL (<s00) DRL (<200) 1,000 t,000 )00 l,M) N/A 50,000 20,000 50,000 30,000 L'Y.3 c,,-c. C,, - C" BRL 1<5661 BRL (<500) BRL (<200) 1,000 5,000 200 t,000 N/A 50,otn 20,000 50,N0 30,000 M'V4 c,- c," C"-C-BRL (< 500) BRL (<500) BRL (<200) 1.000 5,000 200 l,0oo N// t0,000 20,000 50,000 30.000 IV-3c,-c" C,"- C"c,,-c, BRL (<s20) DRL (<520) BRL (<200) 4,000 5,000 200 1,000 N/t t0,000 20,000 50,000 30,000 IYl C,- CN C,,'C. C,,'C, gRL (<too) DRL (<500) BRL (<200) 1,000 5,000 200 t,N0 N/t t0,000 20,N0 50,000 30,000 IV-5 C'-C," C"-C- te0,a 3i,un$,un 4,000 5,000 200 t,0@ N/t t0,000 20,000 50.000 30,000 and solution kLW(tgU 3t0cMR40.971(2) GV-t JUNE 30, I99t PAGE 5 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO9& I t52 IRAC"'RAO RTN# +I3054 On 3/20/98, an additional groundwater sample was collected at the downgradient MW-S monltor vell for standod &inking *wer unlysis in review of the applicable groundwater category. Laboratory results slow that grondwoter at the MW-5 location has an eleyated sodium content and metal concentrations (irory'manganese) on an order of 5 to 10 times the drtnhng water standard as cottsistent with the USGS (traer-Resowces Investigation Report 94-4156) map entitled "Potenttal Water Supply Areas of Cape Cod", where the subject ite is mapryd within the arca of greatest limitation due to saltwer intnsion ond impired *aer quality associated with business/utility land use [refer to Figure jJ. This plrysical testing and the referenced doctrmentation fiirther qulified the rubject property as wirtin the NPDWSA, in accardutce with the ptovisions of j 10 CMR 40.0932 (s)@(2). On April 8, 1998, BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC., contacted the MA DEP (SERO), BWC/ERS to review analytical test results recieved in the period of 3/l l/98 to i/30/98. Because of time constraints to implement and complete remedlal lesponse actions without further delay, verbal authorization of an Immediate Response Action was requested. The proposed IRA tould require the slwring of the single story, wood framed cottage. The cottage will be held in place and clean overbwdcn segegdted arrd stocbiled on site a assisted byfield PID screening using a 5 ppm field guidance level as indicated by initial anolysis. Excavation of antaminaed soils below 3' in a 25' x 20' area tould be con&tcted in the wea of the former UST and extended under the dwe ing for the removal of soils to the capillary fringe. Excsvation of contaminoted soils through the capilloy fringe would be accomplished through de-watering. Impacted groundwater twuld be allovcd to acc.ntulate into the open excavation which will be sdmmed to remwe any LNA?L and cont@ninated gouMer. Verbal qprwal of the proposed IRA was granted by Dan Crafton with doantentotion provided to the Depotment in conespondence from BENNETT & O'REILLY NC., datedApril 8, 1998. REMEDUL RESPONSE [Refer to Appendb B] Implementaion of the IRA uns delayed because of permitting issaes raised by the Yarmouth Building Departnent as complicated by the Butlding Inspector's leave. W'ith permitting ond site preptation completed by Ewirofufe, additional response actions proceeded under the supervision of BENNETT & O'REILLY, NC., on 5/13/98. A portion of the western foundatton wall was iemoved and an occess ramp was constructed beneath the building to facilitate soil removal operdions. Clean overbtrdei was stoclEiled on site, as facilitated by Jield screening. An area of soil contamtufiion appro*mtely 26'. (L) x 22', (W) x 9',@) was defined extending under the dwelling to the east, originatingfrom the from the former UST locdion. contaminated soil removal and stoc@iling proceeded through 5/15/98. Composite soil sanples collected were feld screened using an HW PI-101 Photoionimtian Detector with a l0'2 eVionp,inaccordorcewiththeMADEi"Intertm...SoilsPolicy"YSC94'400. Afieldvalueof 5 po'ti per million (ppm) was used to define the extent of excavation JTJNE 30, I99t PAGE 7 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO98-I652 IRAC/RAO RTN# +13054 W'ork proceeded with the removal of contaminated soils to the groundwater intedace, approximately 8' belot, grade. Random field phuoionization readings along the northern and westera sidewalls were corcistently below l0 ppm as indicating sufficient soil removal in these oeas. Lilcewise, photoionlmtion screening of the narthern half ond westem holf of the respective eastert and sotlhern sidewalls, recorded detector response consistently below l0 ppm. Elevated photoionization detector response in the southeast corner of the excaeation indtcated that the laeral extew of contarrirution in this qea qten&d beyond that which was originolly estimated and the capcity of the available shoing. To quolify the need to flrthel extend the lateral ertent of soil removal in this oea soil samples *ere collected for confirmaory hborotory analysis. Subsequently, a slonp *as constructed in the ,rortheast corner of the ercavation and a vac-tntck wss utilized to de*aer the bottom of hole tea to advance the vertical qtent of excavation to 9'. A conJirmatory soil sample was collected from the bottom of the hole for laboratory analysis- The vac-truck was shut down and grotmdwater was allowed to accumulale in the open exccvation. This impacted groundwater was periodically skimmed oyer a 4 hour period. A total of 660 gallons of impacted gtototMer vtos removed and trasprted to Olson's Greenhouses in Raynham, MA for recycling. Absortent pds v,vre plocel in the open *,cavation as a precautionary measwe ond to evaluate the accumulation of any free product. The area was secured with fencing and the stocfoiles covered pending receipt of laboratory onalysis. Soil samples for the bottom of hole @OII, sidewalls (SW) and clean overbrrden were submitted to Groundwater Analytical of Buzmds Bry, MA., for Rush analysis of TPH GdFID. Prior to leaving the site, BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC., sampled monitor wells MW-i and MW-4. The sanplingvqs used to confrrm groundvater conditions immediately outside the area of excavation (withtn l0) through the projected Time of Travel, as previously te*ed. Groundwater samples were analyzed for IutA DEP EPH analysis with tmgeted analytes as consistent with the "Inpletrctation of the MA DEP EPII/WH Approach" poliq (10/j1/97)for *eathered fuel oil as de termine d by prellminry assessment. Laboratory rerults for TPH CtgFID analysis of sidewall and bottom of hole samples, received on 5/20/98, indicated residual soil contamination within the sidewall east, side'tall souh potentially botton of lwle areas exceeded tlu Method I - Risk Choracterization standods for the appropriate soil categories. TPH concentations reported within the sidewall nonh and sidewall west samples were repofied as Below the Reporting Linit @RL < 69 ng/kg). The TPH concentlation o! the clean overbwden was reported at 69 mAkg. Laboratory analysis of gromdWer sa tples ot Mtr-3 otd MV4 reponed all fractional EPH and target anolytes as BRL. subseqnnt to corrsultation with the homeowner, BENNETT & O'REILLY, NC., scheduled additional siil remwal with boiroSafe, as facititated by_additionol shoing and inslructed the labofdory to re-run the bottom of lole somple for MA DEP EPH analytis with targeted analytes, as consistent with the " Implementation of tlrc MA DEP EPII/WH Approach" policy (10/31/97). WOLLERMAN/BO9t.I852 IRAC/RAO RTN*,I.13054 On 5/21/98, BENNETT A O'REILLY, INC., returned to the site ond conducted a series of laterol hand borings into the southern and eastern sidewalls to establish the lateral ertefi of capillary finge soil contaminotion in consideration of additional shoring requirements. Field photoionimtion indicated thal a 3' exlension of soil removal in these areas'nnuld be adequate to neet Methd I - Risk Claracterization standards. Supplemental shoring was installed to facilitate this additional soil removal. No ignificant impact was noted within the exposed groundwater with minor areas of sheen in the orea of contdct with the south and east sidewall. Iabordory oulysb, recetved 5/22J98 ord 5/29/98, reponed the si&wall east, sidewall south and bottom of hole oeos as below the apploptiate S-1/GW-2, Method I - Risk Characterization standards. Subsequent to consultation with the homemner regoding the feasibility to meet background condttions, the excsvation contractor wos bstructed to bacl$ll the area of *cavation installing a soil vapor recovery system (SW) 1' obove groundwter on a bed of I %" stone and cqped with poty slieeting. The exhotut port wcis vented above the roof ltne with a turbine vent to facilitate sub-slab venting of any organic vapors and natural attenuotion and biodegradation of residual contaminotion impact. A total of 65.84 tons of contaminated soil was transported on June I I, 1998 to Bardon Trimount in South Dennis, MA. The completed Bill of Lading is included with the Supporting Documents in Appetdb C. The contractor has subsequently reconstnuted the cellar area and removed the shoring from under the dwelling. The clean overbulden stocblled on site has been utilized as fill ogaiwt the rc-constructed cellar with additional clean sand- JI,NE 30, 1998 PAGE t OF 13 On 5/22J98, BENNETT & O'REIUY, NC., nqervised the segregation of clean overburden ond the removal ofadditional contaminated soils by ErwiroSafe to extend the eastern and southerrt side*vlls some 3' in the souheast corner of the excavation. Field photoionization screening of the oeas ofutended excavation reported detector readings consistently below 10 ppm in these oreas. Soil somples were collectedfor MA DEP EPH analysis with torget analyes as consistent with the " Implementation of the MA DEP EPII/WH Approach" policy (10/31/97) for weatheredfuel oil. RISK CEARACTERIZ/ITION [Rel* a Appet& Dl Seil For the purpose of risk characterization in consideration of lruman exposue and ewirorunetol hryct to smsittve receptors, the most sensitive soil categories (assuming ingestion' intalati,on od direA derrnol contact) were considered (S-I/GV-2 and GW-j). The Method l-Risk CtwocterizAion Stmdods for TPH and EPH in the $l soil categories ore defiwd in Table i and Table 4 betow. Test rcsul*for each of the sider+all otd BOfr reas at the final extenl of *cavation rcported contnninant ,orn"rt Aions below tle anutly qpropriAe 92/GV-2 and S'2/GW-3, and JUNE 30, 1998 PAGE 9 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO9t. I t52 IRAC/RAO RTN# 4-13054 the potentially appropriate S1/GW-2 and S-L/GV-|, Method 1- Risk Characterization standords represenling a condition of "No Significant Risk" in accordance with the provisions of j10 CMR 40.0970 without restliction of activities and use of the subject property. In accordance *ith the prwdons of 310 CMR 40.0973, the computed exposure point concentation for those contigaous areas of residnl contarnirumt imryt represented in Table 3 is below the most restlictive S-l/GW-l , Method I - Risk Choracterization standar^. I R.I}kto,s ,o MCP 310 CMR 40.0N, Recllbu&aiboa Yc6ioa Wd!2 I0/31D7 ' EPH-E tactable Petoleum Hydrocorbo* SMed lftrs desigales aPpropriou Mertod l 'RbkTharac*riatln Categories TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF EPfl ANALYSIS FOR METEOD I.NSX C ARACTERIZATION: SOIL LOOITION/ E{P(NANE NINT CONCENTRANON EPE, Ra,b( S/kE-ppn) MA DEP Mehod 91tuetu@ (ppa) 3 t0 C]'tR 10.0975(6)a GV-uGV.3 92wW GFr) 3 l0 CMR t0-97 t (6)0 GV-2/GB/-j 3i.h||dll Eatt (E t): 5-8' 15D2D81 C,roCL BRL(<35)C,taC. 92 Cuto Cz BRL(<35)Naphttahd BRL(<0.tE) 2-Mewnqh,hal.n BRL(<0.58)Pkrathwto ERf{<o.t8)Acenq$cac DRL(<o.5E) 1,000/1,N0 2,500/2,500 800n00 100/t 00 500/500 t,000/t 00 I,000/t,000 2,500n,500 t,M)/5,0u, 2,000n,000 l,NUt,000 1,000/1,000 2500/r00 2,50(W,500 5,000/5,tM) t,000/5,000 t,00u5,M0 I,000/t,000 2,AM/1,000 2,500/t00 t,0044000 Sidc*all Sotth (E t): 5-8' 15D2D8l C,bC, BRL(<32)CDtoCr BRL(<32) C" to Ci BRL(<32)llophthdcne BRL(<0.51) 2 - Ikdryhsph,lalac BRL(<0. 5 1) Phcaztbcnc BRL(<0.51) Ac.iqirh.n DRL(<0.51) 1,000/t,0M 2.flND,500 800/E00 100/t 00 t00/500 t,000n 00 I,000/1,000 2,50(n,s00 5,000/5,000 2,00M,000 1,00at,000 1,NA|,000 2,50U100 2,500/2J00 5,000/5,000 t,000/5,000 5,0N/5,M0 1,000/t,0M 2,00ut,0u 2,5UvtN t,00u1,N0 DoH:9-10' ft/r5/98] Crto c" CDto CxC toc, Nq?thoLtu 2-l,kthylapdslenc Ph.t 6&rav Acerulththtru 920 250 1t0 BRL(<o.59) 1.5 BRL(<o.59) t.2 2,tuw00 5,UXv,,0N 2,MoD,000 t,00u1,000 1,004r,000 2.tdv]00 2,5002,t00 5,000/5,000 5,000/5dn 5,N0/5,000 t,000/t,lNN 2dnn,0u 2,5N/100 t,00al,otD NFoSIJNE FOINr CON@IIT,ATION (AVERAGfu) C, to C,. cDto C- C,!toC,, Nqtlohnc 2-llcdrylaaptholcac Preietl@n lc.iqrtdEn 3t9 120 t55 BRL(<0.59) t.5 BRL(<o.59) 0.59 G7-tlGW-2/Gr-3 I ,00u1,000/t ,000 2,5Nn,500n,500 200n00n00 4/tMn00 1/5N/500 700/t ,000n 00 20/t ,un/t ,000 GY-t EV-2/G9-3 2,500D,5M/2,500 t,00ut,000/5,000 20u2,000n,out 1/t,NUl,0ul/t-un .000 700n,twt00 2MSoAn,500 GY-LGY-2JGY-3 t,Nw,000/t,000 5,00a5,00M,000 xnfi,00ut,000 1/r ,00tvt ,000 |n,N0/1,000 700a.twt00 20/5,00u1,000 S.tJo.gsr&!d bp,n)j10 CUR 40.975(6)d GF-/GT-J 1,00wr,000 2,5002,tN 800/800 100/lN 50u500 t,000n00 t,No/t,000 JUNE 30, I99E PAGE IO OF I3 tRevtionslo I'ICP 310CMR10.000,R dlitefstit ot,y.rtion, Et ctit. t0/31D7 1 TPH-Total Pe'ole,,,t lwocdtbotzt Stsd.d Ar.at d.tignotct approplatc l,lcthod. l-Ritl ChotacterbatioD Caegoriet Preliminary assessment activities conducted by BENNETT & O'REIAY NC., in the development of the.Immediate Response Action had included monitor vell gauging to qualify an easterly grototd*we:rflow direction Q,l89E to S56E) and to confirm thot the AE-3 (MW-j) and the AE4 (IuM4) monitor wells me lepresentative of potential grondwater impact and contaminant migration o&side the hrmediate oea of release. Groundwater samples collected by BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC., on Februory 23, 1998, reportedfractional MA DEP EPH as below the method reporting limit as irdi@lng no significox grouMer impact o*side the immediate release oea. To fir'ther EnliIy these fndings, the projected Time ofTravel for dissolved phase petroleum contaminant migrotion was estimoted from the UST grave to the AE-i(tlW-3) and AE-4(lulW-4) monitor vrells to govide confrnnatory woteT malysis. Using tle site specific lrydroulic gradient and consemtive lry*aulic cotductivity/porosity values, Time of Travel between the area of release otd the domgrdient monitor vells was computed to be 12 days. Therefore, sompling of monitor wells MW-3 ord MW-4, qproximaely 7' and 10' downgradient, was funher quolilied as representative of downgradient impact intermediate to the sensitive receptors, well within the projected time of impaa for the release offiul oil which hod ocarred prior to April, 1997 (300+ days). The samples colleaed on May I 5 , I 998 rwre sent to Groundwater Analytical of Buzards Bay, MA for MA DEP EPH analysis, with toget oulyes, as cottsistent with uuahered fuel oil doatmented by preliminary a.sses$nent. Labolatory results received on 5/20/98, reported EPH values, and torget analytes, below reponbY limit (BRL). Tlu reporting limtts for the fraclfional EPH compounds, and the target otaytei (yqWnoUne, 2-Mettrylnaphthalene, Phenanthrene and Acenapththene) are less thon' or equal to, the Method l-Risk Cheacterization thresholds for the GV-l, GY-2 and GY-3 T,AtsLE 1 SUMMARY OF TPH ANATYSIS FOR METHOD I -NSK CHIRACTERIZATION : SOIL 8ISdlgolr'ald (pprrr) 310 CMR 10.975(6)a Gr-1 ,6V-2/GB'-3 92hltud bPr)Jl0 cMR 10.975(6)4 GV-rreV-2,8v-3 9rs,Jltutr'a'f @pn) 310 Ct'lR 10.97 5 (6)a GU-t,GV-Z,GY-3 Cl.an Ov.rbud.n StoclaiL 69 200/800/E00 200,2,000/2,000 200/5,000/5 ,000 SideYall V.st 5-E'RRL (<69)200/600/E00 2@/2,0002,000 x)0/5,000/5,000 DRL (<68)20aE00/800 200/2,000/2,000 2U/t,000/5 ,a00 Groundwater WOLLERMAN/BO9t.I852 IRAC/RAO RTN# 4.I 3054 LOCAflON/ D<PoSI]RE FOINT CONCANTRANON TPEnah @gftt-ppt,) ],todfred ASTM M.rtod D3328-78 Sidevdll Nonh: 5-E' JUNE 30. I99E PAGE 1I OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO98-I852 IRAC/RAO RTN* 4.I3054 t R.tisions to MCP 310 CMR 40.000, Re.llinestriboa Yertiorr, Efrctivc l,/jf97 1 EP -Extacloble Peto lcum Hydro@tbo,,s Shded Areot desigtuQ aprypriore Mcdtod, l -Risk Cll@dcterizztiot Catcgories CONCLASIONS Baned on a MetM l-Risk Characterization showing a condition of "No Significant Risk" for nils and groundwater conditiow in the area of the fueloil release at the I 1-1 j Appleby Road hclling at the Wollennm property, it appeors tha tle removal of some 65.84 tons of contaminated soil od 660 gallons of fupacted grouMer lws ntltigaed signiJicant impact to the etaironmental and to lwnan receptots regardlex of groundwater or soil category applied. As such, a pennanent LIBLE 5 SUMMLRY OF EPH ANALIBIS FOR WTHOD I-RISK CHARACTERE ITION: WATER LOAtnON/ E{P(NURE MINI CONCENTXATION EIFr.,,b(dLnb) MA DEP EPH M.thod GY-lYtESt.lsd fu,s"t') 3t0 cMR40.971(2) GVAVe,tudrd ha/A 3t0cLtR10.971Q) etr3VbW (E/L) 310 caR 0.971(2) Mv-3 I2ni/9El C,b CL CDtoC, C,ttocn 1.00t) 5,000 200 L000NI 50, n 20,000 50,000 3C MA MV-3 [st5rc8] qio CD BRL(<500)CDbC, DRL(<'qo) C0 to C, ERL(<200) Tcre.,lnaletar NqthohtE BRL (<10) 2-M.Mrqtluh,E BRL (<5) Ph.na lver. BRL (<10)Acendfihrt.n BRL (<10) 1,000 t,040 200 20 l0 t0 20 1,000 Nl 50,out 60dd IA,U0tlt N,l, 20,000 50,000 30,000 6000 3,000 t0 t,0@ Mvlp/,Jn'1 C,bCn Cnto Cx C roc,, 1,000 5.000 2U) 1,01X' N,I 50,M 20,N0 54,000 30,0M Mn/1 tt/rt/981 C,ta Cn BRL(<,0o) C Dto Cy BRL(<s(N)C roc, BRL(<500) Tdrael .lnal,t rNoprlvlenc BRL (<10) 2-M.,lrlnq,hahn BRL(<t) Ph qrrhnrQ BRL (<10)l,c.dqhfi.a. BRL (<10) 4,000 5,000 200 20 IO 30 20 TO,N NA NA 20,000 50,000 i0,000 6,N0j,oaa t0 5,400 grourdwqter categoies. As such, groundwater quality, immediately adjacent to and downgradient of the area of release, represents a condition of 'No Signi/icont Risk". Method 1 - Risk Chqacterization stondods for the appropriate GW-2 and GW-3 grotmdwater categories , and the most restrictiye GW-l groundwater category, is represented in Table 5. BRL(<500) BRL(<t00) BRL(<200) BRL(<t00) BRL(<t00) BRL(<200) JTJNE 30, I 998 PAGE 12 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO9t.1t52 IRAC/RAO RTN* +13054 solution has bem achieved and a Level A-2 Respowe Action Outcome (RAO) withou an Activities and Use Limitation (AUL) is applicable for the closwe of this project, in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.1036. A rniew of costs odfeasibility to meet backgrond corditions in soils has been considered Worlrer safety issues ard qerces ossociated withfinher shoring of the dwelling is excessive based on calctlated iskfor even the most restictive soil and groundwater categories. The residual soil contamination at the *tent of excatation is below the applicable Method l-Risk Chardcterization standods for the most slringent cdepies qsntning direct exposure atd leacling potential. These soils are mderlying the uisting dwelling with a subslab yent exhausted thlough o passive turbine vent and capped with a vapor banier. Therefore, any residual contamination does not represent a significant risk to fuMo, or ewironmmtal receptols based on ingestion, inhalation or dermol contact. Conseqnntly, the review of costs to beneJits show thot additional fees to fwther shore the dwelling agoirst datnage and ptential rbk to site tnrkerc lus rc substantive efect on exposure risk nor limits acttvities or use of the property. As such, no fitrther work has been conducted or deemed necessaO) at this time. The SW nanifuld will proide for nb-slab venting of any orgonic vqors, and promote natural attemstlo4 and biodegradation of residual contaminotion in meeting background conditions witho* fwther active remediation and qpense Subsequent to yorn review and concurreoce with this Inmrdiate Response Action Coryletion and Response Action Or.ncomc Statement, as qualified by the Supporting Documentation, tbe Response Action Outcome (BWSC-104) and Trvrmediate Respoose Action Outcome (BWSC-I05) tansmittaJs shouH be e:recuted ad retumed to our office with your cover letter to Daa Crafion, for filing with the MA DEP (SERO) BWSC/ERS. A copy of the report distribution will be forwarded to you for your records and acknowledgment of public notificatioc Ifyou barrc my questbns rcguding tle proirt or need additional information, please cotrtact me at your earliest convenience. Sincaety, BENNETT & O'REILLY, INC. David C. Bennett, P.G., CGWP Director of Environmeotal Services JIJLY 2, 1998 PAGE 13 OF 13 WOLLERMAN/BO9t-I t52 IRAC/RAO RTN# 4.13054 encl: -'lmmediate Response Action Completion-Response Action Outcome Statement ...", prepared by BENNETT & O'REILLY INC., Dated July 2, 1998. - Transmittal Forrns BWSC-104(RAO) and BWSC-105(IRAC) - Bill of Lading, BWSC-l2A B and C cc:Wayne Wollerman, Homeowner MA DEP (SERO) BWSC/ERS, Attrr- Dan Crafton Yarmouth Fte Department, Attn Deputy Chief Greene Yarmouth Health Departnrent, Attn. Bruce Murphy Yarmouttr Chief Municipal Officer