GE 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield. MA 01201 USA · GE 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield. MA 01201 USA Transmitted Via Electronic Mail (to EPA) and Overnight Courier September 6, 2012

-• GE 159 Plast ics Avenue Pittsfield. MA 01201 USA

Transmitted Via Electronic Mail (to EPA) and Overnight Courier

September 6, 2012

Mr. Richard Fisher U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 5 Post Office Square- Suite 100 Boston, Massachusetts 02109-3912

Re: GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site Groundwater Management Area 1 (GECD310) East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report

Dear Mr. Fisher:

Enclosed is a report entitled East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report. This report describes the soil gas sampling event conducted in June 2012 at East Street Area 1-South within Groundwater Management Area (GMA) 1, presents the results from that sampling event (as well as certain associated groundwater monitoring results), and proposes a number of modifications to the LNAPL volatilization assessment for the fall2012 soil gas sampling round.

Please call me if you have any questions regarding this report.

Sincerely,

(d./MCui}/IJ-Richard W. Gates Remediation Project Manager

Enclosure

cc: Dean Tagliaferro, EPA Tim Conway, EPA (cover letter only) Holly Inglis, EPA (CD-ROM) Rose Howell, EPA (CD-ROM) Robert Leitch, USACE (CD-ROM) Linda Palmieri, Weston (2 hard copies & CD-ROM) Eva Tor, MDEP (CD-ROM) Michael Gorski, MDEP (CD-ROM) John Ziegler, MDEP (2 hard copies & CD-ROM) Karen Pelto, MDEP (cover letter only) Nancy E. Harper, MA AG (cover letter only) Mayor DanielL. Bianchi, City of Pittsfield Corydon Thurston, Executive Director,

PEDA (CD-ROM)

Corporate Environmental Program'>

Barbara Landau, Noble & Wickersham (CD-ROM) James Gagnon, O'Reilly, Talbot & Okun David Langseth, Gradient Corporation Michael Carroll, GE (cover letter only) Rod McLaren, GE (cover letter only) James Nuss, ARCADIS James Bieke, Sidley Austin John Ciampa, SPECTRA Jack Yablonsky, Berkshire Gas Richard Nasman, Berkshire Gas (cover letter only) Ishwar Murarka, Ish, Inc. Public Information Repositories GE Internal Repositories

G:IGE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_ l\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI Report\Final\3641211222CvrLtr.doc

General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report

Groundwater Management Area 1

September 2012

Groundwater Management Area 1 – East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Prepared for:

General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Prepared by:

ARCADIS of New York, Inc. 6723 Towpath Road Syracuse New York 13214-0066 Tel 315.446.9120 Fax 315.449.0017

Our Ref.:

B0031215

Date:

September 2012

\\arcadis-us.com\OfficeData\Syracuse-NY\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI

Report\Final\3641211222Rpt.doc i

Table of Contents

1. Background 1

2. Summary of June 2012 Soil Gas Investigation Activities 3

2.1 Soil Gas Sample Locations 3

2.2 Soil Gas Probe Installation and Sampling Methods 3

2.3 Data Validation 5

2.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring 5

3. Summary of Analytical Results 6

3.1 Soil Gas Analytical Results 6

3.2 Comparison to Screening Levels 6

3.3 Comparison of Soil Gas Data to Historical LNAPL 7

3.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring Results 7

4. Modifications and Future Activities 9

4.1 Proposed Modifications 9

4.2 Future Activities 9

5. References 11

Tables

1 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 – Residential

2 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 - Residential

3 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 – Commercial

4 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 – Commercial

5 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 – Residential

6 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 - Residential

\\arcadis-us.com\OfficeData\Syracuse-NY\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI

Report\Final\3641211222Rpt.doc ii

Table of Contents

7 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 – Commercial

8 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 - Commercial

9 East Street Area 1 LNAPL Analytical Results

10 East Street Area 1 Groundwater Analytical Results – Spring 2012

11 Soil Gas Reporting Limits for SVOCs and PCBs

Figures

Figure 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Sampling Locations

Attachments

Attachment A Soil Gas Point Construction Logs

Attachment B Sample Logs

Attachment C Data Validation Report

Attachment D City of Pittsfield Drinking Water Quality Reports

G:\\arcadis-us.com\OfficeData\Syracuse-NY\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI

Report\Final\3641211222Rpt.doc 1

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report

1. Background

In a letter dated January 11, 2011, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) directed General Electric Company (GE) to submit a proposal to evaluate whether the presence of light non-aqueous-phase liquid (LNAPL) within Groundwater Management Area GMA 1 that is less than 15 feet below the ground surface and within 30 feet laterally of an occupied building (or building that could be occupied) could pose an unacceptable risk to occupants of such buildings via volatilization and transport of constituents from the LNAPL to the indoor air of such buildings. In response, GE submitted such a proposal in March 2011, and subsequently revised it in January 2012 as required by an EPA conditional approval letter dated November 7, 2011. That revised proposal, titled Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan for Groundwater Management Area 1 – East Street Area 1 (Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan) (ARCADIS 2012), presented a summary of existing information regarding LNAPL and groundwater in the relevant areas and description of the proposed activities to assess the potential impact of volatilization of constituents from the LNAPL on the indoor air of nearby occupied or potentially occupied buildings. EPA provided conditional approval of that work plan by letter dated May 14, 2012.

Section 2 of the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan identified areas within GMA 1 containing LNAPL on groundwater at an average depth of less than 15 feet below the ground surface (bgs) and at a lateral distance of less than 30 feet from an occupied or potentially occupied building. It noted that GE’s initial LNAPL volatilization assessment proposal in March 2011 had identified such areas within two Removal Action Areas at GMA 1 – namely, East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-South. It explained further, however, that since that time, it was determined that the existing buildings at East Street Area 1-North, which were unoccupied, would be demolished in the near future. (In fact, since the submission of that work plan, those buildings have been demolished.) For this reason, the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan proposed to evaluate the potential for impacts from volatilization of constituents in the LNAPL on the indoor air of two commercial buildings and six residential buildings at East Street Area 1-South. These consist of the commercial buildings at 1260 and 1264 East Street and the residential structures at 1224/1226, 1228, 1230/1232, 1234, 1236/1238, and 1244/1246 East Street, as shown on Figure 1. This proposal was approved by EPA.

The Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, as conditionally approved by EPA, called for the performance of two rounds of soil gas sampling at a number of sampling points near the above-referenced occupied buildings as a screening-level step to assess the potential for volatilization of constituents from the LNAPL that could impact the indoor air of those buildings. It provided further for the submittal of an LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report after receipt of the data from the initial sampling round and the submittal of a Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report after receipt of the data from the second sampling round.




The initial round of soil gas sampling was conducted on June 21-22, 2012 at the required locations near the commercial and residential buildings discussed above, and the final laboratory data packages from that sampling round were received on July 24, 2012. In accordance with Section 6.2 of the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, this East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report (LNAPL Volatilization Interim Data Report) describes the June 2012 sampling event, presents the soil gas results from that event, and proposes certain modifications to the LNAPL volatilization assessment to be implemented for the second soil gas sampling round. In addition, as required by EPA, this report describes associated groundwater monitoring activities conducted as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment.




2. Summary of June 2012 Soil Gas Investigation Activities

As noted above, GE proposed to conduct two soil gas sampling events to account for potential temporal variability in results, and EPA approved that proposal. This section describes the first sampling event conducted in June of 2012. The second sampling event is currently planned for later in the fall of 2012.

2.1 Soil Gas Sample Locations

Five proposed soil gas sample locations were identified in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan. In its May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter, EPA approved those locations and directed GE to add one more soil gas sample location between the buildings at 1224/1226 and 1228 East Street. Sample locations were selected to provide soil gas data from areas where LNAPL had been observed in the last five years within 30 feet from the buildings identified for evaluation (i.e., monitoring wells 31R, 33, 34, 35, 72, 75 and 76 and both the Southside and Northside Recovery Systems), or where no intermediate monitoring well is located between the building and an LNAPL accumulation. These six soil gas sample locations (SVP-1 through SVP-6), along with the monitoring well and recovery system locations, are shown on Figure 1. A detailed description of the buildings located near the sampling locations was presented in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan. These consist of the commercial buildings at 1260 and 1264 East Street and the six residential structures located at 1224/1226, 1228, 1230/1232, 1234, 1236/1238, and 1244/1246 East Street (Figure 1)

On June 21-22, 2012, GE conducted soil gas sampling at the six sample locations shown on Figure 1 (SVP-1 through SVP-6), including the additional soil gas sampling point required by EPA. An ambient air sample was also collected during the sampling event at a location upgradient of the soil gas sampling locations (as shown on Figure 1) to evaluate the contribution of background sources to the samples, if any.

2.2 Soil Gas Probe Installation and Sampling Methods

Soil gas probes were installed and samples were collected in accordance with the detailed sample probe installation and sampling methods presented in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan. These procedures are summarized below in this subsection. Soil gas point construction logs are provided in Attachment A and sample logs are provided in Attachment B.

All soil gas probes were installed as permanent single-level probes as detailed in the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) included as Appendices A, B, and C of the Work Plan. Each soil gas probe contains a stainless steel screen set at a depth approximately one foot above the water table and outside the capillary fringe. Each soil gas probe location was manually cleared with hand-auger techniques to the appropriate depth. After each respective




boring was advanced, a 6-inch long, 0.375-inch outer diameter stainless steel soil gas screen was set in a one-foot interval of standard sand pack, allowing approximately three inches of sand above and below the screen. Teflon tubing was connected to the soil gas screen.

A layer of dry, granular bentonite was placed above the sand pack, followed by either hydrated granular bentonite (SVP-1, SVP-2, and SVP-3) or a bentonite slurry (SVP-4, SVP-5, and SVP-6) to 1 foot below the surface, and the boring was then sealed with concrete. Sand pack was used around the screened interval of each sample probe to allow soil gas from the adjacent soil to reach the probes. At the surface, the Teflon tubing was capped with a vapor-tight Swagelok fitting to eliminate communication between the subsurface and the atmosphere. The surface of each probe location was fitted with a concrete pad and a flush mounted, traffic-rated well box.

Soil gas samples were collected as detailed in Appendices A, B, and C of the Work Plan. A helium tracer gas leak test (described in Appendix A of the Work Plan) was conducted at each soil gas sampling point prior to sampling. All six points were shown to be properly sealed, indicating that there was no influence from ambient air into the collected samples. Samples collected for analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method TO-15 and certain associated semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) that can be analyzed by the same method were collected in SUMMA® canisters in accordance with Method TO-15. Each sample was collected using a passivated 1-liter SUMMA® canister with an attached pre-set flow regulator. All canisters were confirmed to have acceptable vacuum levels prior to sample collection. Samples for analyses of other SVOCs were collected using sorbent tube methodology as specified by EPA Methods TO-13A and TO-17.1 Additionally, samples were collected for analysis of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in accordance with EPA Method TO-17.

All samples were submitted to Air Toxics Ltd, located in Folsom, California for analysis. Air Toxics has a current National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) certification and is accredited in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. EPA Method TO-15 was used for analysis of the soil gas samples for VOCs and associated SVOCs that can be analyzed by that method. For analysis of other SVOCs, the laboratory used EPA Methods TO-13A and TO-17 (depending on the particular constituents); and for PCBs, EPA Method TO-17 was used. These results received from the laboratory are discussed in Section 3.

As previously noted, an ambient air sample was collected upgradient of the soil gas sampling locations. This ambient sample was collected using a passivated 1-liter SUMMA® canister with an attached pre-set flow regulator. The sample was collected from breathing height

1 Although Appendix C to the Work Plan did not specifically describe the procedures for collecting samples for Method TO-13A, the procedures for collecting such samples are identical to the sorbent tube methodology specified in that appendix, and used, for collection of Method TO-17 samples.




(approximately 3 to 5 feet above ground) from upwind of all the soil gas samples. The ambient air sample was submitted to Air Toxics for analysis of VOCs and associated SVOCs using EPA Method TO-15.

2.3 Data Validation

The 2012 soil gas and ambient air analytical results were received from the laboratory in units of both micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) and parts per billion by volume (ppbv), and both sets of data have been validated. The results of this review are included in Attachment C. Results of the validation indicate that 100% of the analytical data are considered usable.

2.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring

The Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan stated that GE currently monitors well 33, 34, and 72 (located in the vicinity of the buildings subject to this assessment) for the presence of LNAPL on a monthly basis and that, as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment, GE had initiated and would continue monthly monitoring for the presence of LNAPL at wells 35 and 76 for the duration of this assessment. These activities were conducted throughout the first half of 2012, and the results were presented in GE’s Groundwater Management Area 1 NAPL Monitoring Report for Spring 2012 (Spring 2012 NAPL Monitoring Report, August 2012). Those results are also briefly summarized below.

In addition, in its May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter for the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, EPA directed GE to sample and analyze groundwater from well 31R for a full suite of VOCs and SVOCs for a minimum of four semi-annual monitoring rounds starting in spring 2012, and to add the entire suite of SVOCs to the analysis of groundwater from well 72R for at least the next two sampling rounds. EPA stated that GE should compare the results from these samples to the GW-2 Performance Standards (i.e., the Method 1 GW-2 groundwater standards set out in the Massachusetts Contingency Plan). GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 31R for the full suite of VOCs and SVOCs in the spring 2012 semi-annual sampling round, conducted in April 2012. However, since that sampling event was conducted prior to receipt of EPA’s May 14, 2012 letter, well 72R was sampled only for VOCs. The results of this sampling event were presented in GE’s Plant Site 1 Groundwater Management Area Groundwater Quality Monitoring Interim Report for Spring 2012 (Spring 2012 GMA 1 Groundwater Quality Report, July 2012), but are also briefly described in this LNAPL Volatilization Interim Data Report, as required by EPA’s May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter. The Spring GMA 1 Groundwater Quality Report also noted that GE would conduct a supplemental sampling event at well 72R for the full suite of SVOCs in the fall of 2012,




3. Summary of Analytical Results

This section presents a summary and initial evaluation of the analytical results from the soil gas (and ambient) air samples collected in June 2012. It also briefly discusses the results of the associated groundwater monitoring activities conducted as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment.

3.1 Soil Gas Analytical Results

The analytical results for the soil gas samples collected on June 21-22, 2012 are presented in Tables 1 through 4 in units of ppbv and in Tables 5 through 8 in units of µg/m3. Results from samples collected near residential buildings (SV-P-1, SVP-2, and SVP-6) are shown in Table 1 and 5 (VOCs and associated SVOCs) and Table 2 and 6 (other SVOCs and PCBs). Analytical results from samples collected near commercial buildings (SVP-3, SVP-4, and SVP-5) are presented in Table 3 and 7 (VOCs and associated SVOCs) and Table 4 and 8 (other SVOCs and PCBs). Analytical results for the ambient air sample collected on June 21, 2012 are presented in all tables showing VOCs and associated SVOCs for comparison.

In summary, a total of 42 VOCs/SVOCs analyzed by TO-15 and six other SVOCs were detected in the six soil gas samples. More specifically, soil gas data collected from the residential areas showed the presence of 34 VOCs/SVOCs analyzed by TO-15 and two other SVOCs (Tables 1 & 5 and 2 & 6); and soil gas data collected from the commercial areas showed the presence of 36 VOCs/SVOCs analyzed by TO-15 and four other SVOCs (Tables 3 & 7 and 4 & 8). No PCBs were detected in any soil gas samples using the standard detection and reporting limits associated with Method TO-17.

3.2 Comparison to Screening Levels

Analytical results were compared to highly conservative screening levels based on the EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) table (EPA 2012).2 Soil gas samples collected near residential homes (at SVP-1, SVP-2, and SVP-6) were compared to screening values calculated by applying an attenuation factor of 0.1 to the EPA RSLs for Residential Indoor Air at a 10-6 cancer risk or a non-cancer hazard quotient of 1.3 Soil gas samples collected near commercial buildings (at SVP-3, SVP-4, and SVP-5) were compared to screening values calculated by applying an attenuation factor of 0.1 to the EPA RSLs for Industrial Indoor Air at a 10-6 cancer risk or a non-cancer hazard quotient of 1. Soil gas results are expected to be representative of worst-case conditions since all samples were collected approximately one

2 These screening levels are not regulatory requirements and are not indicative of actual risks to occupants of the buildings, but are used as an initial screening tool as required by the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, as conditionally approved by EPA . 3 Soil gas RSL = indoor air RSL ÷ 0.1




foot above the water table (i.e., source). These comparisons are shown in Tables 1 through 8.

In the samples collected near residential buildings, five VOCs were detected at concentrations exceeding their respective screening levels in at least one sample; these VOCs were benzyl chloride, benzene, bromodichloromethane, chloroform, and ethylbenzene (Tables 1 & 5). It should be noted that chloroform and bromodichoromethane are byproducts of drinking water chlorination and are found in the City of Pittsfield drinking water (as shown by the City’s Annual Drinking Water Reports for 2011 and 2010 in Appendix D), and thus are likely attributable to such chlorination. No SVOCs were detected at concentrations above their respective screening levels. No PCBs were detected in these soil gas samples.

In the samples collected near commercial buildings, two VOCs, chloroform and naphthalene, were detected at concentrations exceeding their respective screening levels in at least one sample (Tables 3 & 7). No SVOCs were detected at concentrations above their respective screening levels. No PCBs were detected in these soil gas samples.

It should be noted that the detection and reporting limits used in this initial round for PCBs and certain other constituents, which are the standard limits associated with the volumes of soil gas obtained in accordance with the methods approved in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, are above the screening levels. As a result, GE, in consultation with the analytical laboratory, has elected to develop a revised methodology to reduce the reporting limits for the next sampling round, as discussed in Section 4.1 below.

3.3 Comparison of Soil Gas Data to Historical LNAPL

Table 9 presents all available data on LNAPL sampling from GMA 1. Of the constituents detected in soil gas during the June 2012 sampling event, only five VOCs/SVOCs (acetone, tetrachloroethene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, chlorobenzene, and trichloroethene) were also previously detected in LNAPL samples collected from GMA 1. Of these five constituents, none was detected in soil gas above its respective screening level. PCBs were not detected in any soil gas samples.

3.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring Results

As discussed in Section 2.4, as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment, GE performed monthly monitoring for the presence of LNAPL at wells 33, 34, 35, 72, and 76 (locations shown on Figure 1). The results for the monthly LNAPL monitoring for January through June 2012 (6 or 7 rounds, depending on the well) were presented in the Spring 2012 NAPL Monitoring Report. As shown there, LNAPL was not observed in wells 33 and 34; but it was observed in and removed from the other wells on one or more occasions – namely, during 1 of 7 rounds at well 35, 4 of 7 rounds at well 72, and all 7 rounds at well 76. The extent of




LNAPL indicated by these findings, which is also shown on Figure 1, is generally consistent with or less than the LNAPL extent in this area over the past few years.

In addition, as also noted in Section 2.4, during the spring 2012 semi-annual sampling event, GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 31R for a full suite of VOCs and SVOCs, and it sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 72R for VOCs (as well as PCBs). Further, during that event, GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well GMA1-6, also located in East Street Area 1-South, for VOCs and select SVOCs. The results from these wells were presented in the Spring 2012 GMA 1 Groundwater Quality Report and are also summarized in Table 10. As shown there, none of the sample results from these wells for any constituent exceeded the GW-2 Performance Standards.




4. Modifications and Future Activities

As outlined in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, GE will collect a second round of soil gas samples from the soil gas points installed in June. However, based on the results of the first round of samples, GE proposes to make a number of modifications to the sampling and analytical approach for the second round, as described below.

4.1 Proposed Modifications

In accordance with the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, the soil gas samples collected in June 2012 were analyzed for a full suite of VOCs, SVOCs, and PCBs via EPA Methods TO-15, TO-13A, and TO-17. The results of the soil gas sampling have confirmed that only a limited number of constituents were detected above the highly conservative soil gas screening levels and that several constituents, including chloroform and bromodichloromethane, appear to be related to known non-site-related sources (i.e., drinking water chlorination). Based on these findings, given that the purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the potential for volatilization of constituents from the LNAPL in East Street Area 1 to impact the indoor air of nearby buildings, GE proposes to limit the analyses for the next sampling round to only the constituents that have been detected in LNAPL in East Street Area 1 – namely, four VOCs (acetone, tetrachloroethene, chlorobenzene and trichloroethene), two SVOCs (1,2,4-trichlorobenzene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene), and PCBs. This shortened analyte list will help focus the assessment on those constituents associated with the LNAPL and avoid background or other non-site-related interferences. The VOCs and SVOCs will be analyzed by Method TO-15, and the PCBs will be analyzed by Method TO-17

In addition, recognizing that the reporting limits for PCBs used in the initial sampling event exceeded the screening levels, GE has elected to develop a revised methodology, in consultation with the analytical laboratory, to reduce the reporting limits for PCBs (to the residential screening level) by obtaining a much larger volume of gas. In addition, GE and the laboratory have developed a revised methodology for reducing the reporting limits for the SVOCs proposed for analysis in the next round, again by collecting a larger volume of gas. The proposed revised reporting limits for PCBs and those SVOCs are presented in Table 11. GE’s proposal of these non-standard methodologies (which depend on obtaining a large volume of gas) is based on the particular circumstances of this assessment and should not be considered a precedent for any other situation.

4.2 Future Activities

The second soil gas sampling round will be conducted in the fall of 2012. Both the June 2012 data and future fall 2012 data will be discussed together and presented in a Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report, to be submitted within 90 days after receipt of the final laboratory data packages from the fall 2012 sampling event. That report will also include an




overall evaluation of the soil gas results and recommendations for any additional assessment activities or response actions, if appropriate.




5. References

ARCADIS. 2012. Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan for Groundwater Management Area 1 – East Street Area 1. January.

EPA. 2012. Regional Screening Levels (RSL) for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites. April.

Tables

Table 1Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via TO-15- East Street Area 1 - Residential

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)

Location ID: USEPA Residential AMB SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL AMB-062112 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

VOCs/Select SVOCs1,1,1-Trichloroethane 950 9,500 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0061 0.061 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 4,000 40,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) 0.35 J [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.028 0.28 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,1-Dichloroethane 0.37 3.7 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,1-Dichloroethene 53 530 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.28 2.8 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.5 15 ND(0.82) 3.8 1.1 [1] 2.11,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.000017 0.00017 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.00053 0.0053 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 35 350 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.023 0.23 0.091 J ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [0.094 J] ND(0.92)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.052 0.52 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(0.82) 1.2 0.27 J [0.26 J] 0.58 J1,3-Butadiene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)1,4-Dioxane 0.089 0.89 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)2-Butanone 1,800 18,000 0.81 J 0.85 J 1.4 J [0.85 J] 3 J2-Hexanone 7.6 76 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)3-Chloropropene 0.13 1.3 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(0.82) 3.9 0.8 J [0.93] 1.84-Methyl-2-pentanone 760 7,600 ND(0.82) 0.58 J ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] 0.47 JAcetone 13,000 130,000 7.8 J 22 15 [14] 46Acetonitrile 38 380 ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)Acrolein 0.0092 0.092 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Acrylonitrile 0.017 0.17 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)Benzene 0.097 0.97 0.13 J 4.8 0.6 J [0.59 J] 0.65 JBenzyl Chloride 0.0097 0.097 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) 0.14 J [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Bromodichloromethane 0.0099 0.099 ND(0.82) 7.8 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Bromoform 0.21 2.1 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Bromomethane 1.3 13 ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)Carbon Disulfide 230 2,300 ND(3.3) 14 2.1 J [2 J] 4Carbon Tetrachloride 0.065 0.65 ND(0.82) 0.42 J ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Chlorobenzene 11 110 0.55 J 0.6 J 0.63 J [0.63 J] 0.64 JChloroethane 3,800 38,000 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Chloroform 0.023 0.23 ND(0.82) 326 1.2 [1.2] 3Chloromethane 46 460 ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.1 J ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] 0.13 JCyclohexane 1,800 18,000 ND(0.82) 0.55 J 0.17 J [0.18 J] ND(0.92)Dibromochloromethane 0.011 0.11 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Dichlorodifluoromethane 20 200 0.57 J 1.2 0.53 J [0.56 J] 0.64 Jd-Limonene - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Ethanol - - - - 5.7 1.3 J 1.7 J [2.8 J] 1 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Ethylbenzene 0.22 2.2 0.16 J 9.1 1.5 [1.4] 2.6Heptane - - - - 0.24 J 1.5 0.22 J [0.36 J] 0.4 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.01 0.1 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Isooctane - - - - 0.14 J 0.95 0.18 J [ND(0.88)] 0.17 JIsopropyl alcohol 3,000 30,000 0.44 J ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] 0.55 JIsopropylbenzene 85 850 ND(0.82) 0.32 J ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] 0.14 Jm&p-Xylene 23 230 0.16 J 30 5.4 [5.1] 7.6

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI Report\Final\3641211222Tbls.xlsx - Table 1

Page 1 of 2

9/6/2012



Location ID: USEPA Residential AMB SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL AMB-062112 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

VOCs (continued)Methyl Methacrylate 180 1,800 ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)Methyl tert-butyl ether 2.6 26 ND(0.82) 0.08 J ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Methylene Chloride 28 280 1.9 J 0.87 J 0.58 J [0.42 J] 0.8 JNaphthalene 0.014 0.14 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)n-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.2) ND(8.6) ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(9.2)n-Hexane 210 2,100 0.87 2.7 1.1 [0.94] 0.68 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Nonane 40 400 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)n-Propylbenzene 200 2,000 ND(0.82) 0.9 0.21 J [0.25 J] 0.43 Jo-Xylene 23 230 ND(0.82) 9.3 1.8 [1.8] 2.7Propene 1,800 18,000 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Styrene 230 2,300 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Tetrachloroethene 1.4 14 0.25 J 2 0.91 [0.9] 5.7Tetrahydrofuran 710 7,100 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Toluene 1,400 14,000 4 36 4.9 [5.4] 8.4trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 16 160 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.2 J ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)Trichloroethene 0.08 0.8 ND(0.82) 0.77 J 0.33 J [0.24 J] 0.41 JTrichlorofluoromethane 130 1,300 0.78 J 1 1 [1.1] 0.39 JVinyl Acetate 60 600 ND(3.3) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)Vinyl Chloride 0.063 0.63 ND(0.82) ND(0.86) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.92)

Notes:

3. Only VOCs and select SVOCs analyzed by TO-15 are presented in this table.4. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. 5. Shading indicates that value exceeds the applicable screening level. 6. -- Indicates no screening level for this parameter; not applicable.7. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.8. Residential Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Residential Indoor Air RSL (at 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (attenuation factor of 0.1).9. ppbv = parts per billion by volume

Data Qualifiers:Organics (volatiles)J - Indicates an estimated value.

2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment C.

1. Samples were collected by ARCADIS and submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis for analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and select semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs).


Page 2 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 2Soil Gas Sampling Results via TO-17 and TO-13a - East Street Area 1 - Residential

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)

Location ID: USEPA Residential SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.011 0.11 ND(0.47) ND(0.47) [ND(0.47)] ND(0.47)Aroclor-1221 0.00056 0.0056 ND(0.61) ND(0.61) [ND(0.61)] ND(0.61)Aroclor-1232 0.00056 0.0056 ND(0.53) ND(0.53) [ND(0.53)] ND(0.53)Aroclor-1248 0.00036 0.0036 ND(0.42) ND(0.42) [ND(0.42)] ND(0.42)Aroclor-1254 0.00032 0.0032 ND(0.37) ND(0.37) [ND(0.37)] ND(0.37)Aroclor-1260 0.00027 0.0027 ND(0.34) ND(0.34) [ND(0.34)] ND(0.34)Total PCBs - - ND(0.61) ND(0.61) [ND(0.61)] ND(0.61)SVOCs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.00093 0.0093 ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.000084 0.00084 ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97 J)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.00084 0.0084 ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.00084 0.0084 ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Chrysene 0.0093 0.093 ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00007 0.0007 ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.00077 0.0077 ND(0.98) ND(0.98) ND(0.98)SVOCs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.11 0.036 J [ND(8.6)] 0.089Acenaphthene - - - - ND(0.16) ND(0.16) [ND(16)] ND(0.16)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.08) ND(0.08) [ND(8)] ND(0.08)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068 J) [ND(6.8 J)] ND(0.068 J)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.06) ND(0.06) [ND(6)] ND(0.06)Fluorene - - - - ND(0.15) ND(0.15) [ND(15)] ND(0.15)Naphthalene 0.014 0.14 0.072 J 0.032 J [ND(9.5)] 0.12Phenanthrene - - - - ND(0.068) ND(0.068) [ND(6.8)] ND(0.068)Pyrene - - - - ND(0.12) ND(0.12) [ND(12)] ND(0.12)

Notes:

3. Only PCBs and SVOCs analyzed by TO-17 or TO-13A are presented in this table.4. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. 5. Shading indicates that value exceeds the applicable screening level.6. -- Indicates no screening level for this parameter; not applicable.

8. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.

10. ppbv = parts per billion by volume

Data Qualifiers:Organics (PCBs, semivolatiles)J - Indicates an estimated value.


1. Samples were collected by ARCADIS and submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and certain semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs).

7. Aroclor 1016 and 1242 demonstrate a similar pattern with many common congeners. These two Aroclors were not individually identified in the samples and were reported as Aroclor 1016/1242 using the relative response factor of Aroclor 1016.

9. Residential Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Residential Indoor Air RSL (at 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (attenuation factor of 0.1).


Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012

Table 3Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via TO-15- East Street Area 1 - Commercial


Location ID: USEPA Industrial AMB SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5Date Collected: Industrial Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL AMB-062112 SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5

VOCs/Select SVOCs 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 4,000 40,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.083 J 0.092 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.031 0.31 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.14 J ND(0.86)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 17,000 170,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.15 J ND(0.86)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.14 1.4 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,1-Dichloroethane 1.9 19 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,1-Dichloroethene 220 2,200 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1.2 12 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6.3 63 ND(0.82) 0.35 J 2.4 0.961,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00021 0.0021 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0026 0.026 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 150 1,500 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.12 1.2 0.091 J ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.26 2.6 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.86 J 0.39 J1,3-Butadiene 0.19 1.9 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.21 J ND(0.86)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.18 1.8 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)1,4-Dioxane 0.44 4.4 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)2-Butanone 7,500 75,000 0.81 J 1.2 J 2.3 J 1.4 J2-Hexanone 32 320 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)3-Chloropropene 0.64 6.4 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(0.82) 0.27 J 2 0.76 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,200 32,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.44 J ND(0.86)Acetone 59,000 590,000 7.8 J 14 30 40Acetonitrile 150 1,500 ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)Acrolein 0.038 0.38 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Acrylonitrile 0.083 0.83 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)Benzene 0.5 5 0.13 J 0.41 J 2.5 0.53 JBenzyl Chloride 0.048 0.48 ND(0.82) 0.14 J 0.16 J 0.14 JBromodichloromethane 0.049 0.49 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Bromoform 1.1 11 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Bromomethane 5.7 57 ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)Carbon Disulfide 1,000 10,000 ND(3.3) 9 8.5 2.1 JCarbon Tetrachloride 0.32 3.2 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Chlorobenzene 48 480 0.55 J 0.66 J 0.58 J 0.61 JChloroethane 17,000 170,000 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Chloroform 0.11 1.1 ND(0.82) 1.4 2.2 0.39 JChloromethane 190 1,900 ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.1 J 0.14 J 0.17 J ND(0.86)Cyclohexane 7,600 76,000 ND(0.82) 0.58 J 0.66 J ND(0.86)Dibromochloromethane 0.053 0.53 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Dichlorodifluoromethane 89 890 0.57 J 3.7 17 2.8d-Limonene - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Ethanol - - - - 5.7 2.1 J 1.9 J 2.2 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Ethylbenzene 1.1 11 0.16 J 0.2 J 4.6 0.98Heptane - - - - 0.24 J 0.15 J 1.1 0.37 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.053 0.53 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Isooctane - - - - 0.14 J 0.21 J 0.95 0.18 JIsopropyl alcohol 13,000 130,000 0.44 J ND(3.8) ND(3.5) 0.76 JIsopropylbenzene 370 3,700 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.2 J 0.14 Jm&p-Xylene 100 1,000 0.16 J 0.41 J 17 3.6


Page 1 of 2

9/6/2012




VOCs (continued)Methyl Methacrylate 760 7,600 ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)Methyl tert-butyl ether 13 130 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.071 J ND(0.86)Methylene Chloride 350 3,500 1.9 J 0.83 J 0.73 J 0.79 JNaphthalene 0.069 0.69 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) 0.79 J 0.79 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.2) ND(9.6) ND(8.8) ND(8.6)n-Hexane 880 8,800 0.87 0.39 J 1.2 0.64 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Nonane 170 1,700 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)n-Propylbenzene 900 9,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) 0.49 J 0.21 Jo-Xylene 100 1,000 ND(0.82) 0.24 J 5.9 1.3Propene 7,600 76,000 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Tetrachloroethene 6.9 69 0.25 J 2.5 2.9 0.8 JTetrahydrofuran 3,000 30,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Toluene 5,800 58,000 4 0.78 J 18 3.2trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 66 660 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.2 J ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)Trichloroethene 0.56 5.6 ND(0.82) 1 0.69 J 0.26 JTrichlorofluoromethane 550 5,500 0.78 J 0.89 J 4.8 4.5Vinyl Acetate 250 2,500 ND(3.3) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)Vinyl Chloride 1.1 11 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.88) ND(0.86)

Notes:

3. Only VOCs and select SVOCs analyzed by TO-15 are presented in this table.4. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. 5. Shading indicates that value exceeds the applicable screening level. 6. -- Indicates no screening level for this parameter; not applicable.7. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.





8. Industrial Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Indoor Air RSL (at a 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (Attenuation Factor of 0.1).


Page 2 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 4Soil Gas Sampling Results via TO-17 and TO-13a - East Street Area 1 - Commercial

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)

Location ID: USEPA Industrial SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5Date Collected: Industrial Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5

PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.058 0.58 ND(0.47) ND(0.47) ND(0.47)Aroclor-1221 0.0027 0.027 ND(0.61) ND(0.61) ND(0.61)Aroclor-1232 0.0027 0.027 ND(0.53) ND(0.53) ND(0.53)Aroclor-1248 0.0018 0.018 ND(0.42) ND(0.42) ND(0.42)Aroclor-1254 0.0016 0.016 ND(0.37) ND(0.37) ND(0.37)Aroclor-1260 0.0013 0.013 ND(0.34) ND(0.34) ND(0.34)Total PCBs - - ND(0.61) ND(0.61) ND(0.61)SVOCs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.012 0.12 ND(1.1) ND(1.1 J) ND(1.1)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0011 0.011 ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97 J)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.011 0.11 ND(0.97) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(0.88) ND(0.88 J) ND(0.88)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.011 0.11 ND(0.97) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97)Chrysene 0.12 1.2 ND(1.1) ND(1.1 J) ND(1.1)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00088 0.0088 ND(0.88) ND(0.88 J) ND(0.88)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0097 0.097 ND(0.98) ND(0.98 J) ND(0.98)SVOCs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.036 J 0.21 0.28Acenaphthene - - - - ND(0.16) 0.13 J 0.049 JAcenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.08) ND(0.08) ND(0.08)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068 J)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.06) ND(0.06) ND(0.06)Fluorene - - - - ND(0.15) 0.05 J ND(0.15)Naphthalene 0.069 0.69 0.025 J 0.34 0.6Phenanthrene - - - - ND(0.068) ND(0.068) ND(0.068)Pyrene - - - - ND(0.12) ND(0.12) ND(0.12)

Notes:





1. Samples were collected by ARCADIS and submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and certain semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs).2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment C.


9. Industrial Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Industrial Indoor Air RSL (at a 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (Attenuation Factor of 0.1).


Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012


LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)

Location USEPA Residential AMB SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL AMB-062112 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

VOCs/Select SVOCs1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5,200 52,000 ND(4.5) ND(4.7) ND(4.8) [ND(4.8)] ND(5)1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.042 0.42 ND(5.6) ND(5.9) ND(6) [ND(6)] ND(6.3)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 31,000 310,000 ND(6.3) ND(6.6) 2.7 J [ND(6.7)] ND(7)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.15 1.5 ND(4.5) ND(4.7) ND(4.8) [ND(4.8)] ND(5)1,1-Dichloroethane 1.5 15 ND(3.3) ND(3.5) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.7)1,1-Dichloroethene 210 2,100 ND(3.2) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.6)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2.1 21 ND(24) ND(25) ND(26) [ND(26)] ND(27)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 7.3 73 ND(4) 19 5.3 [4.9] 101,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00016 0.0016 ND(32) ND(33) ND(34) [ND(34)] ND(35)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0041 0.041 ND(6.3) ND(6.6) ND(6.7) [ND(6.7)] ND(7)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(5.7) ND(6) ND(6.1) [ND(6.1)] ND(6.4)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 210 2,100 ND(4.9) ND(5.1) ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(5.5)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.094 0.94 0.37 J ND(3.5) ND(3.5) [0.38 J] ND(3.7)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.24 2.4 ND(3.8) ND(4) ND(4) [ND(4)] ND(4.2)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(4) 5.8 1.3 J [1.3 J] 2.9 J1,3-Butadiene 0.081 0.81 ND(1.8) ND(1.9) ND(1.9) [ND(1.9)] ND(2)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(4.9) ND(5.1) ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(5.5)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.22 2.2 ND(4.9) ND(5.1) ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(5.5)1,4-Dioxane 0.32 3.2 ND(12) ND(12) ND(13) [ND(13)] ND(13)2-Butanone 5,200 52,000 2.4 J 2.5 J 4.2 J [2.5 J] 8.9 J2-Hexanone 31 310 ND(13) ND(14) ND(14) [ND(14)] ND(15)3-Chloropropene 0.41 4.1 ND(10) ND(11) ND(11) [ND(11)] ND(11)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(4) 19 3.9 J [4.6] 94-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,100 31,000 ND(3.4) 2.4 J ND(3.6) [ND(3.6)] 1.9 JAcetone 32,000 320,000 19 J 53 36 [33] 110Acetonitrile 63 630 ND(14) ND(14) ND(15) [ND(15)] ND(15)Acrolein 0.021 0.21 ND(7.5) ND(7.8) ND(8) [ND(8)] ND(8.4)Acrylonitrile 0.036 0.36 ND(7.1) ND(7.4) ND(7.6) [ND(7.6)] ND(7.9)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(46) ND(48) ND(49) [ND(49)] ND(51)Benzene 0.31 3.1 0.41 J 16 1.9 J [1.9 J] 2.1 JBenzyl Chloride 0.05 0.5 ND(4.2) ND(4.4) 0.73 J [ND(4.5)] ND(4.7)Bromodichloromethane 0.066 0.66 ND(5.5) 52 ND(5.9) [ND(5.9)] ND(6.1)Bromoform 2.2 22 ND(8.5) ND(8.8) ND(9) [ND(9)] ND(9.4)Bromomethane 5.2 52 ND(32) ND(33) ND(34) [ND(34)] ND(36)Carbon Disulfide 730 7,300 ND(10) 45 6.4 J [6.2 J] 13Carbon Tetrachloride 0.41 4.1 ND(5.2) 2.6 J ND(5.5) [ND(5.5)] ND(5.8)Chlorobenzene 52 520 2.5 J 2.7 J 2.9 J [2.9 J] 2.9 JChloroethane 10,000 100,000 ND(8.6) ND(9) ND(9.2) [ND(9.2)] ND(9.6)Chloroform 0.11 1.1 ND(4) 1,600 5.9 [5.8] 15Chloromethane 94 940 ND(17) ND(18) ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(19)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene - - - - ND(3.2) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.6)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.48 J ND(3.9) ND(4) [ND(4)] 0.6 JCyclohexane 6,300 63,000 ND(2.8) 1.9 J 0.58 J [0.62 J] ND(3.1)Dibromochloromethane 0.09 0.9 ND(7) ND(7.3) ND(7.4) [ND(7.4)] ND(7.8)Dichlorodifluoromethane 100 1,000 2.8 J 6.1 2.6 J [2.8 J] 3.1 Jd-Limonene - - - - ND(18) ND(19) ND(20) [ND(20)] ND(20)Ethanol - - - - 11 2.4 J 3.2 J [5.4 J] 2 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(12) ND(12) ND(13) [ND(13)] ND(13)Ethylbenzene 0.97 9.7 0.69 J 40 6.5 [6] 11Heptane - - - - 0.99 J 6.2 0.9 J [1.4 J] 1.6 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.11 1.1 ND(35) ND(36) ND(37) [ND(37)] ND(39)Isooctane - - - - 0.64 J 4.4 0.84 J [ND(4.1)] 0.82 JIsopropyl alcohol 7,300 73,000 1.1 J ND(8.4) ND(8.6) [ND(8.6)] 1.3 JIsopropylbenzene 420 4,200 ND(4) 1.6 J ND(4.3) [ND(4.3)] 0.69 Jm&p-Xylene 100 1,000 0.69 J 130 24 [22] 33


Page 1 of 2

9/6/2012



Location USEPA Residential AMB SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL AMB-062112 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

Volatile Organics (continued)Methyl Methacrylate 730 7,300 ND(34) ND(35) ND(36) [ND(36)] ND(37)Methyl tert-butyl ether 9.4 94 ND(3) 0.29 J ND(3.2) [ND(3.2)] ND(3.3)Methylene Chloride 96 960 6.5 J 3 J 2 J [1.5 J] 2.8 JNaphthalene 0.072 0.72 ND(17) ND(18) ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(19)n-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(39) ND(41) ND(42) [ND(42)] ND(43)n-Hexane 730 7,300 3.1 9.4 3.8 [3.3] 2.4 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(15) ND(16) ND(16) [ND(16)] ND(17)Nonane 210 2,100 ND(17) ND(18) ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(19)n-Propylbenzene 1,000 10,000 ND(4) 4.4 1 J [1.2 J] 2.1 Jo-Xylene 100 1,000 ND(3.6) 40 7.8 [7.8] 12Propene 3,100 31,000 ND(5.6) ND(5.9) ND(6) [ND(6)] ND(6.3)Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(3.5) ND(3.6) ND(3.7) [ND(3.7)] ND(3.9)Tetrachloroethene 9.4 94 1.7 J 13 6.2 [6.1] 39Tetrahydrofuran 2,100 21,000 ND(2.4) ND(2.5) ND(2.6) [ND(2.6)] ND(2.7)Toluene 5,200 52,000 15 140 18 [20] 32trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 63 630 ND(3.2) ND(3.4) ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(3.6)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.91 J ND(3.9) ND(4) [ND(4)] ND(4.2)Trichloroethene 0.43 4.3 ND(4.4) 4.2 J 1.8 J [1.3 J] 2.2 JTrichlorofluoromethane 730 7,300 4.4 J 5.9 5.8 [6.2] 2.2 JVinyl Acetate 210 2,100 ND(12) ND(12) ND(12) [ND(12)] ND(13)Vinyl Chloride 0.16 1.6 ND(2.1) ND(2.2) ND(2.2) [ND(2.2)] ND(2.3)

Notes:


9. ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter




8. Residential Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Residential Indoor Air RSL (at a 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (Attenuation Factor of 0.1).


Page 2 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 6Soil Gas Sampling Results via TO-17 and TO-13a - East Street Area 1 - Residential

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)

Location ID: USEPA Residential SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6Date Collected: Residential Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-6

PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Aroclor-1221 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Aroclor-1232 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Aroclor-1248 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Aroclor-1254 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Aroclor-1260 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)Total PCBs - - ND(5) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(5)SVOCs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.00087 0.0087 ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10 J)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Chrysene 0.087 0.87 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0008 0.008 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)SVOCs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.63 0.21 J [ND(50)] 0.52Acenaphthene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(1)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.5)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5 J) [ND(50 J)] ND(0.5 J)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.5)Fluorene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(1)Naphthalene 0.072 0.72 0.38 J 0.17 J [ND(50)] 0.66Phenanthrene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.5)Pyrene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(1)

Notes:







9. Residential Soil Gas RSL is USEPA Residential Indoor Air RSL (at a 10-6 cancer risk or hazard quotient of 1) multiplied by 10 (Attenuation Factor of 0.1).


Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012




VOCs/Select SVOCs 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 22,000 220,000 ND(4.5) ND(5.2) 0.45 J 0.5 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.21 2.1 ND(5.6) ND(6.6) 0.94 J ND(5.9)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 130,000 1,300,000 ND(6.3) ND(7.3) 1.2 J ND(6.6)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.77 7.7 ND(4.5) ND(5.2) ND(4.8) ND(4.7)1,1-Dichloroethane 7.7 77 ND(3.3) ND(3.9) ND(3.5) ND(3.5)1,1-Dichloroethene 880 8,800 ND(3.2) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 8.8 88 ND(24) ND(28) ND(26) ND(25)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 31 310 ND(4) 1.7 J 12 4.71,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.002 0.02 ND(32) ND(37) ND(34) ND(33)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.02 0.2 ND(6.3) ND(7.3) ND(6.7) ND(6.6)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(5.7) ND(6.7) ND(6.1) ND(6)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 880 8,800 ND(4.9) ND(5.7) ND(5.3) ND(5.1)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.47 4.7 0.37 J ND(3.9) ND(3.5) ND(3.5)1,2-Dichloropropane 1.2 12 ND(3.8) ND(4.4) ND(4) ND(4)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(4) ND(4.7) 4.2 J 1.9 J1,3-Butadiene 0.41 4.1 ND(1.8) ND(2.1) ND(1.9) ND(1.9)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(4.9) ND(5.7) 1.2 J ND(5.1)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1.1 11 ND(4.9) ND(5.7) ND(5.3) ND(5.1)1,4-Dioxane 1.6 16 ND(12) ND(14) ND(13) ND(12)2-Butanone 22,000 220,000 2.4 J 3.5 J 6.7 J 4.3 J2-Hexanone 130 1,300 ND(13) ND(16) ND(14) ND(14)3-Chloropropene 2 20 ND(10) ND(12) ND(11) ND(11)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(4) 1.3 J 10 3.7 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone 13,000 130,000 ND(3.4) ND(3.9) 1.8 J ND(3.5)Acetone 140,000 1,400,000 19 J 34 71 96Acetonitrile 260 2,600 ND(14) ND(16) ND(15) ND(14)Acrolein 0.088 0.88 ND(7.5) ND(8.8) ND(8) ND(7.8)Acrylonitrile 0.18 1.8 ND(7.1) ND(8.3) ND(7.6) ND(7.4)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(46) ND(53) ND(49) ND(48)Benzene 1.6 16 0.41 J 1.3 J 8.1 1.7 JBenzyl Chloride 0.25 2.5 ND(4.2) 0.74 J 0.84 J 0.73 JBromodichloromethane 0.33 3.3 ND(5.5) ND(6.4) ND(5.9) ND(5.7)Bromoform 11 110 ND(8.5) ND(9.9) ND(9) ND(8.8)Bromomethane 22 220 ND(32) ND(37) ND(34) ND(33)Carbon Disulfide 3,100 31,000 ND(10) 28 26 6.5 JCarbon Tetrachloride 2 20 ND(5.2) ND(6) ND(5.5) ND(5.4)Chlorobenzene 220 2,200 2.5 J 3.1 J 2.6 J 2.8 JChloroethane 44,000 440,000 ND(8.6) ND(10) ND(9.2) ND(9)Chloroform 0.53 5.3 ND(4) 6.7 11 1.9 JChloromethane 390 3,900 ND(17) ND(20) ND(18) ND(18)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene - - - - ND(3.2) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.48 J 0.64 J 0.79 J ND(3.9)Cyclohexane 26,000 260,000 ND(2.8) 2 J 2.3 J ND(2.9)Dibromochloromethane 0.45 4.5 ND(7) ND(8.1) ND(7.4) ND(7.3)Dichlorodifluoromethane 440 4,400 2.8 J 18 82 14d-Limonene - - - - ND(18) ND(21) ND(20) ND(19)Ethanol - - - - 11 4 J 3.6 J 4.2 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(12) ND(14) ND(13) ND(12)Ethylbenzene 4.9 49 0.69 J 0.87 J 20 4.2Heptane - - - - 0.99 J 0.63 J 4.6 1.5 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.56 5.6 ND(35) ND(41) ND(37) ND(36)Isooctane - - - - 0.64 J 1 J 4.4 0.84 JIsopropyl alcohol 31,000 310,000 1.1 J ND(9.4) ND(8.6) 1.9 JIsopropylbenzene 1,800 18,000 ND(4) ND(4.7) 1 J 0.68 Jm&p-Xylene 440 4,400 0.69 J 1.8 J 72 16


Page 1 of 2

9/6/2012




Volatile Organics (continued)Methyl Methacrylate 3,100 31,000 ND(34) ND(39) ND(36) ND(35)Methyl tert-butyl ether 47 470 ND(3) ND(3.4) 0.25 J ND(3.1)Methylene Chloride 1,200 12,000 6.5 J 2.9 J 2.5 J 2.7 JNaphthalene 0.36 3.6 ND(17) ND(20) 4.2 J 4.2 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(39) ND(45) ND(42) ND(41)n-Hexane 3,100 31,000 3.1 1.4 J 4.1 2.2 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(15) ND(18) ND(16) ND(16)Nonane 880 8,800 ND(17) ND(20) ND(18) ND(18)n-Propylbenzene 4,400 44,000 ND(4) ND(4.7) 2.4 J 1 Jo-Xylene 440 4,400 ND(3.6) 1 J 26 5.8Propene 13,000 130,000 ND(5.6) ND(6.6) ND(6) ND(5.9)Styrene 4,400 44,000 ND(3.5) ND(4.1) ND(3.7) ND(3.6)Tetrachloroethene 47 470 1.7 J 17 20 5.4 JTetrahydrofuran 8,800 88,000 ND(2.4) ND(2.8) ND(2.6) ND(2.5)Toluene 22,000 220,000 15 2.9 J 68 12trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 260 2,600 ND(3.2) ND(3.8) ND(3.5) ND(3.4)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene - - - - 0.91 J ND(4.3) ND(4) ND(3.9)Trichloroethene 3 30 ND(4.4) 5.5 3.7 J 1.4 JTrichlorofluoromethane 3,100 31,000 4.4 J 5 J 27 25Vinyl Acetate 880 8,800 ND(12) ND(13) ND(12) ND(12)Vinyl Chloride 2.8 28 ND(2.1) ND(2.4) ND(2.2) ND(2.2)

Notes:




2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment C.1. Samples were collected by ARCADIS and submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis for analysis of volatile organic



Page 2 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 8Soil Gas Sampling Results via TO-17 and TO-13a - East Street Area 1 - Commercial

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)

Location ID: USEPA Industrial SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5Date Collected: Industrial Soil 06/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12Sample Name: Indoor Air RSL Gas RSL SVP-3 SVP-4 SVP-5

PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.61 6.1 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Aroclor-1221 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Aroclor-1232 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Aroclor-1248 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Aroclor-1254 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Aroclor-1260 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)Total PCBs - - - - ND(5) ND(5) ND(5)SVOCs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.011 0.11 ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10 J)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Chrysene 1.1 11 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.01 0.1 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)SVOCs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.21 J 1.2 1.6Acenaphthene - - - - ND(1) 0.83 J 0.31 JAcenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5 J)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Fluorene - - - - ND(1) 0.34 J ND(1)Naphthalene 0.36 3.6 0.13 J 1.8 3.2Phenanthrene - - - - ND(0.5) 0.19 J ND(0.5)Pyrene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) ND(1)

Notes:









Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012

Table 9LNAPL Analytical Results

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Location ID: ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-NDate Collected: 10/12/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/28/79 01/10/80 02/13/80 03/04/80Sample Name: 48 48 51 52 53 56 55 1260 SUMP 48 48

Units ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppmVolatile OrganicsAcetone NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAChlorobenzene ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Tetrachloroethene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NATrichloroethene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAPCBsAroclor-1254 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 94 ND(3) NDAroclor-1260 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 180 46 146Total PCBs 49 33 14 7 4 8 9 274 46 146Semivolatile Organics1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA


Page 1 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 9LNAPL Analytical Results

Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan for Groundwater Management Area 1 East Street Area 1General Electric Company - Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Location ID: ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-SDate Collected: 04/01/80 07/31/96 08/17/05 01/08/08 09/17/09 08/03/11 10/06/04Sample Name: 48 ESA1-NSC-1 BLDG.78-081705-OIL-C1 909096-2007 909096-1 PTA909096 34

Units ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppmVolatile OrganicsAcetone NA ND ND(5.8) 3.04 J ND(50) ND(99) ND(0.05 J)Chlorobenzene ND(10) ND(10) ND(5.8) ND(1) ND(10) 10.8 ND(0.05)Tetrachloroethene NA ND ND(5.8) 0.19 J ND(10) ND(3.96) ND(0.05 J)Trichloroethene NA ND ND(5.8) 0.28 J ND(10) ND(3.96) ND(0.05)PCBsAroclor-1254 ND ND ND(8) 21.5 43.9 ND(95.2) NAAroclor-1260 122 91 200 40.2 60 512 NATotal PCBs 122 91 200 62 104 510 NASemivolatile Organics1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NA ND ND(120) 30 J 26.7 J ND(476) NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene NA NA ND(120) ND(96.9) ND(99) 76.1 J NA

Notes:1. Samples were collected by GE subcontractors and submitted for analysis of PCBs and/or other constituents.

3. NA - Not analyzed.4. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit.5. Only those constituents detected in one or more samples are summarized.6. Sample 34 is a combined LNAPL and groundwater sample collected from monitoring well 34.7. Samples 909096-2007, 909096-1 and PTA909096 are LNAPL samples collected from the Northside Recovery Systemm8. Sample 1260 SUMP is an LNAPL sample collected from a former sump at 1260 East Street.9. Samples 48, 51, 52, 53, 55, and 56 are LNAPL samples collected from the listed monitoring wells.10. Sample BLDG. 78-081705-OIL-C1 is an LNAPL composite sample collected from ESA1N and ESA1S LNAPL drums.

Data Qualifiers:Organics (volatiles, PCBs, semivolatiles)J - Indicates that the associated numerical value is an estimated concentration.

2. Only results from volatile, PCBs and semivolatile analyses are presented for Table 9.


Page 2 of 2

9/6/2012

Table 10Groundwater Analytical Results

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Sample ID: Method 1 GW-2 31R ESA1S-72R GMA1-6Parameter Date Collected: Standards 04/18/12 04/18/12 04/20/12Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0010) 0.0013 ND(0.0010)Chloroform 0.05 0.011 0.017 ND(0.0010)Total VOCs 5 0.011 0.018 ND(0.10)PCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed NA 0.000029 J ND(0.000070)Total PCBs 0.005 NA 0.000029 J ND(0.000070)Semivolatile Organics1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0052) NA 0.00060 J

Notes:1. Samples were collected by ARCADIS and submitted to SGS Environmental Services, Inc. for analysis of PCBs and Appendix IX+3 constituents.�2. Samples have been validated as per GE's EPA-approved FSP/QAPP, General Electric Company, Pittsfield, Massac3. Only the results from analyses for volatile organics, PCBs, and semi-volatile organics are presented in this table for comparison to GW-2 standard4. NA - Not Analyzed.�5. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit.�6. Only those constituents detected in one or more samples are summarized.7. Shading indicates that value exceeds the Method 1 GW-2 standards.

Data Qualifiers:Organics (volatiles, PCBs, semivolatiles)J - Indicates that the associated numerical value is an estimated concentration.


Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012

Table 11Soil Gas Reporting Limits for SVOCs and PCBs – East Street Area 1

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report -Spring 2012 Groundwater Management Area 1General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Compound

SVOCs - TO-151,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 21 15 3.7 7.7 1.0 61,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 2.2 3 0.6 1.2 0.20 6

PCBs - TO-17 CAS #Residential

Soil Gas RSL (ug/m3)

Current TO-17 RL (ng)

Fall 2012 Proposed TO-

17 RL (ng)

RLs based on Proposed Volume

ug/m3 (ppbv)

Proposed volume (L)

Aroclor-1221 11104-28-2 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0052) 23Aroclor-1232 11141-16-5 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0045) 23Aroclor-1248 12672-29-6 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0036) 23Aroclor-1254 11097-69-1 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0032) 23Aroclor-1260 11096-82-5 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0029) 23Aroclor 1016/1242 NA 0.043 5 1 0.043 (0.0041) 23

Notes:1. ug/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter2. ppbv - parts per billion by volume3. L - Liters4. ng - nanograms5. RL - reporting limit6. "Hg - inches mercury

CAS #Residential

Soil Gas RSL (ug/m3)

Current Base TO-15 RL (ug/m3)

Fall 2012 TO-15 (Sim/Scan) RL

(ug/m3) Assuming <10"Hg final

Fall 2012 TO-15 (Sim/Scan) RL

(ppbv) Assuming <10"Hg final

Proposed volume (L)

Fall 2012 TO-15 (Sim/Scan)

Base RL (ug/m3)


Page 1 of 1

9/6/2012

Figures

ii i li

i I ~ I

NOTES:

1. MAPPING IS BASED ON AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND PH01'0GRMIME'IRIC MAPPING BY I..DCKWOCO MAPPING. INC. - F1.DWN IN APRIL 1110: DATA PR0\1DED BY GENERAL ELEC1RIC COMPANY, AND BLASI..AND AND eouac ENGINEERS. P.C. CONS1RUC110N PLANS.

2. NOT AU. PH'I'SICAI... F'EA1URES SHO..

3. SI1E BOUNDARY IS APPROXIMA1E.

4.. All. MONI~G WELL I..OCAllONS ME. APPROlGMA1E.

IL PARCEL BOUNDARIES AND PARCEL IDS FRCM MASS G1S 'lfltBSI1E (http://www . .,....goy/mart/parcele.htm).

--. K1 14-2

K10.14-1

I I

' I \ \ _ _. ....

~---

--·

K10.17-7 J1IHI-15

0 J1D-6-14

sw-1A

AMB-082112111

I J11H!-12 I

L£CEND:

BUILDING

DEMOUSHED BUILDING

EJCIS11NG MONITORING WELL

DECOMMIS9ClNED MONITORING WELL

AC'II\'E GROUNDWATER AND NAPL IIEClCMRY lliEI..L/CAISSON APPROlCaiA1E MAXIIAJM EXtENT OF LNAPL QBSERWD DURING PRIOR FIVE 'tEARS (SINCE SPRING 2007)

APPROlatotA1E CURRENT EXtENT OF LNAPL (CIBSER\m IN SPRING 2012)

SOL VAPOR SAW'LE I..OCAllON

MtBIEIIT AIR SAMPLE UlCAllON

PARCEL BOlNJARY AND PARCEL 1D

0 I

130'

GRAPHIC SCALE

2QO'

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PITT15FiaD, M'oiiSACHUSEm5

EAST STREET AREA 1 LNAPL VOI.ATILIZAnON ASSESSMENT INTERIM DATA REPORT

LNAPL VOLATILIZATION ASSESSMENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS

~ARCADIS 1

Attachments

Attachment A Soil Gas Point Construction Logs

G:\Projects\GE Pittsfield\Bldg 69 VI\Soil Gas Report 1_Aug 2012\Permanent Soil Vapor Construction Log.xls - SVP-1

ARCADIS Permanent Soil Gas Point Construction Log

2'Surface completion Tubing Length Project Name and No.: General Electric - B0031215.0.1

Type: 8" MH LAND SURFACEPoint ID: SVP- 1 Address: East Street

Cement Type: QuikreteConcrete ( 0.5 to 1.5 ) ft* Town/City: Pittsfield State: MA

Tubing Size: 4" inch diam. Drilled hole3/8 inch diam., ( 0 to 4.9 ) ft* Land-Surface Elevation and Datum:

Teflon lined polyethylene Slury ( Y / N ) ( to ) ft* NA feet Surveyed Estimated

Granular Bentonite: 1.5 ft* Top of Bentonite Coordinates- Northing: Easting:

Hydrated X ( 2.8 to 1.5 )'

Dry X ( 3.8 to 2.8 )' Installation Date(s): 6/19/123.8 ft* Bottom of Bentonite

Drilling Contractor: Zebra

4.0 ft* Top of screen (Diller/Helper)

Installation Method: Hand Auger

Well Screen (inch):1/2 , type: Filter Pack: # 2 Equipment Used: Hand Auger, shovel, post hole digger

Stainless Steel (3.8 to 4.9 ) ft*

_____inch diam. Drilled hole( to ) ft* Groundwater Information:

4.5 ft* Bottom of screenWell ID:

Well Screen Setting:

Static Depth to Water:

Vapor Point Purpose: Perimeter Evaluation

Remarks: Soils: Silty SAND (medium to fine), moist to dry, medium brown. (0 ppb)

Noted wet soils at ~4.9' bls.

**Measuring Point is Top of Well Casing Unless Otherwise Noted.

Prepared by Dan Zuck






Tubing Size: 4" inch diam. Drilled hole3/8 inch diam., ( 0 to 5 ) ft* Land-Surface Elevation and Datum:

Teflon lined polyethylene NA feet Surveyed Estimated









3" inch diam. Drilled hole(5 to 5.6 ) ft* Groundwater Information:





Remarks: Soils: Sandy (medium to fine) SILT, moist to dry, medium brown. (0 ppb)









Teflon lined polyethylene NA feet Surveyed Estimated



Dry X ( 2.0 to 3.0 )' Installation Date(s): 6/19/123 ft* Bottom of Bentonite






2" inch diam. Drilled hole(3 to 4) ft* Groundwater Information:





Remarks: Soils: Sandy (medium to fine) SILT, soft-med stiff, moist to dry, medium

brown, no odors, (0 ppb). Noted wet soils at ~3.8' bls.









Teflon lined polyethylene Slury ( Y / N ) (1.5 to 3.2) ft* NA feet Surveyed Estimated


Hydrated ( to )'







3" inch diam. Drilled hole(4 to 5.2) ft* Groundwater Information:





Remarks: Soils: Sandy (medium to fine) SILT, moist to dry, medium brownish Gray,

loose, no odor, (0 ppb). Noted wet soils at ~5' bls.

Slury consited of 3:1 mix of bentonite to portland with water.











Hydrated ( to )'







3" inch diam. Drilled hole(4 to 5.4) ft* Groundwater Information:





Remarks: Soils: Sandy (medium to fine) SILT, moist to dry, brownish Gray, few

slag fragments, loose, no odor, (0 ppb). Noted wet soils at ~5.1' bls, staining at 5.1-5.4'.









Tubing Size: 4" inch diam. Drilled hole3/8 inch diam., ( 0 to 4.5 ) ft* Land-Surface Elevation and Datum:



Hydrated ( to )'







3" inch diam. Drilled hole(4.5 to 5.5) ft* Groundwater Information:





Remarks: Soils: Sandy (medium to fine) SILT to Gravely (m-c.) SAND , moist,

redish brown, loose, no odor, (0 ppb). Noted wet soils at ~5.5' bls.




Attachment B Sample Logs

AMB-062112.doc 2/12/2007

Indoor/Ambient Air Sample Collection Log

Sample ID: AMB - 062112 Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21 /2012 Thursday Project: GMA1 Sample Intake Height: 5’ ALS Location: Pittsfield MA Subcontractor: NA Project #: B0031215.0.1 Miscellaneous

Equipment: Car/Truck Traffic Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ Erika Denkenberger

Coordinates: (See attached Figure) ~55’ W of SVP-6 Start Time: 08:50

Outdoor/Indoor: Outdoor End Time: 09:01 Instrument Readings: Time Canister

Pressure (inches Hg)

Temperature (F)

Relative Humidity (%)

Air Speed (ft/min)

Barometric Pressure

PID (ppb) / (ppm)

08:50 -28.5 81.3 58.3 5.0 29.34 0

09:01 -6 93.2 41.2 8.5 29.33 0

SUMMA Canister Information Size (circle one): 1 L 6 L Canister ID: 3126 Flow Controller ID: FC00667 General Observations/Notes:

Photo(s): 101-1577 Initial Digital reading pre-sample: -27.98

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1_Confidential\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Spring 2012\Sampling logs\GE Soil Gas Sampling Logs_SVP-1.doc 8/14/2012

Soil Gas Sample Collection Log

Sample ID: SVP-1

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21 /12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.23 Stop: 29.21 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: 92.5*F /31.9% Stop: 96.4*F /28.9% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 3.2 (mph) / W Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of

Sampling Zone (circle one):

Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4’ – 4.5’

Probe (circle one):

Permanent / Temporary

Approximate air volume in probe and sampling line:

91 mL= ( 8’ of ¼” ID tubing) + ___________(11mL in probe)

SUMMA Time of Collection:

Start: 16:09 Finish: 16:22

Approximate Purge Volume: 273 mL= [ ( 91 ) * (3v)]

Nearby Groundwater Monitoring Wells/Water Levels:

Well ID Depth to Groundwater (feet)

33 ~4.16 (bls)

SUMMA Canister Information Size (circle one): 1 L 6 L

Canister ID: 2223

Flow Controller ID: FC00371 Tracer Gas Information (if applicable)

Tracer Gas: Helium

Canister Pressure (inches Hg): Reported By Laboratory Measured Prior to Sample Collection Measured Following Sample Collection

- NA

Analog: - 29

Analog: - 6

Tracer Gas Concentration (if applicable):

Measured from Soil Vapor Tubing Measured in ‘Concentrated’ Area Post Purge Post Sample Prior to Purging Post Purging Post Sampling

0 ppm

0 ppm

64.3 %

57.8 %

42.30 %

TO-17/TO-13a Sorbent Tube:

Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-154526 SVP-1 (SVOCs[L]) 100 mL & 97 mL/min 16:22/16:23

Mi-195013 SVP-1 (PCBs) 1L & 200 mL/min 16:25/16:30

Mi-154529 SVP-1 (SVOCs[H]) 10 L & 191.99 mL/min - 200 mL/min 16:32/17:22

(6/22/12) SVP-1 (TO-13A) 10 L & 197 mL/min 11:54/12:45


General Observations/Notes:

Photo ID: 101-1581 TO-13A Photo ID: 101-1587 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: (16:05 to 16:08 ) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: -28.61 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 in Hg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: (11:50 to 11:51)r Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start: 29.23in Hg/ 88.5*F / 54%] [Stop: 29.23 in Hg/88.5*F /55 %] Wind Speed/Direction (6/22/12): 3.9 mph / SW

Approximating One-Well Volume (for purging temporary points): Each 0.5’x 3/8-inch ID vapor point will have a volume of approximately 11mL. Each foot of ¼-inch ID tubing will have a volume of approximately 10 mL.



Sample ID: SVP- 2

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21 /12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.20 Stop: 29.21 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start:88.8*F /58.6 % Stop:91*F /52.3% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 0 (mph) NA Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 5’ – 5.5 ’

Probe (circle one):



101 mL= (9’ of ¼” ID tubing) + ___________(11mL in probe)






72 ~7.09 (bls)


Canister ID: 3019/DUP: 40873


Tracer Gas: Helium


- NA

Analog: - 28

Analog: - 6



0 ppm

0 ppm

64.1 %

58.3 %

49 %


Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-195009 SVP-2 (PCBs) 1L & 200 mL/min 19:49/19:59

Mi-195011 DUP-062112 (PCBs) 1L & 200 mL/min 19:49/19:59

Mi-151432 SVP-2 (SVOCs[L]) 100 mL & 100 mL/min 19:43/19:45

Mi-130225 DUP-062112 (SVOCs[L]) 100 mL & 100 mL/min 19:43/19:45

Mi-151696 SVP-2 (SVOCs [H]) 10 L & 200 mL/min 20:05/20:55

(6/22/12) SVP-2 (TO-13A) 10 L & 199 mL/min 14:22/15:12


General Observations/Notes: Photo ID: 101-1584 TO-13A Photo ID: 101-1589 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: (19:16 to 19:20) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: -28.68 DUP:-28.51 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: (13:14 to 13:16)r : Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start: 29.20 in Hg/88.5*F /57.9%] [Stop: 29.20 in Hg/84.5*F /57.9%] Wind Speed/Direction (6/22/12): 2.4 mph / SW




Sample ID: SVP- 3

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21/12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.26 Stop: 29.22 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: 95.1*F /35.6% Stop: 95*F/33.7% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 4.6 (mph) W Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 3.2’ – 3.7’

Probe (circle one):



86 mL= (7.5’ of ¼” ID tubing) + ___________(11mL in probe)






35 ~5.92 (bls)


Canister ID: 40900


Tracer Gas: Helium


- NA

Analog: - 28.5

Analog: - 6



0 ppm

0 ppm

60.9 %

46.7 %

44.8 %


Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-151371 SVP-3 (SVOCs[L]) 100 mL & 99.4 mL/min 14:24/14:26


Mi-154533 SVP-3 (SVOCs[H]) 10 L & 199.4 mL/min 14:39/15:29

(6/22/12) SVP-3 (TO-13A) 10 L & 200 mL/min 10:49/11:39



Photo ID: 101-1580 TO-13A Photo ID: 101-1586 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: (14:08 to 14:11 ) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: - 28.57 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: (10:44 to 10:45) Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start: 29.23 in Hg/89.2*F / 55.9%] [Stop: 29.24 in Hg/87.2*F /50.2%] Wind Speed/Direction (6/22/12): 5.0 mph / SW




Sample ID: SVP- 4

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21 /12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.3 Stop: 29.27 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: 93.2*F /42.1%Stop:103.2*F /29.8% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 7.3 (mph) / W

Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA

Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.5’ – 5’

Probe (circle one):









76 ~7.03 (bls)


Canister ID: 2082


Tracer Gas: Helium


- NA

Analog: - 30

Analog: - 6



0 ppm

0 ppm

63.4 %

45.1 %

27.2 %


Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-195012 SVP-4 (PCBs) 1 L & 195 mL/min 12:49/12:54

Mi-154448 SVP-4 (SVOCs[L]) 100 mL & 100 mL/min 12:43/ 12:45

Mi-118368 SVP-4 (SVOCs[H]) 10 L & 198 mL/min 12:57/13:47

(6/22/12) SVP-4 (TO-13A) 10 L & 207.7 mL/min 09:45/10:36



Photo ID: 101-1579 TO-13A Photo ID: 101-1585 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: ( 12:19 to 12:23 ) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: - 28.71 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: ( 09:40 to 09:42)r Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start: 29:23in Hg/87.6*F/ 54.9%] [Stop: 29.23 in Hg/85.8*F / 54.7%] Wind Speed/Direction (6/22/12): 4.3 mph / SW




Sample ID: SVP- 5

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/21/12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.33 Stop: 29.29 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start:82.5*F /57.3% Stop: 93.1*F/42.1% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 5.2 (mph) / W Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.5 ’ – 5 ’

Probe (circle one):






Approximate Purge Volume: 273 mL= [ (91) * (3v)]



76 ~7.03 (bls)


Canister ID: 3017


Tracer Gas: Helium


- NA

Analog: - 29

Analog: - 6



0 ppm

0 ppm

63.5 %

63.5 %

42.1 %


Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-195007 SVP-5 (PCBs) 1 L & 158 mL/min 09:59/10:03/10:06

Mi-151731 SVP-5 (SVOCs[L]) 100 m L & 50-100 mL/min 10:13/10:15

Mi-153324 SVP-5 (SVOCs[H]) 10 L & 198.7 mL/min [10:31/10:39] [10:59/11:48]

(6/22/12) SVP-5 (TO-13A) 10 L & 204 mL/min 08:40/09:30



Photo ID: 101-1578 TO-13A Photo ID: photo not available 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: (09:50 to 09:53) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: - 28.27 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: ( 08:29 to 08:31)r : Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start: 29.23 in Hg/75.9*F / 71.1 %] [Stop: 29.24 in Hg/ 84.5*F /55.4 %] Wind Speed/Direction (6/22/12): 4.9 mph / SW




Sample ID: SVP- 6

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 6/ 21 /12 Thursday Project: GMA1 Barometer: Start: 29.21 Stop: 29.21 Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: 96.4*F/39.7% Stop:91.4 *F /49.8% Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 5.9 (mph) W Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ E. Denkenberger Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Erika Denkenberger Equipment: PPB RAE/Helium Detector Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.8 ’ – 5.3 ’

Probe (circle one):



101 mL= ( 9’ of ¼” ID tubing) + ___________(11mL in probe)






31R ~8.75 (bls)

33 ~4.16 (bls)


Canister ID: 3395


Tracer Gas: Helium


- NA

Analog: - 28.5

Analog: - 6



0 ppm

0 ppm

63.2 %

58.7 %

38.1 %


Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time Mi-155195 SVP-6 (SVOCs[L]) 100mL & 100 mL/min 17:52/17:54


Mi-153584 SVP-6 (SVOCs[H]) 10L & 200.6 mL/min 18:06/18:56

(6/22/12) SVP-6 (TO-13A) 10L & 196.7 mL/min 13:06/13:56



Photo ID: 101-1583 TO-13A Photo ID: 101-1588 0 ppb reading on the PID following sample Purge rate: 100 mL/min Purge time: (17:38 to 17:41) collection from soil vapor tubing. Digital pre-sample canister pressure: - 28.6 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection (6/22/12): Purge rate: 200 mL/min Purge time: (13:00 to 13:01)r : Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (6/22/12): [Start:29.22 in Hg/86.1*F / 51.2%] [Stop: 29.23in Hg/ 88.5*F / 54%] Wind Speed/Direction: 2.9 mph / SW


Attachment C Data Validation Report

Page 1 of 5

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI Report\Final\Attachments\Attachment C - DVR Soil Gas_summer 2012.doc

Attachment C Air Sampling Data Validation Report Soil Gas Quality Investigations – Spring 2012 General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

1.0 General

This attachment summarizes the data validation review performed on behalf of the General Electric Company (GE) for air samples collected in June 2012 as part of soil gas sampling activities conducted at the General Electric Company/Housatonic River Site in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. The samples were analyzed by Air Toxics Ltd of Folsom, California, for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), certain semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), in accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Compendium Methods TO-15, TO-13A, and TO-17. Data validation was performed for eight VOC samples, 15 SVOC samples, and eight PCB samples.

2.0 Data Evaluation Procedures

This attachment outlines the applicable quality control criteria utilized during the data review process and any deviations from those criteria. The data review was performed in accordance with the general procedures in GE’s Field Sampling Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan (FSP/QAPP) (ARCADIS BBL; March 2007), as approved by EPA, and the following documents:

• Region I Tiered Organic and Inorganic Data Validation Guidelines, USEPA Region I (July 1, 1993); and

• Region I Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Organics Analyses, USEPA Region I (Draft, December 1996).

The data were validated to either a Tier I or Tier II level, as described below. Any deviations from the applicable quality control criteria utilized during the data review process are identified below. A tabulated summary of the Tier I/Tier II data review is presented in Table C-1. Each sample subject to evaluation is listed in Table C-1 to document that data review was performed. Samples that required data qualification are listed separately.

The following data qualifiers were used in this data evaluation:

J The compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimated concentration. This qualifier is used when the data evaluation procedure identifies a deficiency in the data generation process. This qualifier is also used when a compound is detected at an estimated concentration less than the corresponding practical quantitation limit (PQL).

U The compound was analyzed for, but was not detected. The sample quantitation limit is presented. Non-detect sample results are presented as ND(PQL) within this report for consistency with documents previously prepared for investigations conducted at the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site.

Page 2 of 5


UJ The compound was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit. However, the reported limit is estimated and may or may not represent the actual level of quantitation. Non-detect sample results that required qualification are presented as ND(PQL) J within this report for consistency with documents previously prepared for investigations conducted at the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site.

R Indicates that the previously reported detection limit or sample result has been rejected due to a major deficiency in the data generation procedure. The data should not be used for any qualitative or quantitative purpose.

3.0 Data Validation Procedures

Section 7.5 of the FSP/QAPP states that analytical data will be validated to a Tier I level following the procedures presented in the Region I Tiered Organic and Inorganic Data Validation Guidelines (EPA guidelines). The Tier I review consisted of a completeness evidence audit, as outlined in the EPA Region I CSF Completeness Evidence Audit Program (EPA Region I, July 31, 1991), to ensure that laboratory data and documentation were present. In the event data packages were determined to be incomplete, the missing information was requested from the laboratory. Upon completion of the Tier I review, the data packages complied with the EPA Region I Tier I data completeness requirements.

The Tier II data review consisted of a review of data package summary forms for identification of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) deviations and qualification of the data according to the Region I Data Validation Functional Guidelines. Additionally, field duplicates were examined for relative percent difference (RPD) compliance with the criteria specified in the FSP/QAPP.

A tabulated summary of the samples subject to Tier I and Tier II data review is presented in the following table.

Summary of Samples Subjected to Tier I and Tier II Data Validation

Parameter Tier I Only Tier I &Tier II

Total Samples Duplicates Blanks Samples Duplicates Blanks

EPA TO-13A 0 0 0 6 0 1 7

EPA TO-15 0 0 0 6 1 1 8

EPA TO-17 0 0 0 6 1 1 8

Total 0 0 0 18 2 3 23

When qualification of the sample data was required, the sample results associated with a QA/QC parameter deviation were qualified in accordance with the procedures outlined in EPA Region I data validation guidance documents. When the data validation process identified several quality control deficiencies, the cumulative effect of the various deficiencies was employed in assigning the final data qualifier. A summary of the QA/QC parameter deviations that resulted in data qualification is presented in Section 4 below.

4.0 Summary of QA/QC Parameter Deviations Requiring Data Qualification

This section provides a summary of the deviations from the applicable QA/QC criteria that resulted in qualification of results.

Page 3 of 5


Surrogate compounds are analyzed with every organic sample to aid in evaluation of the sample extraction efficiency. Three of the four surrogate compounds for EPA TO-13A must have a recovery between laboratory-specified control limits. Associated sample results were qualified as estimated (J) for all compounds when surrogate recovery criteria were below control limits and greater than 10%. A summary of the compounds affected by surrogate recovery exceedances and the number of samples qualified due to those deviations are presented in the following table.

Compounds Qualified Due to Surrogate Recovery Deviations

Analysis Compound Number of Affected Samples Qualification

EPA-TO 13A All Compounds 1 J

Laboratory control sample/laboratory control sample duplicate (LCS/LCSD) analysis recovery criteria for organics must be within the laboratory-generated QC acceptance limits specified on the LCS/LCSD reporting form. Organic sample results associated with the LCS/LCSD that exceeded laboratory-generated QC acceptance limits were qualified as estimated (J). The compounds that did not meet LCS/LCSD recovery criteria and the number of samples qualified due to those deviations are presented in the following table.

Compounds Qualified Due to LCS/LCSD Recovery Deviations

Analysis Compound Number of Affected Samples Qualification

EPA TO-13A Benzo(a)pyrene 6 J EPA TO-17 Anthracene 8 J

Acenaphthene 2 J Fluorene 1 J Phenanthrene 1 J

LCS/LCSD sample analysis recovery criteria for organics require that the RPD between the LCS and LCSD recoveries be less than the laboratory-generated QC acceptance limits specified on the LCS/LCSD reporting form. The compound that exceeded the RPD limit and the number of samples qualified due to deviations are presented in the following table.

Compound Qualified Due to LCS/LCSD RPD Deviations

Analysis Compound Number of Affected Samples

Qualification

EPA TO-17 Anthracene 8 J

Blank action levels for compounds detected in the blanks were calculated at five times the blank concentrations. Detected sample results that were below the blank action level were qualified with a “U.” Detected sample results that were above the blank action level had the laboratory qualifier “B” removed. The compounds detected in method blanks which resulted in qualification or removal of qualification of sample data, along with the number of affected samples, is presented in the following table.

Page 4 of 5


Compounds Qualified Due to Blank Deviations

Analysis Analyte/Compound Number of Affected Samples Qualification

EPA TO-15 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 8 U Carbon disulfide 1 U

EPA TO-17 Phenanthrene 1 U

5.0 Overall Data Usability

This section summarizes the analytical data in terms of its completeness and usability. Data completeness is defined as the percentage of sample results that have been determined to be usable during the data validation process. The percent usability calculation included analyses evaluated under both the Tier I/II data validation reviews. The percent usability calculation also includes quality control samples (i.e., field/equipment blanks, trip blanks, and field duplicates) to aid in the evaluation of data usability. Data usability is summarized in the following table.

Data Usability Parameter Percent Usability Rejected Data

EPA TO-13A 100 None EPA TO-15 100 None EPA TO-17 100 None

The data package completeness, as determined from the Tier I data review, was used in combination with the data quality deviations identified during the Tier II data review to determine overall data quality. As specified in the FSP/QAPP, the overall precision, accuracy, representativeness, comparability, and completeness (PARCC) parameters determined from the Tier I and Tier II data reviews were used as indicators of overall data quality. These parameters were assessed through an evaluation of the results of the field and laboratory QA/QC sample analyses to provide a measure of compliance of the analytical data with the Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) specified in the FSP/QAPP. Therefore, the following sections present summaries of the PARCC parameters assessment with regard to the DQOs specified in the FSP/QAPP.

5.1 Precision

Precision measures the reproducibility of measurements under a given set of conditions. Specifically, it is a quantitative measure of the variability of a group of measurements compared to their average value. For this investigation, precision was defined as the RPD between duplicate sample results. The duplicate samples used to evaluate precision included field duplicates and LCS/LCSD samples. For this analytical program, 1.2% of the data required qualification due to LCS/LCSD RPD deviations. None of the data required qualification due to field duplicate RPD deviations.

Page 5 of 5


5.2 Accuracy

Accuracy measures the bias in an analytical system or the degree of agreement of a measurement with a known reference value. For this investigation, accuracy was defined as the percent recovery of QA/QC samples that were spiked with a known concentration of an analyte or compound of interest. The QA/QC samples used to evaluate analytical accuracy included instrument calibration, internal standards, surrogate recoveries, and LCS/LCSDs. For this analytical program, 1.2% of the data required qualification due to surrogate recovery deviations and 2.0% of the data required qualification due to LCS/LCSD recovery deviations. None of the data required qualification due to instrument calibration deviations or internal standard recovery deviations.

5.3 Representativeness

Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents a characteristic of a population, parameter variations at a sampling point, or an environmental condition. Representativeness is a qualitative parameter, which is most concerned with the proper design of the sampling program. The representativeness criterion is best satisfied by making certain that sampling locations are selected properly and a sufficient number of samples are collected. This parameter has been addressed by collecting samples at locations specified in the EPA-approved work plan and following the sample collection and analysis procedures specified in that work plan. Additionally, the analytical program used procedures consistent with EPA-approved analytical methodology. A QA/QC parameter that is an indicator of the representativeness of a sample is holding time. Holding time criteria are established to maintain the samples in a state that is representative of the in-situ field conditions before analysis. For this analytical data set, none of the data required qualification due to holding time deviations.

5.4 Comparability

Comparability is a qualitative parameter expressing the confidence with which one data set can be compared with another. This goal was achieved through the use of standardized techniques for sample collection and analysis as presented in the EPA-approved work plan. Specifically, all the air samples collected in June 2012 were analyzed by EPA methods TO-13A, TO-15, and TO-17.

5.5 Completeness

Completeness is defined as the percentage of measurements that are judged to be valid or usable to meet the prescribed DQOs. The completeness criterion is essentially the same for all data uses -- the generation of a sufficient amount of valid data. This analytical data set had an overall usability of 100%.

Sample Delivery Group No. Sample ID Date Collected Matrix

Validation Level Qualification Compound QA/QC Parameter Value Control Limits

Qualified Result ug/m3

Qualified Result (ppbv) Notes

EPA TO-13A1206499 SVP-1 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) J1206499 SVP-2 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) J1206499 SVP-3 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) J1206499 SVP-4 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)anthracene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) J

Benzo(a)anthracene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) JBenzo(a)pyrene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(a)pyrene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(b)fluoranthene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(b)fluoranthene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(g,h,i)perylene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JBenzo(g,h,i)perylene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JBenzo(k)fluoranthene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(k)fluoranthene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JChrysene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) JChrysene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Surr. %Rec. Benzo(a)pyrene-d12 32.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.98) JIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Surr. %Rec. Fluorene-d10 58.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.98) J

1206499 SVP-5 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) J1206499 SVP-6 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) J1206499 Trip Blank 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Benzo(a)pyrene LCS/LCSD %R 55.2%, 54..0% 60% to 120% ND(100) J ND(9.7) JEPA TO-151206493 AMB-062112 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Carbon disulfide Method Blank - - ND(10) ND(3.3)

1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(4.9) ND(0.82) 1206493 DUP-062112 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.3) ND(0.88) Duplicate of SVP-21206493 SVP-1 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.1) ND(0.86) 1206493 SVP-2 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.3) ND(0.88) 1206493 SVP-3 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.7) ND(0.96) 1206493 SVP-4 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.3) ND(0.88) 1206493 SVP-5 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.1) ND(0.86) 1206493 SVP-6 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Method Blank - - ND(5.5) ND(0.92) EPA TO-171206497AR1 DUP-062112 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(50) J ND(6.8) J Duplicate of SVP-2

Anthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(50) J ND(6.8) J1206497AR1 SVP-1 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J

Anthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J1206497AR1 SVP-2 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J

Anthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J1206497AR1 SVP-3 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J

Anthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J1206497AR1 SVP-4 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Acenaphthene LCSD %R 131.0% 70% to 130% 0.83 J 0.13 J

Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JAnthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JFluorene LCSD %R 134.0% 70% to 130% 0.34 J 0.050 JPhenanthrene Trip Blank - - 0.19 J ND(0.068)

1206497AR1 SVP-5 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Acenaphthene LCSD %R 131.0% 70% to 130% 0.31 J 0.049 JAnthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JAnthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J

1206497AR1 SVP-6 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JAnthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) J

1206497AR1 Trip Blank 6/21/2012 Air Tier II yes Anthracene LCS/LCSD RPD 27.0% <20% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JAnthracene LCS %R 63.5% 70% to 130% ND(0.50) J ND(0.068) JPhenanthrene LCSD %R 133.0% 70% to 130% 0.12 J 0.016 J

1206497BR1 DUP-062112 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no Duplicate of SVP-21206497BR1 SVP-1 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 SVP-2 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 SVP-3 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 SVP-4 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 SVP-5 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 SVP-6 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no1206497BR1 Trip Blank 6/21/2012 Air Tier II no

Table C-1Analytical Data Validation Summary

General Electric Company - Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per billion by volume, ppbv and micrograms per cubic meter, ug/m3)

Soil Gas and Indoor Air Investigation- Summer 2012

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\Spring 2012 LNAPL VI Report\Final\Attachments\Attachment C-1 Soil_gas_2012_ppbv & ugm3 (2).xls Page 1 of 1 9/6/2012

Attachment D City of Pittsfield Drinking Water Quality Reports

1

2011 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report

For The City of Pittsfield, Massachusetts

MassDEP Public Water Supply ID #1236000

This report is a snapshot of drinking water quality that we provided last year. Included are details about where your water comes from, what it contains, and how it compares to state and federal standards. We are committed to providing you with information about the public drinking water system.

PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM INFORMATION

Water System Improvements Our water system is routinely inspected by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). MassDEP inspects our system for its technical, financial, and managerial capacity to provide safe drinking water to you. To ensure that the City of Pittsfield provides the highest quality of water available, your water system is operated by a Massachusetts certified operator who oversees the routine operations of our system. In 2011, the new Coltsville Flow Control Station went online. It had been relocated approximately 400 feet from its original location on the same property, the Coltsville Shopping Center. The old station was demolished, and the area restored and parking for the shopping center added in its place. The City also replaced 12 hydrants and replaced 163 water meters with new remote-read Sensus water meters. Opportunities for Public Participation If you would like to participate in discussions regarding your water quality, you may attend the regular meetings of the City Council, which fall on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month, except July and August, at 7:30 pm. City Council meets in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. You may also contact your local elected representatives with any water quality concerns.

DRINKING WATER SOURCES

What are the sources for my drinking water, and how is it treated? The drinking water for the City of Pittsfield comes from six surface reservoirs, none from wells. Cleveland Reservoir and Sackett Reservoir are situated in the Town of Hinsdale, and Ashley Lake, Lower Ashley Intake Reservoir, Farnham Reservoir, and Sandwash Reservoir are situated in the Town of Washington. The City of Pittsfield restricts use of these reservoirs and the land around them to protect the water supply from contamination. Our water system makes every effort to provide you with safe and pure drinking water. To improve the quality of the water delivered to you, we treat it to remove several contaminants and impurities. Our two water filtration plants, the Ashley Water Treatment Plant in the Town of Dalton and the Cleveland Water Treatment Plant in the Town of Hinsdale, treat water by using aluminum sulfate and sodium aluminate to remove particulate matter by coagulation and flocculation. Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) and zinc orthophosphate are added to the drinking water to make it less corrosive to pipes, and chlorine is added later in the process, via the Ashley and Cleveland chlorinators, to disinfect the water. The processed water is pumped throughout the City via six pump stations and stored in four ground-level water tanks. The water quality of our system is constantly monitored by the City of Pittsfield and MassDEP to determine the effectiveness of existing water treatments and to determine if any additional treatment is required. What Hazards Exist For Our Water Supply? MassDEP has prepared a Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Report for the sources serving the City of Pittsfield potable water supply system. The SWAP Report assesses the susceptibility of public water supplies to contamination. A susceptibility ranking of “high” was assigned to this system because of at least one high land use within the City water supply protection area. The complete SWAP report is available online at http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/drinking/1236000.pdf.

2

Several common sources of contamination can pollute the water supply. Improperly maintained or nonworking septic systems can be a source of microbial contamination if unsuitable materials are disposed into them. Common household substances, such as fertilizers, paints, weed killers, and pesticides, can endanger public water. Underground oil storage tanks, if maintained improperly, can lead to leaks or spills. Storm water can pick up and carry debris and contaminants from roadways and lawns as it flows to catch basins. See below for further explanation on potential drinking water contaminants. How Is Our Water Source Protected, and How Can Protection Improve Further? The SWAP Report notes the key issues of watershed management, utility line right-of-ways, residential land use, and transportation corridors in or around the protection areas for the City water sources. The report commends our water system on promoting measures to protect our potable water supply sources. In order to maintain and improve source water protection, the SWAP report recommends several key measures. Access should be controlled to areas surrounding the City water supply. Inspections should be made regularly to the protection areas and any problems encountered remedied. Emergency response teams in the areas of the water sources should be educated on the water supply protection issues and should be prepared to respond to any accidents or spills in the vicinity of the sources. Residents in the areas of the water supplies can help protect sources by limiting fertilizer and pesticide use, maintaining septic systems properly, participating in hazardous materials collection events, and being vigilant for any suspicious or potentially harmful activities.

POTENTIAL DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS

Sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels overland or underground, it dissolves naturally occurring minerals and, in some cases, radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from the presence of animals or from human activity. Contaminants that may be present in source water include: Microbial contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, which may come from sewage treatment plants, septic systems, agricultural livestock operations, and wildlife. Inorganic contaminants, such as salts and metals, which can occur naturally or result from urban stormwater runoff, industrial and domestic wastewater discharges, oil and gas production, mining, and farming. Pesticides and herbicides, which may come from a variety of sources, such as agriculture, urban stormwater runoff, and residential uses. Organic chemical contaminants, including synthetic and volatile organic chemicals, which are byproducts of industrial processes and petroleum production, and can come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoff, and septic systems. Radioactive contaminants, which can occur naturally or result from oil and gas production and mining activities. In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the MassDEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prescribe regulations that limit the amount of certain contaminants in water provided by public water systems. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) regulations establish limits for contaminants in bottled water that must provide the same protection for public health. All drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at least small amounts of some contaminants. The presence of contaminants does not necessarily indicate that water poses a health risk. More information about contaminants and potential health effects can be obtained by calling the EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426 4791. Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking water than the general population. Immuno-compromised persons, such as those having cancer, undergoing chemotherapy, having undergone organ transplants, and having HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, as well as some elderly and some infants, can be particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking water from their health care providers. EPA/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines on lowering the risk of

3

infection by cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791). If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. The City of Pittsfield is responsible for providing high-quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several hours, it is recommended that you flush your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking to minimize the potential for lead exposure. If you are concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead. Cross Connection Inspection/Backflow Prevention Program Cross connections are potentially hazardous situations for a public or private potable water supply and a source of potable water contamination. A cross connection is any potential or actual physical connection between a potable water supply and any source through which it is possible to introduce any substance (such as gasoline, soap, gray water, or an industrial chemical) other than potable water to the water supply. Common cross connection scenarios are a garden hose whose spout is submerged in a bucket of soapy water or connected to a spray bottle of weed killer. A backflow, or unintended flow of water toward a source, is caused when a higher pressure develops at a water system than in a water supply. This can occur with an increase in pressure in the target system (backsiphonage) or a decrease of pressure in the supply (backpressure). Since water flows from higher pressure to lower pressure, a backflow event can occur when such a variation in pressure occurs somewhere in the system or the supply. This variation may result from a water main break, an unusually high demand for water, or even a submerged hose end that is higher than the faucet to which it is connected. Prevention of contamination of the water supply from backflow events is the responsibility of the water user. Responsibility begins at the connection from the public main to the user system and includes all piping included in the water distribution system on the property. Any water user whose internal water system presents a potential or actual cross connection conflict with the City potable water supply must have a backflow prevention assembly appropriate for the hazard level of the facility installed, maintained, and periodically tested at the user’s expense to protect the public, per Chapter 22, Section 23.2 of the Code of the City of Pittsfield. The City of Pittsfield is not currently required to survey residential properties for cross connections. However, residential properties still may have potential or actual cross connections, most commonly involving outdoor faucets, hot tubs, and swimming pools. All faucets to which hoses attach must have a hose bib vacuum breaker to prevent backsiphonage. To obtain a copy of the Massachusetts regulations regarding cross connections (310 CMR 22.22), or for any further information regarding cross connections, please contact the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Western Regional Office at (413) 784 1100.

IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS

Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) – The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to the MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology. Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) –The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety. Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) -- The highest level of a disinfectant (chlorine, chloramines, chlorine dioxide) allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants. Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG) -- The level of a drinking water disinfectant (chlorine, chloramines, chlorine dioxide) below which there is no known of expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead

4

Treatment Technique (TT) – A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water. Action Level (AL) – The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow. Applicable Abbreviations: ppm: parts per million, or milligrams per liter (mg/l); corresponds to approximately one minute in two years ppb: parts per billion, or micrograms per liter (μg/l); corresponds to approximately one minute in 2,000 years NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (measure of density of solid particles in liquid); turbidity of 5 NTU is just

noticeable to the average person ND: Not Detected N/A: Not Applicable Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) – These standards are developed to protect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water and are not health based. Massachusetts Office of Research and Standards Guideline (ORSG) – This is the concentration of a chemical in drinking water, at or below which, adverse health effects are unlikely to occur after chronic (lifetime) exposure. If exceeded, it serves as an indicator of the potential need for further action.

WATER QUALITY TESTING RESULTS

The water quality information presented in the table(s) is from the most recent round of testing done in accordance with the regulations. All data shown was collected during the last calendar year unless otherwise noted in the table(s).

Date(s)

Collected 90

TH

percentile Action Level

MCLG

# of sites above Action

Level

Possible Source of Contamination

Lead (mg/L)

9/30-10/5/11

0.0035 0.015 0 0 Corrosion of household

plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits

Copper (mg/L)

9/30-10/5/11

0.16 1.3 1.3 0

Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of

natural deposits; leaching from wood preservatives

If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. The City of Pittsfield is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by flushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead.

Highest % Positive in a

month

Total # Positive

MCL MCLG Violation

(Y/N) Possible Source of Contamination

Total Coliform 0 ----- >5% 0 No Naturally present in the environment

Fecal Coliform or E. coli

----- 0 * 0 No Human and animal fecal waste

Compliance with the fecal coliform/E.coli MCL is determined upon additional repeat testing.

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead

5

TT Highest Detected

Daily Value Violation

(Y/N) Possible Source of Contamination

Turbidity (NTU) 5 0.49 No Soil runoff

Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is a good indicator of water quality.

Regulated Contaminant Date(s)

Collected

Highest Result/Running

Average Detected

Range Detected

MCL or

MRDL

MCLG or

MRDLG

Violation (Y/N)

Possible Source(s) of Contamination

Inorganic Contaminants

Barium (ppm) 11/22/11 0.011 0.0076-0.011

2 2 No

Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge from

metal refineries; erosion of natural

deposits

Fluoride (ppm) ■ 11/22/11 0.03 0.02-0.03

4 4 No

Erosion of natural deposits; water additive which

promotes strong teeth; discharge from

fertilizer and aluminum factories

Nitrate (ppm) 11/22/11 0.05 0.03-0.05

10 10 No

Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits

Nitrite (ppm) 11/22/11 0 0 1 1 No

Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits

Perchlorate (μg)

9/28/11 0 0 2 N/A No

Rocket propellants, fireworks, munitions,

flares, blasting agents

Disinfection Byproducts

Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) (ppb)

Quarterly in 2011

50.1 19.5-50.1

80 ----- No Byproduct of drinking

water chlorination

Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) (ppb)

Quarterly in 2011

28.5 13.2-28.5

60 ----- No Byproduct of drinking

water disinfection

Chlorine (ppm) (free, total or combined)

Weekly in 2011

1.61 0.22-1.61

4 4 No Water additive used to

control microbes

■ Fluoride also has a secondary contaminant level (SMCL) of 2 ppm. Unregulated contaminants are those for which there are no established drinking water standards. The purpose of unregulated contaminant monitoring is to assist regulatory agencies in determining their occurrence in drinking water and whether future regulation is warranted.

6

City of Pittsfield Department of Public Utilities 70 Allen Street Pittsfield, MA 01201

Unregulated and Secondary Contaminants

Date(s) Collected

Result or Range

Detected

Average Detected

SMCL ORSG Possible Source


Sodium (ppm) 11/22/11 8.0-12.2 10.1 ---- 20 Natural sources; runoff from use of salt on roadways; by-product

of treatment process

Other Organic Contaminants - When detected at treatment plant as VOC residuals, not TTHM compliance

Bromodichloromethane (ppb)

9/28/11 0.60-3.20 1.90 --- --- Byproduct of drinking water

chlorination

Chloroform (μg/L) 9/28/11 13-97 55 --- --- Byproduct of drinking water

chlorination

Bacteriological Contaminants

Cryptosporidium N/A 0 0 ---- ---- Discharged especially where water is contaminated with sewage or animal wastes

* The EPA has established a lifetime health advisory (HA) value of 0.3 mg/L for manganese to protect against concerns of potential neurological effects, and a one-day and 10-day HA of 1 mg/L for acute exposure.

COMPLIANCE WITH DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

Does My Drinking Water Meet Current Health Standards? We failed to complete required sampling for copper in a timely manner; this is a monitoring and reporting violation. A sufficient number of samples were taken of copper, and the results of those tests fell within the allowable range, as indicated above, but we did not mail the results of those samples on time. No other violations occurred during the year 2011, and thus our water met all applicable health standards regulated by the state and federal government in 2011.

2010 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report For

The City of Pittsfield, Massachusetts MassDEP Public Water Supply ID #1236000

This report is a snapshot of drinking water quality that we provided last year. Included are details about where your water comes from, what it contains, and how it compares to state and federal standards. We are committed to providing you with information because informed customers are our best allies.

PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM INFORMATION

Address: _70 Allen Street, Pittsfield, MA

Contact Person: Bruce Collingwood, Commissioner of Public Utilities

Telephone#: (413) 499 9330 Fax#: (413) 499 9418

Internet Address: http://www.pittsfield.com/city_departments/public_works_and_utilities/water_sewer_and_drain.htm

Water System Improvements Our water system is routinely inspected by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). MassDEP inspects our system for its technical, financial, and managerial capacity to provide safe drinking water to you. To ensure that the City of Pittsfield provides the highest quality of water available, your water system is operated by a Massachusetts certified operator who oversees the routine operations of our system.

In 2010, the City of Pittsfield replaced 12 hydrants and replaced 608 water meters with new remote-read Sensus water meters. The Hathaway Brook dams, which formerly impounded the Hathaway Reservoir, were removed to restore natural stream conditions. The natural connectivity of the stream now allows for the natural movement of aquatic life upstream from the Housatonic River; it also allows for natural nutrient and sediment transport, natural flow patterns, and overall improvement of water quality. In addition, the Coltsville Flow Control Station has been in the process of being relocated and updated. The flow control station, which tempers the flow and pressure of water entering the City of Pittsfield distribution system from the Cleveland Transmission Main, will be equipped newly with redundancies in flow control conduits so that the new station may continue to operate even when it is under maintenance. The new station will be located approximately 400 feet from the old station, remaining in the parking lot of the Coltsville Shopping Center, and the old station will be demolished and replaced with additional parking space for the shopping center.

Opportunities for Public Participation If you would like to participate in discussions regarding your water quality, you may attend the regular meetings of the City Council, which fall on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month, except July and August, at 7:30 pm. City Council meets in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. You may also contact your local elected representatives with any water quality concerns.

DRINKING WATER SOURCES

What are the sources for my drinking water, and how is it treated?

The drinking water for the City of Pittsfield comes from six surface reservoirs, none from wells. Cleveland Reservoir and Sackett Reservoir are situated in the Town of Hinsdale, and Ashley Lake, Lower Ashley Intake Reservoir, Farnham Reservoir, and Sandwash Reservoir are situated in the Town of Washington. The City of Pittsfield restricts use of these reservoirs and the land around them to protect the water supply from contamination.

Our water system makes every effort to provide you with safe and pure drinking water. To improve the quality of the water delivered to you, we treat it to remove several contaminants and impurities. Our two water filtration plants, the Ashley Water Treatment Plant in the Town of Dalton and the Cleveland Water Treatment Plant in the Town of Hinsdale, treat water by using aluminum sulfate and sodium aluminate to remove particulate matter by coagulation and flocculation. Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) and zinc orthophosphate are added to the drinking

1

water to make it less corrosive to pipes, and chlorine is added later in the process, via the Ashley and Cleveland chlorinators, to disinfect the water. The processed water is pumped throughout the City via six pump stations and stored in four ground-level water tanks.

The water quality of our system is constantly monitored by the City of Pittsfield and MassDEP to determine the effectiveness of existing water treatments and to determine if any additional treatment is required.

What Hazards Exist For Our Water Supply?

MassDEP has prepared a Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Report for the sources serving the City of Pittsfield potable water supply system. The SWAP Report assesses the susceptibility of public water supplies to contamination. A susceptibility ranking of high was assigned to this system because of at least one high land use within the City water supply protection area. The complete SWAP report is available online at http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/drinking/1236000.pdf.

Several common sources of contamination can pollute the water supply. Improperly maintained or nonworking septic systems can be a source of microbial contamination if unsuitable materials are disposed into them. Common household substances, such as fertilizers, paints, weed killers, and pesticides, can endanger public water. Underground oil storage tanks, if maintained improperly, can lead to leaks or spills. Storm water can pick up and carry debris and contaminants from roadways and lawns as it flows to catch basins. See below for further explanation on potential drinking water contaminants.

How Is Our Water Source Protected, and How Can Protection Improve Further?

The SWAP Report notes the key issues of watershed management, utility line right-of-ways, residential land use, and transportation corridors in or around the protection areas for the City water sources. The report commends our water system on promoting measures to protect our potable water supply sources.

In order to maintain and improve source water protection, the SWAP report recommends several key measures. Access should be controlled to areas surrounding the City water supply. Inspections should be made regularly to the protection areas and any problems encountered remedied. Emergency response teams in the areas of the water sources should be educated on the water supply protection issues and should be prepared to respond to any accidents or spills in the vicinity of the sources. Residents in the areas of the water supplies can help protect sources by limiting fertilizer and pesticide use, maintaining septic systems properly, participating in hazardous materials collection events, and being vigilant for any suspicious or potentially harmful activities.

POTENTIAL DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS

Sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels overland or underground, it dissolves naturally occurring minerals and, in some cases, radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from the presence of animals or from human activity.

Contaminants that may be present in source water include:

Microbial contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, which may come from sewage treatment plants, septic systems, agricultural livestock operations, and wildlife.

Inorganic contaminants, such as salts and metals, which can occur naturally or result from urban stormwater runoff, industrial and domestic wastewater discharges, oil and gas production, mining, and farming.

Pesticides and herbicides, which may come from a variety of sources, such as agriculture, urban stormwater runoff, and residential uses.

Organic chemical contaminants, including synthetic and volatile organic chemicals, which are byproducts of industrial processes and petroleum production, and can come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoff, and septic systems.

Radioactive contaminants, which can occur naturally or result from oil and gas production and mining activities.

In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the MassDEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prescribe regulations that limit the amount of certain contaminants in water provided by public water systems.

2

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) regulations establish limits for contaminants in bottled water that must provide the same protection for public health. All drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at least small amounts of some contaminants. The presence of contaminants does not necessarily indicate that water poses a health risk. More information about contaminants and potential health effects can be obtained by calling the EPA s Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426 4791.

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking water than the general population. lmmunocompromised persons, such as those having cancer, undergoing chemotherapy, having undergone organ transplants, and having HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, as well as some elderly and some infants, can be particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking water from their health care providers. EPA/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention {CDC) guidelines on lowering the risk of infection by cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline {800-426-4 791 ).

If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. The City of Pittsfield is responsible for providing high-quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several hours, it is recommended that you flush your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking to minimize the potential for lead exposure. If you are concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead.

Cross Connection lnspection/Backflow Prevention Program

Cross connections are potentially hazardous situations for a public or private potable water supply and a source of potable water contamination. A cross connection is any potential or actual physical connection between a potable water supply and any source through which it is possible to introduce any substance (such as gasoline, soap, gray water, or an industrial chemical) other than potable water to the water supply. Common cross connection scenarios are a garden hose whose spout is submerged in a bucket of soapy water or connected to a spray bottle of weed killer.

A backflow, or unintended flow of water toward a source, is caused when a higher pressure develops at a water system than in a water supply. This can occur with an increase in pressure in the target system (backsiphonage) or a decrease of pressure in the supply {backpressure). Since water flows from higher pressure to lower pressure, a backflow event can occur when such a variation in pressure occurs somewhere in the system or the supply. This variation may result from a water main break, an unusually high demand for water, or even a submerged hose end that is higher than the faucet to which it is connected.

Prevention of contamination of the water supply from backflow events is the responsibility of the water user. Responsibility begins at the connection from the public main to the user system and includes all piping included in the water distribution system on the property. Any water user whose internal water system presents a potential or actual cross connection conflict with the City potable water supply must have a backflow prevention assembly appropriate for the hazard level of the facility installed, maintained, and periodically tested at the users expense to protect the public, per Chapter 22, Section 23.2 of the Code of the City of Pittsfield.

The City of Pittsfield is not currently required to survey residential properties for cross connections. However, residential properties still may have potential or actual cross connections, most commonly involving outdoor faucets, hot tubs, and swimming pools. All faucets to which hoses attach must have a hose bib vacuum breaker to prevent backsiphonage. To obtain a copy of the Massachusetts regulations regarding cross connections (310 CMR 22.22), or for any further information regarding cross connections, please contact the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Western Regional Office at {413) 784 1100.

3

IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS

Maximum Contaminant Level CMCL) The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to the MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology.

Maximum Contaminant Level Goal CMCLG) The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level CMRDL) -- The highest level of a disinfectant (chlorine, chloramines, chlorine dioxide) allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal CMRDLG) -- The level of a drinking water disinfectant (chlorine, chloramines, chlorine dioxide) below which there is no known of expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

Treatment Technique (TT) A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water.

Action Level CAL) The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow.

Applicable Abbreviations:

ppm: parts per million, or milligrams per liter (mg/1); corresponds to approximately one minute in two years ppb: parts per billion, or micrograms per liter (IJg/1); corresponds to approximately one minute in 2,000 years NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (measure of density of solid particles in liquid); turbidity of 5 NTU is just

noticeable to the average person ND: Not Detected N/A: Not Applicable

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level CSMCL) These standards are developed to protect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water and are not health based.

Massachusetts Office of Research and Standards Guideline CORSG) This is the concentration of a chemical in drinking water, at or below which, adverse health effects are unlikely to occur after chronic (lifetime) exposure. If exceeded, it serves as an indicator of the potential need for further action.

WATER QUALITY TESTING RESUL=T-=-S ________ o==J The water quality information presented in the table(s) is from the most recent round of testing done in accordance with the regulations. All data shown was collected during the last calendar year unless otherwise noted in the table(s).

Date('.>) 8QTI-f Act1on #of s1tes

Pos~ible Source Ctf above Act1on Collected perr.entile Level MCLG

Level ContamlnatJ•)n

Lead Corrosion of household

(ppb) 2008 4.6 15 0 0 plumbing systems; erosion of

natural deposits Corrosion of household

Copper 2008 0.12 1.3 1.3 0 plumbing systems; erosion of (ppm) natural deposits; leaching from

wood preservatives

If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. The City of Pittsfield is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by flushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are concerned

4

about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/lead .

I Highest %

Positive tn a

tl--------+·- · month Total Coliform

Fecal Coliform or E. coli

0

Total# Pos1t1va

0

MCL

>5%

*

MCLG

0

0

Vtolabon ! t'f/N)

No

No

Possible Source of Contammation

Naturally present in the environment

Human and animal fecal waste

• Compliance with the fecal coliform/E. coli MCL is determined upon additional repeat testing.

TT I Htghest Detected Violat1on Possible Source of Contamination

Dally Value (Y/N)

Turbidity (NTU) 5 l 1.88 No Soil runoff

Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is a good indicator of water quality.

I H1gh.;,st I M'"'L MCLG I

Regulated Contam1m:nt Date;(s) Rl9sult1Runmng RangP- 'J

tJr Vtolat1on Possible Source(s) of

Collected Average I or (Y/NJ Contamination Detected MRDL MRDLG I Detected


Discharge of drilling

0.007-wastes; discharge from

Barium (ppm) 12/16/10 0.010 0.010

2 2 No metal refineries; erosion of natural

deposits Erosion of natural deposits; water

0.02-additive which

Fluoride (ppm) • 12/16/10 0.03 0.03

4 4 No promotes strong teeth; discharge from

fertilizer and aluminum factories

Runoff from fertilizer

0.03-use; leaching from

Nitrate (ppm) 12/16/10 0.07 0.07

10 10 No septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

Nitrite (ppm) 12/17/10 0 0 1 1 No septic tanks; sewage;

erosion of natural deposits

Disinfection Byproducts

Total Trihalomethanes Quarterly 56.3

31.6-80 No

Byproduct of drinking (TTHMs) (ppb) in 2010 56.3 ---- water chlorination

Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) Quarterly 34.3 18-34.3 60 -- No

Byproduct of drinking (ppb) in 2010 water disinfection

Chlorine (ppm) (free, total Weekly in 1.00 0.86-

4 4 No Water additive used to

or combined) 2010 1.00 control microbes

• Fluoride also has a secondary contaminant level (SMCL) of 2 ppm.

5

City of Pittsfield Department of Public Utilities City Hall 70 Allen Street Pittsfield, MA 01201 413-499-9330

2010 PRSRTSTD

US POSTAGE

PAID HOLLISTON, MA PERMIT NO. 72

Unregulated contaminants are those for which there are no established drinking water standards. The purpose of unregulated contaminant monitoring is to assist regulatory agencies in determining their occurrence in drinking water and whether future regulation is warranted.

Unregulated and Date(sJ Result or

Average ! -l Range SMCL I ORSG PCissibl~ Source Secondary Contaminants Collected Detected

Detected


I

Natural sources; runoff from use Sodium (ppm) 12/16/10 8.4-12.0 10.2 --- 20 of salt on roadways; by-product

of treatment process

Other Organic Contaminants -When detected at treatment plant as VOC residuals, not TTHM compliance

Bromodichloromethane 9/9/10 0.58-1.30 0.94 Byproduct of drinking water (ppb) --- --- chlorination

Chloroform (ppb) 9/9/10 18-24 21 --- --- Byproduct·of drinking water chlorination

Bacteriological Contaminants

Cryptosporidium Discharged especially where

N/A 0 0 ---- ---- water is contaminated with sewage or animal wastes

* The EPA has established a lifetime health advisory (HA) value of 0.3 mg/L for manganese to protect against concerns of potential neurological effects, and a one-day and 1 0-day HA of 1 mg/L for acute exposure.

COMPLIANCE WITH DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

Does My Drinking Water Meet Current Health Standards?

We are committed to providing you with the best water quality available. We are proud to report that last year your drinking water met all applicable health standards regulated by the state and federal government.

6

Documents

GE 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield. MA 01201 USA · GE 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield. MA 01201 USA Transmitted Via Electronic Mail (to EPA) and Overnight Courier September 6, 2012