102
4^ Sn-.-vrru.it? Rccortis Center SDMS DocID 444458 2ZZ OTHER: <^ijt|(^t^^ W92224D DRAFT WORK PLAN TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND, INC. SITE SOUTHINGTON, CONNECTICUT HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation EPA Work Assignment No. 30-1R08 Contract No. 68-W8-0117 HNUS Project No. 5926 June 1992 o ^HALLIBURTON NUS ^ S ^ Environmental Corporation T

o ^HALLIBURTON NUS - semspub.epa.gov

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    18

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

4 ^ Sn--vrruit Rccortis Center

SDMS DocID 444458 2ZZ OTHER lt ^ i j t | ( ^ t ^ ^

W92224D

DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation

EPA Work Assignment No 30-1R08 Contract No 68-W8-0117 HNUS Project No 5926

June 1992

o

^ H A L L I B U R T O N NUS ^ S Environmental Corporation T

W92224D

DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation

EPA Work Assignment No 30-1R08 EPA Contract No 68-W8-0117

HNUS Project No 5926

June 1992

George 5jl Gardner PE Project Manager Program Manager

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation certifies that to the

best of its knowledge and belief there are no relevant facts andor

circumstances that would give rise to an organizational or

individual conflict of interest in connection with this work

planwork assignment or if any facts andor circumstances would

give rise to such conflict they have been disclosed in accordance

with Contract Clause H2 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

andor Contract Clause H16 NOTIFICATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REGARDING PERSONNEL

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

10 INTRODUCTION 1-1

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 2-1 21 Site Area Description 2-1 22 Site History and Contaminant Source 2-7

Identification 221 Former Features 2-8 222 Current Features 2-13

23 Site Characterization 2-16 231 Site Geology 2-17 232 Hydrogeologic Characterization 2-18 233 Nature and Extent of Contamination 2-20

30 SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT 3-1 31 Task 0100 - Project Planning 3-2

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate 3-3 Preparation

32 Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation 3-4 33 Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment 3-6 34 Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of 3-9

Alternatives 341 Soil Remediation Evaluation 3-10 342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation 3-13

Evaluation 35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost 3-16

Analysis Report 36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support 3-16

361 Draft Final Design Report (90) 3-18 362 Final Design (100) 3-21 363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation 3-22

W92224D

DRAFT

TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 4-1 SUPPORT 41 Task 0200 - Community Relations 4-1

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community 4-1 Relations Plan

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting 4-2 Support

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet 4-3 414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing 4-3

Support 415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices 4-3 416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information 4-4

Repositories 417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness 4-4

Summary 42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record 4-5

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE 5-1 51 Major Deliverables 5-1 52 Interim Deliverables 5-2 53 Project Schedule 5-2

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6-1 61 Project Organization 6-1 62 Quality Assurance and Data Management 6-2 63 Cost Estimate 6-2

70 EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 7-1

APPENDIX A - OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

W92224D 11

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

W92224D

DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation

EPA Work Assignment No 30-1R08 EPA Contract No 68-W8-0117

HNUS Project No 5926

June 1992

George 5jl Gardner PE Project Manager Program Manager

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation certifies that to the

best of its knowledge and belief there are no relevant facts andor

circumstances that would give rise to an organizational or

individual conflict of interest in connection with this work

planwork assignment or if any facts andor circumstances would

give rise to such conflict they have been disclosed in accordance

with Contract Clause H2 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

andor Contract Clause H16 NOTIFICATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REGARDING PERSONNEL

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

10 INTRODUCTION 1-1

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 2-1 21 Site Area Description 2-1 22 Site History and Contaminant Source 2-7

Identification 221 Former Features 2-8 222 Current Features 2-13

23 Site Characterization 2-16 231 Site Geology 2-17 232 Hydrogeologic Characterization 2-18 233 Nature and Extent of Contamination 2-20

30 SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT 3-1 31 Task 0100 - Project Planning 3-2

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate 3-3 Preparation

32 Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation 3-4 33 Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment 3-6 34 Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of 3-9

Alternatives 341 Soil Remediation Evaluation 3-10 342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation 3-13

Evaluation 35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost 3-16

Analysis Report 36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support 3-16

361 Draft Final Design Report (90) 3-18 362 Final Design (100) 3-21 363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation 3-22

W92224D

DRAFT

TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 4-1 SUPPORT 41 Task 0200 - Community Relations 4-1

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community 4-1 Relations Plan

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting 4-2 Support

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet 4-3 414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing 4-3

Support 415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices 4-3 416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information 4-4

Repositories 417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness 4-4

Summary 42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record 4-5

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE 5-1 51 Major Deliverables 5-1 52 Interim Deliverables 5-2 53 Project Schedule 5-2

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6-1 61 Project Organization 6-1 62 Quality Assurance and Data Management 6-2 63 Cost Estimate 6-2

70 EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 7-1

APPENDIX A - OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

W92224D 11

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION

HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation certifies that to the

best of its knowledge and belief there are no relevant facts andor

circumstances that would give rise to an organizational or

individual conflict of interest in connection with this work

planwork assignment or if any facts andor circumstances would

give rise to such conflict they have been disclosed in accordance

with Contract Clause H2 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

andor Contract Clause H16 NOTIFICATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REGARDING PERSONNEL

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

10 INTRODUCTION 1-1

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 2-1 21 Site Area Description 2-1 22 Site History and Contaminant Source 2-7

Identification 221 Former Features 2-8 222 Current Features 2-13

23 Site Characterization 2-16 231 Site Geology 2-17 232 Hydrogeologic Characterization 2-18 233 Nature and Extent of Contamination 2-20

30 SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT 3-1 31 Task 0100 - Project Planning 3-2

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate 3-3 Preparation

32 Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation 3-4 33 Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment 3-6 34 Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of 3-9

Alternatives 341 Soil Remediation Evaluation 3-10 342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation 3-13

Evaluation 35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost 3-16

Analysis Report 36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support 3-16

361 Draft Final Design Report (90) 3-18 362 Final Design (100) 3-21 363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation 3-22

W92224D

DRAFT

TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 4-1 SUPPORT 41 Task 0200 - Community Relations 4-1

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community 4-1 Relations Plan

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting 4-2 Support

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet 4-3 414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing 4-3

Support 415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices 4-3 416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information 4-4

Repositories 417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness 4-4

Summary 42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record 4-5

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE 5-1 51 Major Deliverables 5-1 52 Interim Deliverables 5-2 53 Project Schedule 5-2

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6-1 61 Project Organization 6-1 62 Quality Assurance and Data Management 6-2 63 Cost Estimate 6-2

70 EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 7-1

APPENDIX A - OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

W92224D 11

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

10 INTRODUCTION 1-1

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 2-1 21 Site Area Description 2-1 22 Site History and Contaminant Source 2-7

Identification 221 Former Features 2-8 222 Current Features 2-13

23 Site Characterization 2-16 231 Site Geology 2-17 232 Hydrogeologic Characterization 2-18 233 Nature and Extent of Contamination 2-20

30 SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT 3-1 31 Task 0100 - Project Planning 3-2

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate 3-3 Preparation

32 Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation 3-4 33 Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment 3-6 34 Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of 3-9

Alternatives 341 Soil Remediation Evaluation 3-10 342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation 3-13

Evaluation 35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost 3-16

Analysis Report 36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support 3-16

361 Draft Final Design Report (90) 3-18 362 Final Design (100) 3-21 363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation 3-22

W92224D

DRAFT

TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 4-1 SUPPORT 41 Task 0200 - Community Relations 4-1

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community 4-1 Relations Plan

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting 4-2 Support

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet 4-3 414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing 4-3

Support 415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices 4-3 416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information 4-4

Repositories 417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness 4-4

Summary 42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record 4-5

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE 5-1 51 Major Deliverables 5-1 52 Interim Deliverables 5-2 53 Project Schedule 5-2

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6-1 61 Project Organization 6-1 62 Quality Assurance and Data Management 6-2 63 Cost Estimate 6-2

70 EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 7-1

APPENDIX A - OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

W92224D 11

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

SECTION PAGE

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 4-1 SUPPORT 41 Task 0200 - Community Relations 4-1

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community 4-1 Relations Plan

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting 4-2 Support

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet 4-3 414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing 4-3

Support 415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices 4-3 416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information 4-4

Repositories 417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness 4-4

Summary 42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record 4-5

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE 5-1 51 Major Deliverables 5-1 52 Interim Deliverables 5-2 53 Project Schedule 5-2

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6-1 61 Project Organization 6-1 62 Quality Assurance and Data Management 6-2 63 Cost Estimate 6-2

70 EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 7-1

APPENDIX A - OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

W92224D 11

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) DRAFT WORK PLAN

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

TABLES

NUMBER PAGE

2-1 RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS 2-23 3-1 EECA REPORT OUTLINE 3-17

FIGURES

N U M B E R PAGE

2-- 1 (GENERAL SITE LOCATION 2-2 2--2 1STUDY AREA 2-3 2--3 FORMER OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-9 2--4 ICURRENT OPERATIONS AREA FEATURES 2-14 2-- 5 1OPERATIONS AREA VOCs IN SOIL 2-26 2--6 VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER 2-28 2--7 VOCs IN BEDROCK AQUIFER 2-29 5--1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 5-3 6--1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 6-3

W92224D iii

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

1

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

10

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region I HALLIBURTON NUS Environmental Corporation (HNUS) will

provide technical assistance for a rapid remedial action at the

Solvents Recovery Service of New England Inc (SRSNE) site in

Southington Connecticut This technical assistance involves the

performance of an Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis (EECA) to

evaluate rapid remedial action alternatives and preparation of an

EECA Report The technical assistance also involves provision of

community relations and administrative record support and design

and implementation of the selected rapid remedial action This

Work Plan was developed based on the EPA Statement of Work (SOW)

dated April 24 1992 the scoping meeting of June 4 1992 and the

results of discussions with the RPM The work was authorized under

Work Assignment Number 30-1R08

HNUS understands that the overall objective of the rapid remedial

action at the SRSNE site is to accelerate the site remediation

process and control the migration of contaminants through mass

removal of known contaminants from soils and groundwater To

achieve this overall objective EPAs specific goals are to

accomplish the following

W92224D 1-1

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

1 Dewater the Operations Area or portions of the Operations

Area as appropriate to allow work to proceed on the

contaminated soils

2 Initiate removal of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

from soils through in-situ treatment and

3 Install and operate an appropriate water treatment system

that does not result in unacceptable air emissions This

water treatment system will be designed to address

contaminated groundwater and potential vapors which may

be generated from dewatering and treatment of the soil

An EECA is required to provide the EPA with the necessary

technical cost and risk information to develop evaluate and

select the most appropriate options for fulfilling each of these

objectives An EECA Report records this comparative analytical

process and is required for a rapid remedial (non-time-critical

removal) action

This Technical Assistance Work Assignment will be performed

consistent with the requirements of the following documents the

National Contingency Plan (NCP) the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as

amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

W92224D 1-2

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

of 1986 and the EPA SOW HNUS will utilize to the extent

appropriate the Draft Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis

Guidance for Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions (June 1987) the

revised Outline of EECA Guidance (March 30 1988) The Role

of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA (April 21 1987) (OSWER

Directive 93600-15) and other information and guidance on

conducting rapid remedial actions which EPA provides in writing

during the period of this assignment At the direction of the RPM

the contractor will also consult with experts in the Environmental

Services Division in EPA Region I and in the Emergency Response

Division within the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response for

assistance in planning and preparing the EECA and in implementing

the rapid remedial action

This Work Plan presents the technical scope of work and proposed

schedule for preparing the EECA and providing community relations

and administrative record support It addresses the initial design

of the rapid remedial action but does not address implementation

of the rapid remedial action which may be the subject of an

amended SOW and a subsequent amendment to this work plan This

Draft Work Plan contains seven sections Section 10 provides an

introduction Section 20 summarizes the site history and existing

site data Section 30 details the tasks to be undertaken in the

analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives and in the

preparation of a draft EECA Report Section 40 describes the

bullraquolaquo W92224D 1-3

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

tasks to be undertaken to support the community relations and

administrative record requirements of the EECA process Section

50 describes anticipated interim deliverables and the schedule for

the work Section 60 provides a proposed project management

approach and Section 70 identifies the equipment and consumable

supplies that may be required to perform the activities identified

in the Draft Work Plan

W92224D 1-4

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

20 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

A summary of the site area history and physical and chemical

characterization is provided in the following text

21 Site Area Description

The Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) National

Priorities List (NPL) Superfund site is located on Lazy Lane in the

Town of Southington Connecticut in Hartford County approximately

15 miles southwest of Hartford Figure 2-1 shows the general

location of the SRSNE Inc facility (Operations Area) with respect

to the Town of Southington and its environs The NPL study area

(Figure 2-2) for the SRSNE facility includes the adjoining property

to the east known as the former Cianci property the Town of

Southington well field and the lot formerly occupied by the Queen

Street Diner on the eastern side of the Quinnipiac River The

EECA analysis and subsequent removal action will for the most part

be confined to the Operations Area itself

W92224D 2-1

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

000 r c r

SOURCE US OEOLOOICAL SURVEY 75 MINUTE SERIES TOFOORAFHIC MAPS CONNECHCUT QUADRANOLES

(SOUTHINGTON 196S PHCTTOREVISED 19lt4 MERIDEN 1967PR 19M NEW BRITAIN 1966 PR 1984 B R i n O L 1966 FT 1984)

FIGURE 2-1 CONNEQICUT

LOCATION MAP SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT OUAORANGtX LOCATION

2 -2 W92224D

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICEshyOF NEW ENGLAND INC

LEGEND SRSNE PROPERTY UNE

bulllaquoKlaquo^

APPROXIMATC SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA MAP

SRSNE INC SITE AND TOWN PRODUCTION WELLS SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

SRSNE Operations Area - The Operations Area occupies approximately

25 acres and consists of the grounds and structures within the

fenced perimeter where the day-to-day drum storage and fuel

blending operations were conducted prior to April 1991 The lot

owned by SRSNE occupies 37 acres and includes the Operations Area

and the access road leading to Lazy Lane

The Operations Area is located in the Quinnipiac River basin

approximately 600 feet west of the river channel This lot is

situated just south of Lazy Lane and the Mickeys Garage property

The ground surface elevation ranges between approximately 164 and

180 feet above mean sea level (MSL) The majority of the

Operations Area where day-to-day activities occurred is level (166

- 168 feet MSL) A steep hill (maximum elevation of 180 feet MSL)

occupies the west and southwest portions of the property

Just to the east of the Operations Area outside of the chain-link

fence is an unlined drainage ditch which carries treated effluent

from the cooling towerair stripper to the Quinnipiac River

West of the Operations Area - Immediately uphill and west of the

SRSNE Operations Area is the S Yorski property which has a house

and several tracts of land used for farming Only private

residences are situated farther west of the Yorski property A

number of private residences are located to the southwest of the

W92224D 2-4 ~ bull

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

Study area in the vicinity of Curtiss Street and in the upland

areas

To the west the ground surface elevation increases steadily to a

maximum of 280 feet MSL along Lazy Lane approximately 2200 feet

west of the Operations Area

North of the Operations Area - Immediately north of the SRSNE

Operations Area is the Mickeys Garage auto body repair shop

located on Lazy Lane Several tracts of undeveloped land and two

ponds are located north of Lazy Lane This area extends

approximately to Interstate Highway 1-84 One private residence is

situated northeast of the Operations Area across from the former

Cianci property

North of the study area the Quinnipiac River channel turns

northwest (the river flows from north to south) and passes under Ishy

84 This area is generally in the 150-170 foot MSL elevation

range One ridge possibly a former roadway rises to a peak

elevation of 180 feet MSL (approximately 300 feet north of Lazy

Lane)

East of the Operations Area - The SRSNE facility is bordered on the

east by the Boston amp Maine (BampM) right-of-way and the former Cianci

property The Quinnipiac River borders the eastern edge of the

W92224D 2-5

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

former Cianci property The former Cianci property currently

owned by SRSNE has never been developed and has been altered by

past earth moving and leveling activities Wetlands which occupied

this area have been filled Some wetlands remain as do those in

the floodplain of the Quinnipiac River An unpaved access road

traverses from north to south through the Cianci property and into

the Town well field property

The Cianci property is a well-vegetated level lot characterized by

open grassy fields and some wetlands Surface elevations range

from 150 feet MSL (at the floodplain) to about 160 feet MSL near

the BampM railroad tracks

A number of commercial operations including auto body and repair

shops gasoline stations stores and restaurants are located on

Route 10 (Queen Street) due east of the Quinnipiac River Route 10

serves as a major thoroughfare through the Town of Southington

Residential dwellings are situated uphill and east of Queen Street

The ground elevation increases east of Queen Street to

approximately 250 to 300 feet MSL

South of the Operations Area - Due south of the former Cianci

property and southeast of the Operations Area is the Town of

Southington well field property which consists of approximately

282 acres of undeveloped land Town Production Wells Nos 4 and

W92224D 2-6

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

22

DRAFT

6 are located approximately 2000 and 1400 feet south of the SRSNE

property respectively The Quinnipiac River flows southward along

the eastern edge of the former Cianci property and a portion of the

Town well field and between Wells 4 and 6

The Town well field is characterized by open grassy fields in

gently rolling terrain Wetlands are present in the proximity of

the River Ground elevations range between 145 feet MSL (in the

floodplain near Well No 6) to 160 feet MSL at the peak of one

hill A seasonal pondwetland occupies an area encompassing

portions of the Cianci property and the north portion of the Town

well field A Connecticut Light amp Power (CLampP) easement for a high

tension electric transmission line is located in the northern

portion of the Town well field property (in a northwest-southeast

orientation)

Site History and Contaminant Source Identification

SRSNE Inc began operations in Southington in 1955 The facility

received spent industrial solvents which were distilled for reuse

as solvents or blended with fuel oil for use as a hazardous fuel

product The facility was permanently closed in May 1991

W92224D 2-7

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

DRAFT

While the SRSNE Inc facility operated various practices resulted

in the discharge of spent solvents into the soils and groundwater

These practices included disposing distillation sludges in unlined

lagoons burning sludges in an open-pit and spilling spent

solvents during handling storage and loading activities within

the Operations Area The remainder of this section presents a

summary of the potential contaminant source areas in the Operations

Area Both former (pre-1980) and current (post-1980) facility

features are presented

221 Former Features

Some of the historical information for the contaminant source areas

is based on an interpretation of one set of aerial photographs by

the EPA Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)

(1988) Information developed by other investigators was used to

supplement the interpretation of the aerial photographs Figure 2shy

3 presents the former features described in this section

Operations Building - The 1951 and 1957 aerial photographs of the

area show the concrete block operations building Three

distillation pots and a distillation column were located adjacent

to the operations building in the process area These facilities

were used to separate recoverable fractions from the spent

solvents Aqueous wastes from the distillation process were

W92224D 2-8

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l

I i E I 1 f I f I i f 1 i i 1 1 t I I I i I I 1 I i I i I I I I I

LEGEND

I I TANK raquoraquo laquocw

Q ) MEll POWT CR CHAUaU

-raquomdashlaquomdashraquoshy CHAM UNK f lNCt

PROPMTY UNC UO

H 1 h RANJIOAO IRACXS SCMC M TOT

FIGURE 2-3 FORMER MAJOR FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

DRAFT

discharged to an unspecified on-site location(s) Still bottom

sludges were discharged into two unlined lagoons discussed below

(EPA FIT EampE 1980)

Primary and Secondary Lagoons - These lagoons apparently installed

after 1957 were first identified in an April 1965 aerial

photograph The primary lagoon was located immediately south of

the operations building The secondary lagoon (which appears to be

two earthen excavations separated by a berm) was located 120 feet

south-southeast of the operations building Both lagoons are no

longer present having been covered with soil

The facility disposed of distillation bottoms in the primary lagoon

situated adjacent to the process area Overflow from the primary

lagoon was directed to the secondary lagoon Overflow from the

secondary lagoon would flow to the drainage ditch adjacent to the

railroad tracks and subsequently into the Cianci property (EPA FIT

E amp E 1980)

Open Pit Incinerator - The 1967 photograph showed a walled open

pit located in the southeastern corner of the property This pit

was present in the 1970 1975 1980 and 1982 aerial photographs of

the study area The still bottoms were burned in the open pit

after disposal in the lagoons stopped This open burning practice

was discontinued some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s

W92224D 2-10

DRAFT

In the 1975 photograph the EPIC analysis indicated that a tank

truck was parked adjacent to the pit where it appeared to discharge

its contents A large pool of liquid is visible at the

northeastern corner of the pit draining into the ditch paralleling

the railroad tracks

Tank Farm - The 1965 aerial photograph indicated the presence of

three horizontal tanks south of the operations building and the

primary lagoon A retaining wall was visible in the 1975

photograph By 1980 there were 19 tanks in the tank farm This

tank farm was located in the western part of the property on the

slope of the hill Five vertical tanks were also identified

adjacent to the operations building in the 1982 photograph

Drum Storage Pad - Drums were first identified in the 1965

photograph Later photos (taken in 1970 1975 1980 and 1982)

indicate that the property was used extensively with numerous 55shy

gallon drums stationary tanks and tank trailers distributed

throughout While these later photos show no obvious stains or

pools of liquid there were no secondary containment structures

visible around the drum or trailer storage areas to collect leaking

materials

W92224D 2-11

DRAFT

Septic Leach Field - The leaching field was not shown on the aerial

photographs although records indicate that one existed for the

sanitary facilities located in the operations building This

leaching field was located to the east of the operations building

and was likely installed after the operations building was

constructed The CT DEP identified the presence of VOCs in samples

collected from the leach field The CT DEP also theorized that

spent solvents may have been disposed of in the septic system

General - The aerial photographs indicated that during the site

development the terrain was altered from a sloping land area to a

flat parking and storage area with a steeply cut embankment It is

apparent from the present terrain of the site that a substantial

volume of soil was excavated and removed from the property to

accommodate such a large flat surface Surface drainage from the

site appeared to flow to the east into the drainage ditch along

the railroad bed and through the culvert to the former Cianci

property The 1970 photograph showed an unpaved access road that

lead to the northwestern corner of the Operations Area The 1975

photograph showed that access to the facility was through a roadway

leading to the northeastern corner of the property parallel to the

railroad tracks The 1982 photograph identified the presence of a

security fence encircling the perimeter of the facility

W92224D 2-12

DRAFT

^ 222 Current Features

Since 1980 SRSNE made modifications to the facility structures

Figure 2-4 depicts the structures and features that remain at the

Operations Area

Office Trailer - An office trailer with a false foundation was

erected during the mid-1980s It is located inside the first

electric gate A second electric slide gate controls access into

the Operations Area The security fences and gates are intact and

in good condition A small parking area abutting the office

trailer was paved The entire truck parking and transfer area

within the Operations Area was paved with asphalt in early 1990

Operations Building - The operations building houses a warehouse

area a mechanical room with a large boiler the cooling towerair

stripper an office and a worker rest area

Tank Farm - The tank farm has four horizontal tanks remaining and

is protected by a concrete containment berm Two vertical blending

tanks are located in the process area adjacent to the operations

building A small sheet metal shed was constructed between the

operations building and the blending tanks drums were opened and

processed at this location

W92224D 2-13

vo

M

a

lECUlU

0 EIlHACnOH raquolaquou

HI bull shy bull CIIAItl UNK FENCf

| I I RAtROAO IRACKS

tvgt

--^-laquolaquoa^) f ^ RIQI

scAu M n t t

FIGURE 2-4 oCURRENT FEATURES AT THE

SRSNE INC SITE OPERATIONS AREA

^ bull i I l l l i l i l t l l l i f l l l l l f l l l l l I I

DRAFT

Drum Storage Area - Two drum storage areas were constructed with

coated concrete containments and a spill collection system

Following cessation of facility activities all drums were removed

from the property

Open Pit Incinerator - The open pit was removed from service during

the late-1960s and early-1970s even though the structure remained

at the Operations Area through 1982 (as seen in aerial

photographs) Following that time the open pit was dismantled and

the foundation was covered

On-site Interceptor System - This system was installed in 1985

along the southern and eastern perimeter of the property This

system consists of 25 extraction wells which pump groundwater to

the cooling towerair stripper on the roof of the operations

building The groundwater is air stripped of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) and the treated effluent is discharged to a buried

pipe and then into an unlined drainage ditch The effluent crosses

under the railroad tracks through a culvert enters a second buried

culvert in the former Cianci property and exits to the Quinnipiac

River The cooling tower VOC emissions are discharged to the

atmosphere In 1989 three additional extraction wells were

installed to compensate for the lack of performance of the original

system This system remains in operation

W92224D 2-15

23

DRAFT

General - The fuel and chemical piping and valve systems are still

connected to the tanks on the site Chemical residue may still be

present in these pipes

The hillsides on the western portions of the Operations Area are

covered with 2-3 inches of crushed stone There is a knoll on the

southwestern corner of the property which is vegetated with small

trees and brush A small quantity of construction debris was

deposited in this area by SRSNE when the facility was active The

debris remains on-site

Site Characterization

This section describes the site conditions based on information

provided to date through the Remedial Investigation (RI) process

This characterization centers around the Operations Area and

includes a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic setting

and well as the nature and extent of known contamination A more

detailed discussion of the known site characteristics may be found

in the SRSNE Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial Investigation

Feasibility Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-16

DRAFT

231 Site Geology

The geology underlying the study area consists of three distinct

units

o Stratified outwash deposits consisting of interbeds of

thin silt silty sand and sand layers These units

underlie approximately 90 percent of the study area The

water table aquifer downgradient of the Operations Area

is located in these stratified deposits The groundwater

and accompanying contaminants migrate through these

deposits to the east and southeast of the Operations

Area

o Basal till consisting of an unstratified poorly sorted

mix of clay silt sand gravel cobbles and boulders

The till varies in thickness and is absent in several

locations within the study area Where the till is

present it may act as a semi-confining layer to

groundwater flow between the more permeable overlying

soils and the bedrock aquifer Till windows allow direct

communication of groundwater from one aquifer to another

W92224D 2-17

DRAFT

o Bedrock beneath the till deposits is a poorly cemented

highly fractured arkosic sandstone The arkosic

sandstone is intruded by a vertically fractured diabase

dike The bedrock surface mapped by seismic refraction

and confirmed by rock coring indicates that a gentle

slope dips east and south towards the Quinnipiac River

and the Production Well No 6 respectively Groundwater

flows primarily through the upper fractured zones but

may also enter deeper into the bedrock through fractures

and joints

232 Hydrogeologic Characterization

The study area groundwater flow is not presently influenced by

Production Wells Nos 4 and 6 which have been inactive since 1979

Therefore groundwater flow conditions observed during the RI

investigations do not represent the groundwater flow

characteristics when the Production Wells were active (pre-1979)

The RI investigations to date identified two aquifers a water

table aquifer and a semi-confined bedrock aquifer The two

aquifers were bounded on the bottom and top respectively by a till

aquitard

W92224D 2-18

DRAFT

There are various hydrogeologic characteristics of the study area

o Two principal aquifers the water table and bedrock

aquifers have been delineated within the study area In

addition to a shallow bedrock aquifer data indicates

that a deep bedrock aquifer may also be present

o Lateral contaminant migration pathways exist in both

water table and the bedrock aquifers

o Groundwater flow in the water table aquifer is generally

to the east (Quinnipiac River) and southeast (Town well

field) of the Operations Area

o Groundwater in the shallow bedrock aquifer flows radially

away from the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac

River and the Town well field

o Both the fractured siltstone beds and the diabase dike in

the bedrock may serve as preferential pathways for

groundwater flow

o The lack of basal till at several study area locations

may allow contaminated groundwater to migrate between the

water table and bedrock aquifers

W92224D 2-19

DRAFT

o Upward and downward vertical hydraulic groundwater

gradients between the bedrock and the water table aquifer

have been observed in several study area well clusters

o The observed changes in vertical hydraulic gradients at

different times of year are likely the result of seasonal

precipitation events and increases in groundwater

recharge Contaminated groundwater may therefore be

communicated between aquifers depending on the time of

year

o The On-site Interceptor System exerts an influence on the

local groundwater flow in the water table aquifer

233 Nature and Extent of Contamination

This section describes the nature and extent of soils contamination

within the Operations Area and groundwater contamination within

and in close proximity to the Operations Area This section

summarizes what is known to date from the RI investigations For

a more detailed analysis of the site contamination refer to the

Phase 2 Technical Memorandum Remedial InvestigationFeasibility

Study (HNUS June 1992)

W92224D 2-20

DRAFT

2331 Soil Contamination

During the RI investigations soil samples were collected and

analyzed to determine the presence of organic and inorganic

contaminants at the Operations Area A review of the results to

date indicates that

o The Operations Area soils are typically contaminated with

an assortment of VOCs SVOCs PCBs and metals The

contamination is the result of past disposal and

operating practices

o The locations within the Operations Area with the highest

detected soil VOC contaminant levels are next to or are

in areas where spent solvents were stored handled or

processed Elevated levels of total VOCs primarily

chlorinated solvents and aromatics were found at most

locations within the Operations Area including the

locations of both former lagoons the former open pit

incinerator the drum processing area adjacent to the

operations building and the former spent solvent

distillation unit and just downgradient (east) of the

tank farm

W92224D 2-21

DRAFT

o Soils with elevated SVOC concentrations were found

adjacent to the former lagoons the process area and the

open pit VOCs in the Operations Area soils were

generally accompanied by SVOCS

o Soils with elevated PCB concentrations were found

adjacent to the operations building the former lagoons

and the open pit

o Two areas with comparatively elevated inorganics

contamination were identified the former open pit and

adjacent to the process area

Table 2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in soils

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

Figure 2-5 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in soils within the Operations Area More detailed

summary tables of the Operations Area soil sampling results by

boring location and a figure indicating those locations are

presented in Appendix A

W92224D 2-22

T A B L E 2 - 1 DRAFT RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS

PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

C T D H S STDS (utf l )

2

1000

7

1

200 5

5 5

I

10 5

1000

MCL

2

7

100 70

5

200 5

5 5

5

5

1000 700 100

10000

VOLATILE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS

Methylene Chloride Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Acetone 2 - Butanone Carbon Disulfide 11-Dichloroethene 11 - Dichloroethane

U-Dlchloroethenc (TOTAL) transmdash12-dichloroethene cis-l2-Dichlorocthene Chloroform 12-Dichlorocthane

111-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate

12mdashDichloropropane Trichloroethene 112 -Trichloroethane Benzene 2-Hexanone 4-Methvl-2-penianone trans-l3-Dichloropropene Tetrachloroethene 1112-Tetrachlorocthane Toluene Ethylbenzene Styrene Xylene (total) Isopropyl benzene n-propylbenzene 135 -Trimethylbenzene 124-Trimethyl benzene

12 Dibromo 3-Chloropropane

SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW | MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

ueke ueI ue1 uitl 8600J

360 J SJ 6201 SJF 8 J SF smiamsmshy100 + llOOJ 2 J 9500 J R R R R

22 38000 R R R R R R R R

430 J 1300 3 2 0 3 S F 15000 J S F bullimrsFii imaamF 325 790 J 290 J 5500 J 945 J 940J

9 79000 J 08 J

2 5 0 0 J F 110000 J F 275J F 5300J F 680J

940J SF bull - bull i 3 j s - -

275 J + 690000 78000 J SF 240000 J S F 17000 J SE 32000OJ SF 290J SF 9100 J SF 6 9 J J SE 2000J SJf

4J

220 J 07 J 146J + 800000 26000 J SF 300003 SF 14 J SF 41000J SK 910 J 2900 47 J

255 J + 650 J 610J SF ^bulliiimms-shyllOOJ 7900 J R R R R 410 J 130000J 22000 J 225 2100 J

3903 S 200 J 440000 2000 J SF 46 J 64003 SE

183 6 1700000 J 81000 J SF 1500003 S f 21 3800000 870 J F 60000J F 51J 7403 F

12000 2500000 49000J F 97 J 35 760000 4353

1200J 13 083

13

950 J 26 J 7103

R

Notes

(+) The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards bullbull Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-23

TABLE 2-1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 2

DRAFT

CTDHS MCLi SEMIVOLATILE SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW I BEDROCK GW I STDS (bulllaquofl) COMPOUND MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX (bulllaquofl) bullgklaquo bullgkg bullgA bullgn bullgfl -grt

PHENOL 180 J 680J 22 4200 14 600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 2J

75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10 600 12-DICHLOROBENZENE ISOJ 30

2-METHYLPHENOL 170 J 420 J 14 83 12 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 260J 280J 14 100 4J 13 ISOPHORONE 220J 700 J 8J 2J 9J BENZOIC ACID 870 J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 7J 11 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE no J 530 J NAPHTHALENE 140 J 3300 J 3J 44 2J 3J 4-CHLORANIUNE 940 J 1900 J 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 2800J 16 2 - METH YLNAPHTHALENE 200J 2000J 3J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 73 J 74 J 2J 17 3-NITROANILINE R R ACENAPHTHENE 170 J DIBENZOFURAN 110 J 24-DlNITROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHALATE 140 J 1600 J 2J 5 4-NITROANILlNE R R FLUORENE 69 J 160 J PHENANTHRENE 130 J 119$ J + IOJ ANTHRACENE 64J 190 J DI-N - BUTYLPHTHALATE S3 J S700J I J 52 J 3J FLUORANTHENE 61 J 470 J PYRENE 48J 270 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 100 J 8600J 9J 63 J BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130 J CHRYSENE 89 J 220J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 200J + 120000 J 11000

I DI shy N shy OCTYLPHTHALATE 580 J 1450 J + 26 J

CTDHS MCLi PESTICIDESPCB SUBSURFACE SOIL | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW I STDS (bullgfl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX MIN MAX MIN MAX

OKI) bullJtklt bullgkg bullRl bullg1 bullgl bullgl AROCLOR 1016 27 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 +

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 380J 13000 J 13 SF

1 05 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 9700 J 85 SF

Notes

( + ) = The sample was averaged wilh its duplicate = Value was rejected = Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards = Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-24

DRAFT TABLE 2 -1 (continued) RANGE OF DETECTED CONTAMINANTS PHASE 2 SAMPLING 1991 OPERATIONS AREA SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT Page 3

C T D H S MCLi INORGANIC SUBSURFACE SOILS | OVERBURDEN GW | BEDROCK GW |

STDS (bullgl) COMPOUNDS MIN MAX FILTERED MIN MAX MIN MAX

(bullgl) bullg kg -gkg SAMPLE P - 4 B bullgl bullgl bullgl bullgl ALUMINUM 3150 10400 + 356 12200 51700 906 71300 ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 050 J 54 20 J 50 210 40 J 80 J 1000 2000 BARIUM 341 J 1480 280 604 3510 J SF 106 ^269eJSFfshy

BERYLLIUM 032 J 085 11 J 54 J 19 J 85 J 5 5 CADMIUM 417 389 26 J 769 SF 425 J

CALCIUM 631 J 9410-1shy 65100 37100 349000 41850 J 140000 50 100 CHROMIUM 72 183 512 S U11SF bull 114J SF rfampSiF

COBALT 29 99 524 196 140 104 267 J J 1000 1300 COPPER 50 104 J 104 441 J 324 56 imi SF

IRON 3980 13700 7350 39100 84400 1930 99850 J 1$ 15 LEAD 53 J 1750 J 280 J SF 175 SF 53 bull -scim-sF^i

MAGNESIUM 1140J 5330 3360 9540 25700 1490 33400 5000 MANGANESE 752 J 440 J 6720 S 7610 S 37200 S 455 4000 J

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 57 199 324 J 843 101 1022 J POTASSIUM 433 J 2250 5940 14000 J 12465 J 19600 J

10 50 SELENIUM 17 + 373 J 20000 SODIUM 699 4115-f 12600 10100 105000 J S 6320 16910 J

VANADIUM 101 J 309 381 J 114 328 152 ZINC 192 J 171 J 476 J 662 151 393 J 893

DIOXINSFURANS SUBSURFACE SOILS

COMPOUND MIN MAX

bullgkg bullgkg 2 37 8 - TCDD Equivalents 001 030

Notes

( + ) The sample was averaged with its duplicate = Value was rejected Medium level sample = Exceeds Connecticut DHS Standards Value is estimated = Exceeds Federal MCLs

W92224D 2-25

vo

Ngt rsgt

a reg

to

N

^laquo I ICHtV

reg SOIL SAUPIING LOCATIOM shy MUS PHASE 2 1 t9 l

SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION shy CPA TAT 1

B-9

1344400

bull bull bull

( T ) mdash -

mdash SAMPLE LOCATION IDENTIFIER

mdash TOTAL voca IN SOa ( U Q A B )

ESnwAlEO AREA Of SOIL CONTAMINAIKM

EIL POINT OR CHAUBOI

NOTE All LOCAHONS ARpound APPROXIMATE FOUR CPA TAT SAHPtC LOCAltONS (1SB8) ARC iNauoro IN AREAS MOT SAMPIEO BY NUS IN I M I

FIGURE 2-5 TOTAL VOCs IN SOIL OPERATIONS AREA 1991

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

60 120

3SCALE IN FEET ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

O

i 1 I 1 I f l l l l l f l l l l l l l l i l l l f l l l i l l l i i

DRAFT

2332 Groundwater Contamination

The RI investigations to date have provided information on the

contaminant presence and distribution in the water table and

bedrock aquifers The observed contamination pattern is based on

the current non-pumping conditions of Wells Nos 4 and 6 Table

2-1 presents the range of contaminants detected in groundwater

within the Operations Area subdivided into categories of

contaminants (VOCs SVOCs Pesticides and PCBs and Inorganics)

The water table and bedrock aquifers are presented separately

Figure 2-6 presents the approximate extent of total VOC

contamination in the overburden aquifer Figure 2-7 presents the

approximate extent of total VOC contamination in the bedrock

aquifer More detailed summary tables of the Operations Area

groundwater sampling results are presented in Appendix B

Water Table Aquifer

For the overburden aquifer information to date indicates that

o VOC contaminants in groundwater are migrating away from

the Operations Area towards the Quinnipiac River and Town

well field The highest concentration of VOCs was

detected in Operations Area groundwater samples

V

W92224D 2-27

o ro ro

regro bull 1 ^ O

- mdashshyraquolaquo RWr Of WAY

IO I

IO 00

^ M W - 1 2 3 C asoJ

M W - 7 A ^JO

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

oFIGURE 2-6 TOTAL VOCs IN OVERBURDEN AQUIFER

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

P I- 1 f i l l f l I I I I i i I I I I f l l i I I i i 1 f 1

DRAFT

lt in

hshyD g1shy

az oin u UJ zD zo o

z^9 1 Q 5

IGU

RE

2

IN B

EDR

O

UTH

INi

U 0) O

sect - J

i O K

w Il l

W

d z^ UJ zwtr CO

W92224D 2-29

DRAFT

o At the Operations Area the highest levels of VOCs and

SVOCs in groundwater were detected primarily near the

former secondary lagoon and the tank farm The On-Site

Interceptor System) OIS may be limiting dispersion of

contaminants by inducing groundwater flow toward one

primary extraction well

o PCBs were detected in groundwater samples collected from

the P-IA and B well cluster in the Operations Area The

presence of numerous solvents and some surfactants may

have caused the PCBs to partition to the aqueous phase

o Groundwater contaminants observed at the Operations Area

and at downgradient locations have been identified by

SRSNE in NPDES reports and in the list of chemicals the

facility typically handled

o Contaminated groundwater with elevated concentrations of

VOCs and SVOCs appears to flow east from the Operations

Area to the Quinnipiac River along a limited path

o Groundwater contamination from the water table aquifer

appears to enter the shallow bedrock aquifer through the

till window present in the Operations Area The vertical

gradients observed support this conclusion

W92224D 2-30

DRAFT

o The presence of non-aqueous phase liquids may allow

transport of VOC contaminants in directions other than

that of groundwater flow

Bedrock Aquifer

For the bedrock aquifer information collected to date indicates

that

o VOC contaminants have been identified in all shallow

bedrock wells downgradient of the Operations Area

indicating that contaminant migration is pervasive in the

bedrock aquifer

o The shallow bedrock is more contaminated by VOCs than the

deep bedrock Vertical gradients indicate the potential

for contaminant penetration to deeper fractures from the

shallow bedrock The presence of VOCs in both the

shallow and deep bedrock supports this conclusion The

extent of contamination in the deep bedrock is unknown

because of the limited data available

o Contaminated groundwater at the Operations Area appears

to enter the shallow bedrock through a till window

adjacent to the tank farm and process area

W92224D 2-31

DRAFT

o Contaminated groundwater can migrate a substantial

distance downgradient in the fractured bedrock At some

well locations where the till is absent groundwater in

the shallow bedrock well is more contaminated by VOCs

than the corresponding overburden well

o Bedrock wells immediately upgradient (west) of the

Operations Area have low levels of VOC contamination

The presence of VOCs may have occurred because of some

other transport mechanism such as diffusion

W92224D 2-32

30

DRAFT

SCOPE OF THE RAPID REMEDIAL ACTION SUPPORT

An Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis will be prepared using

data developed from previous RI work and from preliminary risk

assessment and groundwater evaluations The EECA work assignment

will encompass a total of eight tasks Community relations (Task

0200) and administrative record (Task 1600) support are required as

part of the EECA process and are discussed in Section 40 of this

work plan The remaining EECA evaluation and report preparation

tasks include

o Task 0100 - Project Planning

o Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

o Task 0600 - Contaminants Assessment

o Task 1000 - Rapid Remedial Alternatives Evaluation

o Task 1100 - EECA Report

o Task 1200 - Post EECA Support

The overall objective of the EECA is to develop and evaluate rapid

remedial action alternatives that will lead to the fulfillment of

the remedial action objectives described in Section 10 of this

Work Plan For purposes of this Work Plan a rapid remedial action

is equivalent to a removal action for which a planning period of at

least six months exists before on-site activities must be

W92224D 3-1

31

DRAFT

initiated consistent with subpart E of the NCP (40 CFR Part

300415(b)(4))

The following sections provide technical discussions regarding the

components of each EECA task Task numbers coincide with the

standardized tasks defined in the EPA RIFS guidance

Task 0100 - Project Planning

This task will include attending a scoping meeting reviewing

existing information and guidances identifying the scope of the

EECA preparing the Work Plan and Detailed Cost Estimate and

reporting to EPA on the progress of the work Because no field

work is anticipated under this work assignment preparation of

amended Sampling and Analysis (SAP) and Health and Safety (HASP)

Plans will not be included in this work plan If EPA requests

field implementation in the future then an amended work plan will

subsequently be prepared which will include preparation of an

amended SAP and HASP

The Work Plan provides an overview of the technical project

management and scheduling aspects for the EECA A scoping

meeting was held with EPA on June 4 1992 to discuss significant

issues for the EECA It is anticipated that up to five additional

progress or planning meetings with EPA may be required

W92224D 3-2

DRAFT

This task also includes preparation of monthly progress reports

which will include a narrative description of the status of each

task as well as a financial summary

311 Work Plan and Cost Estimate Preparation

This Work Plan presents a summary of information for the SRSNE site

including a site description potential sources of contamination

on-site objectives of the EECA the scope of the EECA the

project management approach and a project schedule The Work Plan

provides an overview of how the project will be managed and the

types of activities to be conducted The detailed Cost Estimate

will present the Level of Effort hours and costs (including Other

Direct Costs and subcontractor services) required to implement the

Work Plan It is anticipated that EPA will review and prepare

comments within two weeks of receipt of the draft Work Plan After

receipt of the comments HNUS will prepare a Final Work Plan and

Cost Estimate

Up to ten copies of the draft and final versions of the Work Plan

and three copies (draft and final) of the Cost Estimates will be

provided to EPA

W92224D 3-3

32

DRAFT

Task 0500 - Dewatering Evaluation

A groundwater flow model will be prepared using the USGS MODFLOW

computer model The model will be constructed using data gathered

during the Phase 2 site investigation and from previous

investigations

The model will consist of three layers The first layer will

represent the water table aquifer the second will represent the

glacial till unit and the third layer will represent the upper

fractured bedrock Hydraulic values measured during the prior RI

site investigations will be assigned to their respective layers

The majority of the data collected during the prior investigations

was collected to the east and downgradient of the Operations Area

Because of this the hydrogeologic conditions west of the

Operations Area must be approximated based upon the available data

The hydraulic values assigned to this area will be adjusted within

appropriate limits until the model recreates the measured August

1991 groundwater flow conditions within the Operations Area

A sensitivity analysis will be performed on these assumptions for

model input west of the Operations Area

W92224D 3-4

DRAFT

The model will then be used todetermine the pumping rate number

of wells and well spacing for a dewatering system The objective

of the dewatering system will be to maintain the groundwater

elevation at or below the top of the till or bedrock within the

Operations Area Capital and operating costs of the dewatering

system will be estimated

As part of the conceptual design of the dewatering system the

pumping rate will be determined for three groundwater scenarios

The first is the observed conditions of August 1991 The second is

the October 1991 condition The third condition is one that would

result in the breakout of groundwater at the toe of the slope along

the west boundary of the Operations Area This final scenario is

believed to represent the worst condition and therefore the highest

required pumping rate

The model will also be used to assess the viability of two

implementation options The first option is the use of an

upgradient interceptor trench west of the Operations Area This

trench may be useful in controlling the groundwater elevations

within the Operations Area by intercepting groundwater before it

enters the Operations Area This interception of clean water would

reduce the volume of groundwater requiring treatment The second

option is to dewater the Operations Area in stages (eg successive

W92224D 3-5

33

DRAFT

5 foot depthintervals) to allow a phased implementation of soils

treatment

Finally the model will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of

the existing On-site Interceptor System (OIS) This evaluation

will determine if the existing system can be utilized as a

component of the dewatering system It will also evaluate the

usefulness of continued operation of the OIS during Operations Area

dewatering

At the conclusion of the groundwater data evaluation an interim

report will be prepared The results of the computer analysis will

be presented including the three flow scenarios and the two

implementation options The interim report will describe the

conceptual design of the dewatering system and projected associated

costs It will also identify site access considerations for

installing structures for dewatering and monitoring A total of

three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

Task 0600 - Contaminant Assessment

A limited evaluation of soil and groundwater contaminants will be

required for the EECA process Contaminants of concern and

removed cleanup levels will be defined for both the dewatering and

soil treatment segments of the rapid remedial action These

W92224D 3-6

DRAFT

removalcleanup levels will consist of- media-specific goals for

protecting human health and the environment Removal cleanup

levels for soils will be developed based on a short-term

(preliminary) soils risk assessment which will consider

contaminants of concern (VOCs only) and exposure routes and

receptors

The contaminated occurrence and distribution will be reviewed and

chemicals of concern (COCs) selected for the development of removal

clan-up goals for the Operations Area soils The following factors

will be considered in the chemical of concern selection process

o Contaminant concentration in the soils

o Frequency of detection

o Chemical fate and transport (eg chemical volatility

vapor pressure Henrys Law Constant)

o Toxicity

The concentration-toxicity screen (CT-screen) presented in the EPA

Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A) will be used in the COC selection

process The objective of CT-screen is to identify chemicals in a

particular medium that based on concentrations and toxicity are

most likely to contribute significantly to risks calculated for

exposure scenarios involving that medium so that the risk

W92224D 3-7

DRAFT

assessment is focused on the most significant chemicals

The human exposure scenarios for the preliminary risk analysis will

include

Incidental ingestion of soils by onsite workers

Dermal contact with soils by onsite workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by onsite

workers

Inhalation of Soil ParticulatesVapors by downwind

residents

Potentially acceptable removal cleanup levels ie levels which

will make the soil safe to excavate and handle during subsequent

remedial actions will be proposed based on the results of this

preliminary soils risk assessment

Removal cleanup levels for groundwater will be developed based on

chemical- and location-specific ARARs and other appropriate risk-

based levels For example effluent discharge limits and

requirements may include the Ambient Water Quality Criteria and the

current SRSNE NPDES permit limits EPA will consult with the CT

DEP and provide further direction to HNUS on developing the

groundwater removal cleanup levels

W92224D 3-8

34

DRAFT

At the conclusion of the contaminant assessment an interim report

will be prepared The results of the short-term (preliminary)

soils risk assessment will be presented The interim report will

also describe the ARARs evaluation for determining the groundwater

removal cleanup levels Included in the interim report will be two

tables one indicating the interim soil chemicals of concern and

the proposed soils removal cleanup levels and the other indicating

the interim groundwater chemicals of concern and proposed

groundwater removal cleanup levels These two tables will need to

be finalized before the rapid remedial action alternatives

evaluation can be concluded As many as four meetings with EPA may

be needed for this task

Task 1000 - Technical Evaluations of Alternatives

The EECA will use data collected during the prior RI field

investigations and the results of the contaminant assessment to

identify a short list of applicable remedial technologies

formulate rapid remedial action alternatives and evaluate these

alternatives for effectiveness implementability and cost The

alternatives will also be examined to determine whether they

contribute to the efficient performance of any anticipated long

term remedial action and comply with Applicable or Relevant and

Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) to the extent practicable

W92224D 3-9

DRAFT

The technical evaluation will be subdivided by media into the

following two subtasks

o Soil Remediation Evaluation

o GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

These tasks are described in more detail in the following sections

As many as four meetings with EPA may be required to complete this

task

341 Soil Remediation Evaluation

The selection of soil remediation technologies available for the

rapid remedial action is limited to in-situ treatment processes

The short list of in-situ technologies to be considered as given

in the SOW and discussed at the scoping meeting of June 4 1992

includes vapor extraction and thermal desorption in conjunction

with vapor extraction Soil flushing will also be considered if

the results of the evaluation indicate that dewatering the

Operations Area or implementing vapor extraction is impracticable

HNUS will incorporate the technology screening treatability results

developed by EPA ORD Cincinnati Ohio if available in a timely

manner Additional in-situ technologies may be identified by HNUS

and added to the EECA process at the request of the RPM

W92224D 3-10

DRAFT

A conceptual design will be described for each alternative in

sufficient detail to include the location of areas to be treated

approximate volumes of soil to be addressed and potential

locations for required treatment facilities and structures The

definition of each alternative may include preliminary design

calculations process flow diagrams sizing of key components

preliminary site layouts and potential sampling and analysis

requirements For the conceptual design of the vapor extraction

alternative HNUS will consider the description provided by EPA

RSKRL Ada Oklahoma

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will be

performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

W92224D 3-11

DRAFT

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions are effectiveness implementability and

cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative to

achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long term

remedial action will also be considered

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for VOCs in

soils based on making the soils safe to handle during

implementation of the long term remedial action The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) will be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- chemical- and location-specific ARARs will be

evaluated Each alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not

attained The actual determination of which ARARs are requirements

to be achieved to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

W92224D 3-12

H ^

DRAFT

The soil treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively examined

to determine the extent to which they contribute to the efficient

performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to

shorten the duration improve the implementability or reduce the

risks of subsequent soil remedial actions

342 GroundwaterVapor Remediation Evaluation

A preliminary list of applicable technologies for groundwater

remediation at the SRSNE site will be identified based on

information gathered during previous investigations at the site

area The technology types to be used alone or in combination will

be evaluated for applicability to treating both the groundwater

extracted during dewatering and the vapors produced during

treatment of soil

The treatment technologies will then be assembled into a limited

number of rapid remedial action alternatives The temporary

UVoxidation treatment to be installed by CT DEP will be considered

as one of the alternatives A conceptual design will be described

for each alternative in sufficient detail to include the location

of groundwater to be treated or contained approximate volumes of

groundwater to be addressed and potential locations for

interceptor trenches or discharges to surface water The definition

W92224D 3-13

DRAFT

of each alternative may include preliminary design calculations

process flow diagrams sizing of key components preliminary site

layouts and potential sampling and analysis requirements All of

the water treatment alternatives will be appropriately sized to

handle the quantity of water predicted by the dewatering

evaluation

A detailed analysis of rapid remedial action alternatives will then

be performed and will consist of

o A discussion of limitations assumptions and

uncertainties concerning each alternative

o Assessment and summary of each alternative against

evaluation criteria

o Comparative analysis among alternatives to assess the

performance of an alternative relative to each evaluation

criterion

The three primary evaluation criteria developed for non-time

critical removal actions will be effectiveness implementability

and cost Two additional criteria the ability of the alternative

to achieve ARARs and to contribute to the performance of the long

term remedial action will also be considered

W92224D 3-14

DRAFT

The effectiveness evaluation will address the extent to which the

completed action can achieve the interim cleanup levels for the

contaminants of concern in groundwater based on making the

treatment effluent achieve ARARs for discharge to the river The

implementability evaluation will consider the availability and the

technical and administrative feasibility of the alternative Total

costs of each alternative will be estimated Treatment system

operating costs will be limited to the period up until either

interim cleanup levels in soil are achieved or the long terra

remedial action is initiated For planning purposes this is

assumed to be April 1996

In addition to the chemical-specific ARARs incorporated into

establishing the interim cleanup levels ARARs will also be

considered during the detailed evaluation of alternatives

Alternatives will be assessed on whether they attain ARARs or other

federal and state environmental and public health laws Compliance

with action- and location-specific ARARs will be evaluated Each

alternative will specify how ARARs are or are not attained The

actual determination of which ARARs are requirements to be achieved

to the extent practicable will be made by the EPA

The groundwater treatment alternatives will also be qualitatively

examined to determine the extent to which they contribute to the

efficient performance of any anticipated long term remedial action

W92224D 3-15

DRAFT

Consideration will be given to each alternatives ability to serve

as or be incorporated into subsequent remedial actions

35 Task 1100 - Engineering EvaluationCost Analysis Report

A report will be prepared presenting the results of the Engineering

Evaluation and Cost Analysis The EECA Report will discuss the

removal objectives and alternatives considered Each alternative

will be described along with a detailed analysis of how each

addresses the evaluation criteria identified previously

The report will provide a comparative evaluation of all

alternatives in a summary table which highlights findings from the

detailed analysis The purpose of the comparative analysis is to

identify the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and

to identify key tradeoffs to be evaluated by EPA The format for

the EECA Report is presented in Table 3-1 As many as four

meetings with EPA may be required to complete this task

36 Task 1200 - Post-EECA Support

After the completion of the EECA and publication of the EECA

Report HNUS will assist EPA in preparing design specifications and

drawings for the selected rapid remedial (removal) action During

W92224D 3-16

DRAFT

TABLE 3-1

EECA REPORT OUTLINE

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A Site Description B Site Background C Analytical Data D Conditions for the Removal Action

III REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES A Mass Removal of Contaminants B Control of Off-site Migration C Statutory Considerations D Scope and Schedule

IV IDENTIFICATION OF REMOVAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES A Soils Treatment Alternatives B Groundwater Treatment Alternatives

V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A Effectiveness B Implementability C Cost D Attainment of ARARs E Contribution to Long Term Action

VI COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

VII PROPOSED REMOVAL ACTION

W92224D 3-17

DRAFT

this Work Assignment HNUS will prepare and submit a draft final

(90) and final design (100) reports

361 Draft Final Design Report (90)

The Draft Final Design will provide a description of the soil

treatment and groundwater extraction systems groundwater and

vapor treatment systems and discharge conveyance systems The

Draft Final Design will encompass approximately 90 of the total

design effort and a submittal (10 copies) will be forwarded to

the EPA Work Assignment Manager for review and approval

The documents that will be prepared and included in this design

report will include the following

o Introduction

o Basis of Design

Identification of design issues and

uncertainties

A presentation of appropriate waste stream

analytical data including drawings depicting

existing site conditions (physical and

chemical)

W92224D 3-18

DRAFT

Assessment of applicable FederalState

regulations

Technology selection

o Draft final design site construction plans (including

well and equipment and utility citing) flow diagrams

and Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (PID)

o Design analysis including calculations (hydrogeologic

process and civil)

o Technical performance specifications

o Technical construction specifications

o Construction schedule including a suggested sequencing

o Site and remedial system monitoring requirements

o Plant OampM requirements

o A site specific Health and Safety Plan to be

implemented during construction

^ ^ m i t f 0 f

W92224D 3-19

DRAFT

o An assessmentstatement of applicable Federal and State

regulations and permits required to perform the work

o A Bid Form specific to the work to be performed

o Estimated construction cost (+20 to -15)

o Project Delivery Strategy

o Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study) to

assess variable system operating conditions

As many as four meetings will be held with EPA prior to submittal

to discuss the intended design and scope of the construction

project The intent of these meetings is to minimize potential

revisions required by comments received after the initial

submittal and to expedite submittal of the 100 design report

As many as two meetings will be held with EPA after the submittal

of the 90 design report to discuss EPA comments

W92224D 3-20

DRAFT

362 Final Design (100)

The Final Design Report will revise and complete all deliverables

and will address 100 of the remedial design It is assumed that

the 100 submittal (10 copies) will be provided to EPA within 30

calendar days from receipt of EPA 90 design comments

Deliverables for the 100 design will include

o Final design plans and specifications in reproducible

format (ie mylar or velum drawings hard copy

documents and magnetic media)

o Final technical bid documents

o Final construction schedule

o Final cost estimates

o Identification of additional design

issuesuncertainties including potential long-lead

procurement items

o Final Health and Safety Plan for the remedial action

W92224D 3-21

DRAFT

o Final Plant Operation and Monitoring Plan (Pilot Study)

to assess variable system operating conditions

One meeting will be held with EPA after submittal of the 100

design report

363 Rapid Remedial Action Implementation

This Work Plan does not address activities by HNUS which may be

required for implementation of the removal action

Implementation activities may include

o solicitation and procurement of subcontractor(s)

o subcontractor oversight

o construction quality control

o monitoring

o operation and maintenance

Further description of these implementation tasks and their

respective costs will be provided through amendment to the EPA

Statement of Work and subsequent Work Plan Amendments

W92224D 3-22

DRAFT

40 COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

Section 415 of the NCP provides for an environmental review and

public participation component to removal actions for which a

planning period of at least six months exists These components

include an establishment of an EECA administrative record and a

public comment period to be held prior to a decision on initiation

of the removal action as well as a response to the public

comments HNUS will assist EPA in these components of the EECA

process A more detailed description of the community relations

and administrative record tasks follows

41 Task 0200 - Community Relations

As specified in the EPA Statement of Work HNUS will provide

additional Community Relations Support during the rapid remedial

(non-time-critical removal) actions These activities are

described as follows

411 Task 0210 - Update the Community Relations Plan

At the direction of EPA HNUS will assist in revising the existing

Community Relations Plan (CRP) to address changes in community

concerns and particular concerns anticipated during the EECA

W92224D 4-1

DRAFT

HNUS may conduct on-site interviews with the interested and

affected residents to ascertain changes in community concerns The

revised CRP may also evaluate which community relations techniques

have been effective and should be continued and recommend

activities to address the rapid remedial action HNUS will provide

draft and draft final copies of the revised CRP to the EPA RPM and

the EPA Superfund Community Relations Coordinator (CRC) Six

copies of the final document will be provided to EPA

One revision of the CRP two meetings with EPA and one trip to the

site area are anticipated for this task

412 Task 0220 - Provide Public Meeting Support

HNUS will provide support for the public informational meeting on

the draft EECA Public meeting support will include attending a

planning meeting with EPA coordinating meeting logistics

preparing audio-visual material attending a dry-run preparing

a list of tough questions attending the informational meeting and

preparing a draft and final meeting summary

A total of two meetings with EPA and one trip to the site area are

anticipated for this task

W92224D 4-2

DRAFT

413 Task 0230 - Prepare a Fact Sheet

HNUS will provide a draft draft final and final version of up to

four fact sheets The first will summarize the EECA The second

third and fourth fact sheets will discuss the progress of the

EECA The documents will be written in accordance with the EPA

Region I format As needed graphics in support of the fact sheet

may be developed HNUS will provide EPA with up to 2000 copies of

the fact sheet for distribution to the site mailing list

A total of four meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

414 Task 0250 - Provide Public Hearing Support

HNUS will obtain a location for and arrange for stenographic

support at the public hearing HNUS will coordinate the inclusion

of EPAs corrections to the draft to ensure the final transcript is

an accurate reflection of the hearing proceedings

One meeting with EPA is anticipated for this task

415 Task 0260 - Publish Public Notices

HNUS will prepare and coordinate publication of two public notices

to appear in up to six local newspapers The first notice will

W92224D 4-3

DRAFT

announce the availability of the draft EECA for public review and

comment The notice will identify the date time and location of

both the public meeting and the public hearing and will announce

the public comment period A press release with this information

will also be prepared at EPAs request The second notice will

announce the selection of the EECA and its schedule HNUS will

prepare a draft and final version of the notices and the press

release Two tear sheets of each copy of the notices will be

submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Administrative Record and

Information Repository

Two meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

416 Task 0270 - Maintain Information Repositories

HNUS will assist EPA in assuring that the public information

repository is fully stocked with EECA-related documents

One meeting with EPA and two trips to the information repository

are anticipated for this task

417 Task 0290 - Prepare a Responsiveness Summary

HNUS will assist EPA in preparing a Responsiveness Summary that

accurately characterizes written and oral comments on the draft

W92224D 4-4

DRAFT

EECA and responds clearly to each characterization HNUS will

prepare three draft versions and a final Responsiveness Summary

Three meetings with EPA are anticipated for this task

42 Task 1600 - Administrative Record

HNUS will prepare and compile the EECA Administrative Record The

Administrative Record is a subset of the site file containing

documents that relate to public involvement and the selection of

the rapid remedial action The Administrative Record supports the

Action Memorandum which is tentatively scheduled for December

1992 HNUS will coordinate all Administrative Record activities

with the Task Manager Brenda Haslett the Work Assignment Manager

for Task 1600 EPA will provide HNUS with an index of the site

file when that index is available

HNUS will contact the Task Manager as required to discuss progress

HNUS will also ensure that EPA retains the diskette(s) containing

the indexes of the EECA Administrative Record and other relevant

materials HNUS anticipates subcontracting much of the

administrative records support work HNUS or its subcontractor will

perform the following Administrative Record subtasks

W92224D 4-5

DRAFT

Compile Administrative Record

Subtask 1 - Meet with the RPM the Site attorney and the Task

Manager to discuss Administrative Record procedures and the

schedule HNUS will prepare a schedule subsequent to the meeting

The EECA Administrative Record will be delivered to the

information repositories at the same time the final EECA Report is

made public

Subtask 2 - Assist the site team in compiling documents comprising

the EECA Administrative Record File (Refer to Selecting

Documents for Region I Superfund Site Administrative Records

Version 20 dated September 14 1988)

Subtask 3 - Prepare a draft index for the EECA Administrative

Record (Refer to Citation Formats for Region I Superfund NPL and

Superfund Removal File Administrative Record Indexes Version 30

dated October 18 1988) The site team will have ten working days

to review the draft index and to provide comments and changes to

HNUS After concurrence by the site team on the Administrative

Record File contents and draft index the final index will be

prepared

W92224D 4-6

DRAFT

Subtask 4 - Coordinate the duplication of the EECA Administrative

Record documents by consulting with Work Assignment Manager or

Records Center Manager on whether to use GSA printing services or

in-house copying resources

Subtask 5 - Assemble two copies of the EECA Administrative Record

and Index into binders (Refer to Binder Specifications for NPL

site Administrative Records and Indexes in Region I Version 10

dated March 16 1988) HNUS will supply the binders divider pages

and labels Both bound copies of the Administrative Record will be

returned to the Records Center

W92224D 4-7

DRAFT

50 PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

This section describes the major and interim deliverables

anticipated during the course of the EECA process The schedule

for these deliverables is also provided

51 Major Deliverables

The following major deliverables are projected during

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in draft for EPA comment and in final form

unless otherwise noted

EECA Work Plan

Draft EECA Report

Draft Final EECA Report (published for public comment)

Final EECA Report amp Responsiveness Summary

Draft Final Design Report

Final Design

Revised Community Relations Plan

Community Relations Fact Sheet(s)

W92224D 5-1

DRAFT

52 Interim Deliverables

The following interim deliverables are projected during the

implementation of this work assignment Each of these documents

will be submitted in a technical memorandum format EPA approval

of the interim deliverables will be required before subsequent work

on the pertinent sections of the EECA analysis can proceed

Dewatering Evaluation Interim Report

Contaminant Assessment Interim Report

53 Project Schedule

The Project Schedule (Figure 5-1) shows the tasks and activities

for the SRSNE EECA The schedule begins upon concurrence with and

approval of the Work Plan by EPA At that time the schedule will

be revised so that actual dates replace the proposed dates The

schedule allows four weeks for EPA to review each submittal The

schedule also allows three weeks from receipt of EPA comments for

resubmittal of final or draft final documents

W92224D 5-2

f i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i I I I I i l i i i l I I I I I i

I M mr Hftvi JUM I JUL I Mt r ^ gp I ncr i MAV I m I M I m i m i m i WM I M I JUL I M ^ I ggp i DCT I NOV I DEC

T )1Q0 PROJECT PLftNNING

bullDELIVER DRAFT WORK PLAN

p2Q0 COMMUNITY RELflTIDNS SUPPORT

bullDELIVER REVISED CRP

bull DELIVER FIRST Ff CT SHEET

bullDELIVER RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARr

g yC^ DEWftTERING EVALUATION

bullDELIVER DEWATERING INTERIM REPORT

m o CON [AM IN ANT ASSESSMENT

bullDELIVER CONTAMINANT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT

1QQQ AITERNATIVF^ EVALUATION

I UOO PREPARE EECA REPORTl S)

bullDELIVER DRAFT EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT FINAL EECA REPORT

bullDELIVER FINAL EECA REPORT

1200 POST EECA SUPPORT

bullDELIVER DRAFT DESIGN REPORT

bull DELIVER FINAL DESIGN

1600 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUPPORT

bullDELIVER EECA ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD O

Sheet 1 of 1I I laquoLtiraquoitraquo Blaquo- Ei r l raquolt tn SRSNE INC W A NO 3 0 - 1 R 0 8 bull ^

C S S S S S S Cri t ical A c t i f i t X ittstia ^ m H Z D Progmc Bar EECA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FIGURE 5-1 Project Star IWYC Data Date2BJUNltl2

Priiiavera SyEtens [nc i w - i ^ v Project Finisn lOCTW Plot Pate asjuHqa

iiuH

DRAFT

60 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The overall project management and control of the EECA for the

SRSNE site is discussed below

61 Project Organization

Mr George Gardner the Program Manager is responsible for the

overall management and implementation of the HNUS ARCS I contract

performed in US EPA Region I Mr Liyang Chu will serve as the

project manager for Work Assignment 30-1R08 and has the primary

responsibility for the execution of the Work Assignment including

technical quality oversightreview control of costs and schedule

coordination with other work assignments and implementation of

appropriate quality assurance procedures during all phases Ms

Marilyn Wade is the task manager for this Work Assignment and is

responsible for the implementation of activities described in this

Work Plan In general the technical disciplines and technical

staffing will be drawn from the HNUS Wilmington Massachusetts

office When specialized or additional support is required

personnel from other HNUS offices or the team subcontractor Badger

Engineers Inc may be used Figure 6-1 presents the project

organization the lines of authority and coordination

W92224D 6-1

DRAFT

62 Quality Assurance and Data Management

All work will be performed in accordance with the HNUS ARCS I QA

Program Plan which was submitted previously under separate cover

63 Cost Estimate

The overall cost for the performance of the EECA as described in

this Work Plan is presented in a separate document the Detailed

Costing Estimate

W92224D 6-2 ^ l

FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION DRAFT

DRAFT WORK PLAN EECA

SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND INC SITE

QUALITY ASSURANCE OFFICER

L GUZMAN

HEALTH amp SAFETY OFFICER

J PILLION

SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION

NUS ARCS I PROGRAM MANAGER

GEORGE DGARDNER

DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER

A OSTROFSKY

PROJECT MANAGER

LCHU

__J

TASK MANAGER

MWADE

RISK ASSESSMENT

L SINAGOGA

CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

EXPOSURE RATES amp RECEPTORS

DEWATERING ANALYSIS

M HEALEY

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

ON-SITE INTERCEPTOR

CONTRIBUTION

EPA RPO

D KELLEY

EPA RPM

B SHAW M NALIPINSKI

GROUNDWATER amp VAPOR TREATMENT

EVALUATION

NOTE Line of communication direction and authority Line of communication and coordination

W92224D 6 -3

70

DRAFT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

Because no field investigation activities are anticipated during

the performance of the EECA the only identified equipment

requirement is the use of vehicles for transportation to meetings

and site visits

W92224D 7-1

s X gt

APPENDIX A

OPERATIONS AREA SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS

I I I I i i l i l I I I I I I i l t I I i l i l i l i l i l I I I

1 COMPOUNDS Locaboo Depth

CHLOROETHANE METHYLENECHLORIDE ACETONE 11 -DICHLOROETHENE IJ -DICHLOROETHANE 1 5 - D I C H L O R O E T H E N E fTOTAL)

1 CHLOROFORM 2 - B U T A N O N E 111-TRICHLOROETHAN E VINYL ACETATE 1 2 - D I C H L O R O P R O P A N E TRICHLOROETHENE I U - T R I C H L O R O E T H A N E BENZENE 4 - M E T H Y L - 2 - P E N T A N O N E

12-HEXANONE TETRACHLOROETHENE

1TOLUENE CHLOROBENZENE ETHYL BENZENE STYRENE TfTTAL XYLENES TOTAL VOLATn -E ORGANICS (TVOCs)

TABLE4-3 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL VOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991)

SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTONCONNECTICin

UNHS (uglg)

1 OPERATIONS AREA

B-1

(9--in 1 B-2

( 9 - i r ) 1 B-4f+l

n5 -16 ) 1 B-5

(V-S) 1 B-7

rr-9) 1 B-S

( r - 3 1 1 B-14

fr-9) 11 B-IS (4--6)

8600J

1

1300 290J 1900

38000 170000 bull

980J 790J 7500J 680J 2400 J

110000

1

7500 J

63000

3000J

20000 J 13000J

470 J

920

420 J

240 J

llOJ

1500J

S60000J 2900 120 J

7000 J I400J

440000 220000

220 J 710000

910J 6S0J 7400 J 7900J

430000 500000

800000

9900J 61000

^10000

130000J

200000 490000

380J

2300 46000 1500

190J

200 J ISOOOJ

59000 40000

240000 1781910 J

230000

7600W 2778030 J 0

280000 73000 50000

13444001

76000 80000

310000 16320001

1200

2800 540701

2100

690 J 4950 J

23000J

150000J 193000 J

( + ) = The umple value was avenged wilh its duplicate

= Medium level sanple

J - Value is Estimated

B-16

n r - i3 i

430 J 140J 3500

1300J 36000

2300

410J llOOJ 6400

47000

100000 12000 18000

228211 i

1 P-IA ( i r - m

R

79000J

690000

170000 J

140000 1700000J

3800000 2500000 330000

94090001

P-2A(+)

I9-in 110

325 3731

37 JJ 2731

1461

25 J 1

2761 300

13301

5651 2laquo871

1 P-4A llaquo-io-)

95001

35000

11000

29000 98000

14000

33000

2293001

1 P-8 ri4-i6i

0

1 1 P-16

fl4-16l

9

22

41

6

21

35 971

TAELE 4 - 4 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TCL SVOCS ANALYSIS - (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINOTONCONNECTICUT

UNITS (u(k()

OPERATIONS AREA 1

COMPOUNDS LocalioD B-I B-2 B-4 (+ ) B-S B-7 B-laquo B-14 B-I5 B-16 P - I A P-2A(+) P-4A P - laquo P-16

PHENOL

DcDlk ( l - U ) 680J

( r- i i i (10-201 (I -n 210J

(r-9i 540J

cr-in (I -in (O-e-) ( I f -m (W-2Q) ( i - i n (Q-Wi iv-vr ( T - U i ttOJ

P - D I C H L O R O B E N Z E N E 150J 2 - M E 1 H Y L P H E N O L 4201 I70J 4-METOYLPHENOL 260 2tOJ 270J ISOPHORONE 700 J 2 I 0 J 270 J 220 270J BENZOIC A a O 170 I24-TRIHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE

noj 3300J

2401 1800

S30J 3200J IIOOJ 340J I40J 390 J 150 220J

4 - C H L O R A N I L I N E 940 J 1900J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - M E T H Y L P H E N O L 28001 2 - M E r a Y L N A P H T H A L E N E 1400J JOOJ 2000 J 360J 220J 455 J 200J DIMETHYLPHTHALATE 73J 74 J A C E N A P K n i Y L E N E 3 - N m i O A N I L I N E R R R R R R R R A C E N A P H n i E N E I70J DIBENZOFURAN 1101 DIETHYL PHTHALATE 930 J 350J 1600J I40J l -N tTROANILINE R R R R R R R R FLUORENE I50J 160J 69 J PHENANTORENE 500J 320J 820J I30J ltS0J 1195J ANTHRACENE 64J 190 p i - N - B U T Y L P H T H A L A T E 4S00J 4400 S700J 2300J 4750 53 J FLUORANTHENE 4701 61J fYRENE 270 J 48J l l O J B imrLBENZYLPKTHALATE (600J 3000 2200 770J 4200J IIOOJ 3900J 150J 1500 lOOJ BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 130J CHRYSENE 89 J 220 J BIS(2-EniYLHEXYL)PI fTHALATE 56000J 24000 200 J 42000 bull I2000J I3000J 11000J 120000J 4600 35500 700 D I - N - O C T Y L P H T H A L A T E I450J 5laquo0J BENZOfUFLUORANTHENE BENZO(k)FLUARANTHEN E BENZOfi lPYRENE I N D E N O l U J - c i U P Y R E N E

lKt36i Ut^i 200J 64S94J 1 ^ 9 raquo J 2115^1 12100J 123900) 4S90J 0 52240J 2233J 6 1370J O R O A N C S (SVOCs)

( f ) a Sample value avenged witkilsdupiiciie gt Medium level sample J shy Value is Estimated

I i I I I I I I i I i I I I I i I I I I I I I i I I i I II 1

l l l i l l l l l l l l l f l i l l i l I I I I 1 1 I i I If

TABLE 4-5 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE S O t S

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES (APRIL - JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B - l B-2 B - 4 ( + ) B - 5 B-7 B - 8 B-14 B-15 Dcnth d - l l ) ( f - l l - ) (l0-20) ( I - T ) ( l -9 ) ( I - i r ) (I-in (0-6)

AROCLOR 1016 410J 550 J 360 J 240 J 220 J 65 J 1200 J AROCLOR 1248 ARO(XOR 1254 2500 J 13000 J 8400J 4900 J 2000 J 2100 J llOOOJ AROCLOR 1260 2100 J 9700 J 7100 J 2700 J 2200 J 1700 J 5000 J

TOTAL 5010 J 23250 J 0 15860 J 7840 J 4420 J 3865 J 17200 J

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUNDS Location B-16 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P - 8 P-16 Depth ( I l - I T ) (10-20) ( bull - bull ) (0-10) (10-20) (2-12)

AROCLOR 1016 27 J AROCLOR 1248 1550 AROCLOR 1254 380J 2000 J 1850 AROCLOR 1260 160 J 1900 J 3550

TOTAL 567 J 3900 J 6950 J 0 0 0

( + ) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE4-6 PHASE 2 SUBSURFACE SOILS

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES (APRIL shy JULY 1991) SRSNE INC SFFE SOLTTHINGTON CONNECTICirr

UNITS (mgkg)

OPERATIONS AREA

COMPOUND Location B - l B-2 B-4r+) B-5 B-8 B-14 B-15 B-16 Depth r - i r I - i r W-2ff V-T r - i r I - i r V-6 i r - i T

ALUMINUM 7640 5890 6605 5920 9810 6480 9720 5260 ARSENIC 25 088 052 097 083 081 54 085 BARIUM 296 531 6055 505 705 434 J 1480 6Z1 BERYLLIUM 083 054 048 085 CADMIUM 183 417 389 CALCIUM 2440 1090 9410 2150 1090 J 813 J 2010 7520 CHROMIUM 183 148 1135 193 134 291 790 80 COBALT 92 55 99 amp3 COPPER 474 J 159 J 601 J 115 J 104 J IRON 12800 8240 10080 7680 13700 7970 11400 7920 LEAD 873 J 53 J 63 J 175 J 160 J 1750 J 63 J MAGNESIUM 4650 2360 3705 2560 5330 2490 3030 2900 MANGANESE 440J 186 J 2495 283J 214 J 142 J 338J 280J NICKEL 199 POTASSIUM 2250 1110 1765 1600 1350 995J loeoj ISIO SELENIUM 373 J 279 J SILVER SODIUM 271 4115 301 J THALLIUM VANADIUM 273 206 193 216 309 191 234 206 ZINC ISSJ 192 J 1 2235 205 J 48 i J 237 J m i 221 J

(+ ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate J shy Value is estimated

P - L 10-20

3150 11

341 J

650 155

3980

1140J 752 J

433 J

101 J

P-2A(+^ i - i r 10400 Z7

4355 051 8a4 9945 3375 amp15 3075 11500 202 4010 338 149 1455 17

274 7345

P-4A V - W

6270 050 J 525

054 J

1190 84 52

8100

3280 214 J 78

1910

730

208 279

P -8 W-2V

5820 066 J 442

055 J

953 72 19

8010

2680 349 J 61

1640

699

188 208

P-16 2 - i r 9120 14

452 032 J

631 J 92 J 29 50

8980

1470 211 J 57 580 17 J

166 193 J

I I I i I I I I I i I I I i I I I I I i I i i i I r f II I

DRAFT

TABLE 4-7 PHASE 2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING SUMMARY

DIOXINSFURANS SRSNE INC SITE RIFS

SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugkg)

DEPTH CONCENTRATION IN 2 3 7 8-TCDD LOCATION (FEET) EQUIVALENTS (ugkg)

8-1 1-3 001 J

B-5 1-3 000 J

B-5 3-5 000 UJ

B-5( + ) 3-5 0002 J

B-7 1-3 000 J

B-7 5- 000 J

B-8 1-3 000 UJ

B-14 1-3 0001 J

B-14( + ) r-3 000 R

B-14( + ) r-3 000 UJ

8-14 5-7 000 UJ

B-15 4-6 030

B-17 V 000 UJ

B-18 r 000 UJ

NOTES

(bulllaquo-) Indicates duplicate samples J Value is estimated UJ Non-detected value is estimated R Data rejected because recovery of internal standards were outside the

acceptable range

gt

O R 09

APPENDIX B

GROONDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS

I 1 i I I i I I i I 1 I 1 I I i I I i I i I I I I I i I i I I I I I

TABLE 4 - PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD SZ42) AUGUST 11 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (UfI)

CT DHS MCL C O M P O U N D UPGRADIENT J OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS N L A Z Y L A N

- (tW T W - 1 2 P - I B P - 2 B P - 4 B P - U P-3B P - P - l l B P - I 2 MW-123C T W - 7 A ( + T W - 8 A CbloromclliMic

Broroomctbwic 2 2 Vinyl Chlohde laquo2raquoJ SP J laquo 0 ] SF 270 ) SF

Cbtoroeibwie t lOlaquo3 M O l 2 3 2 M )

Acelooc R R R R R R R R R R R

1000 2 shy Butuionc R R R R R R R R R R R Carbon Diiul f idc R R R R R 22 ) R R R R R

7 7 11-Oicbloroctbcnc T400ir SF laquo raquo j SI 15040] $ f I t -Djcbtorocthanc 29003 5500) 20 3 70 3 113 210)

too irant -1 2 - dicbloractbcnc laquo J 70 cigt-12-Dicbloroltlbcnlaquo IIOOOOJ P 21003 F 44 3

Cblororom

1 5 12-Dicblorocibanc laquo 4 0 ] SF 3 ) S 114 ] 8 P 200 200 t 11-Tricbloncdiaae 7 M laquo d ] SF laquo P laquo 0 laquo J S F |

s ] Carbon Tctracbloridc raquo i laquo O i SF IMJ s 5 5 12- Dkfalonopropaoc

5 5 Trichloroethene 2 (000 ] SP 3 0 laquo M J S i 14) 013 112-Tricbloracttaane

1 5 Bentenc laquoI0 3 SF M ) SF M J sF ( 2 ) SF 2-Meianone R R R R R R R R 4 -Mc tbv l -2 -pcn tanone 22000 J 3(0 3 I f M )

10 tram -1 3 - Dicbloropfopene

s S Tctracbloraettacne 2000] SF

1112-Tetrachlonictbanc 1000 1000 Toluene t lOOO] SF

100 Cblorobenzenc 33 53 700 Eibylbenzcne t o v m F 9 ) P t i n t 24 3 M l F 4WJ r 100 Styrene 4Mltraquo] r

10000 Xylene (total) 1200 J 7 ( J 24 3 400 3

123-Tribromopropane n-propylbeozene 30 3

135- Trimetbylbcniene 37) ten shy Butylbeniene 133

124-Triaictbylbcniaic bull 950 3 127 3 340) bullee-Butylbenzene 73

laquo00 13-Dicblorobenzcnc 7J 7$ 14 shy Diclilorobenzenc

p- lwpropyl io luenc 53 6U0 12 - Dicblorobenzenc 23

n shy Butylbenzenc

1 - Tricblorobenzene

Napbtbalene 93

T O T A L gt

12 Dibromo 3-Cbloropropane

O L A T I L E ORGANICS r rVOCS) | bull R

451100 ] s

1 I2 IraquoJ 2tStOlaquoJ 1 1S20J 1504 31 1

R 013

R

2 3 bull 150 3 1 M 0 ( ]

( + ) - T b c M i n p c value w u bullveraged witti i u duplicwc J ~ Value i l eatlmated [ bullbullS W Bzcccda Conn ectlcM DHS Sii mdards bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull Eicccda Fcda ral MCLa R shy Value l i Re)eetc4

TABLE 4-10 PHASE 20VERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUOUCT 1991 SRSNE INC SFTE SOUTHINOTDK OONNECnCUT

UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS OOMfOUND UPORADIENTl OPERATIONS AREA CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (ug1) NLAZYLNE

(gl) TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 P-3B P-9 P - l l B P - U MW-12JC PHENOL 4200 22 7J

600 13- DICHLOROBENZENE 75 75 14- DICHLOROBENZENE I J

600 U - DICHLOROBENZENE 30 2-METHYLPHENOL a 49 14 23 4-METHYLPHENOL 100 64 14 17 ISOPHORONE I J 2J I J 24- DIMETHYLPHENOL 10 7J 11 U4--miCHLOROBENZENE 4J NAPHTHALENE 3J 44 7J 21 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 16 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 3J 6J DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 17 2J 2^4-DINnROPHENOL 6J DIETHYL PHTHAIATC 5J 2J PHENANTHRENE IOJ DIshy N - BUTYLPHTHALATE 521 14 I J I J BUTYLBENZYLPimiALATC 631 9J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHrHAljTC 11100 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHAIATE 26 J

TOTAL 0 154731 237J Z3$J 40J 57J 0 1 I J 0 1 13J

(+) = The umple value wai averaged witb ib ltlu|iicate J shy Valie b etiiiiiated

rW-7A(+) 32J

415 J 630J

37J 2J 3J5

2J

778J

TW-8A IM

32 140

27 7J 27

3J

416 J

i I I i i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I

I i l i l 1 1 I I i i i l 1 4 I I I I i l I I I I I I I i I

TABLE 4-11 PHASE 2 OVERBURDEN OROUNDWATER

TCL PESnCIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SOUTHINOTON CONNECnCirT

UNrrS(ugl)

CTDHS MCXs COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA STANDARDS (laquog1) N LAZY LANE

TW-12 P-IB P-2B P-4B P-16 ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

I 03 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260 vvlaquoJfSp

TOTAL 0 lt5 0 0 0

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND CIANCI PROPERTY STANDARDS (gl)

P-3B P-9 P-llB P-12 MW123C TW-7A(+) TW-laquoA ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 OS AROCLOR 1254 1 OS ARO(XOR1260

TOTAL i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CTDHS MCL COMPOUND TOWN PROPERTY MICKEYS STANDARDS (igl) OARAGE

(gI) P-13 MW-127B MW-7 MW-126B ALDRIN 44 shy DDD

1 05 AROCLOR 1254 1 05 AROCLOR 1260

TOTAL 0 0 0 0

( + ) = Sample value averaged with its duplicate Exceeds Federal MCL J = Value is Estimated Exceeds CoBoecliciil DHS Sundards

TABLE 4-12 PHASE 20VERBURDEN0R0UNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugl)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATION iAREA CTDHS MCLs COMPOUND N LAZY LANE

STANDARDS (gI) TW-12 TW-12 P - I B P-2B P-4B P-4B P-16

(ugI) FILTERED FILTERED ALUMINUM 1 74900 109 12200 15300 51700 J 356 24100 J ANTIMONY R

50 ARSENIC 30J 210 SO 70 ZOJ 100 1000 2000 BARIUM 714 J 689 3510 J SF tao s 694 280 604

BERYLLIUM 59 J 12 J M J 54 J 16 J 5 5 CADMIUM R 47 169 SP Z6J m39v

CALCIUM 21800 10700 349000 65600 80700 65100 37100 50 100 CHROMIUM 137 SF bull- t 9 J laquo S bullbullbullbull 52J0 S 111 S F -5 i 2 S bullbull

COBALT 945 J 445 J 413 140 524 196 1000 1300 COPPER 122 J 441 J 743 324 104 655

IRON 115000 113 84400 39100 67200 J 7350 47500 J 15 15 LEAD

MAGNESIUM W9J SF

41800 2690 bull-2ISiPs

20100 mxji tv

13600 280 J SF

25700 3360 53aJ^sF

9540 5000 MANGANESE 3380 J 33 J 37200 S 11300 S 82M S V -vm-sm 7610 S

2 2 MERCURY 035 J NICKEL 127 J 324 J 375 843 315 POTASSIUM 22200J 767 14000 J 5940 12900 6680

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 5570 J 6560 105000 J S 10100 10700 12600 2 ^ S

THALLIUM VANADIUM 227 J 381 J 114 498 ZINC 344 662 908 151 476 J 111

(-lt-) = The sample value was averaged wilh its duplicate Exceeds Fcdlaquolaquol MCL R = Value is Rejected J = Value is estimated Exceeds Coaneclicat DHS SUndard

i I I I I I I I I I i i i l I I I I I I I i I I I I i

I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(utA)

2

1000

7

1 200

5 5 5

1

10 5

1000

75

MCL

2

7

100 70

5 200 5 5

s

5

5

1000

too 700 100

10000

600 75

600

TOTAL VOLATUE ORGAN

Notes

COMPOUND

CUoroBelhaac BroaoDCthaiie Vii)l Chloride CUorocthaDe Acctose 2-Buunone

Crboa Disulfide M-DicUorMlheae lI-Dichloroethlaquoie tnBS-l2-iSchlongtclbraquoe cis -12 - DicUoroetheae Chloroform U-Dichlotoelhaae 111-Tnchloroclhaae Carboa Tetrachloride 12-Dichloropropaae Trichloroetheae lU-TiichlongteihsBc Beazeae 2-HeuBOBe 4-Me(hil-2-peaUBoBe tnas-13-DichlofopropeBe TetracUoroelheae 1112-TctrachlorocthaBe Tolieae CUorobeazcBc Elh]4 beazeae Styreae Xyleae (total) Isopropytbeazeae 123-Tii bromopropaae a-prop)l beazeae 135-Tiimelhylbeazeae tert-But)lbeBzeae 124-Tiimelh]4beazeae sec - Butylbeazeae 13-DichlorobeazeBe 14-DichlorobeazeBe p - Isoprop)4tolueae 12 - Dichlorobeazeae a-BHtgtl beazeae 124-Toe hlorobeazeae Naphlhaleae 2 Dibromo 3-ChloropropaBe CS (TVOCS)

TAa-E4-13 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

VOCS ANALYSIS (METHOD 524i) AUGUSTT 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNE(mCUT

UNTTS (ugl)

UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA IjZYLANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-ii P- IA P-2A(+)

llOJ SF 8J SF 2J

R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R

1600] SF 190J SF 940 J 94JJ

OS J $300J F 2751 P

J 3 J S 17000 J SP 2000J SF 69SS SF

07 J 14 J SP

47 J 191 S

R R R 2100J 22S1 390 J S

46 J 18J

192J 740J P 51J

97 J 435 J

IJ

08 J I J

26 J

R R 192J 0 0 30180J 5953J

F-4A P-8A

R R R

2300J SE

R R R

320000 J

41000 J

R

6400 J

1500001

23001

$F

SJP

SF

SF

F

R

710J

5227101 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its dapiicale Exceeds FedenI MCU R = Value is Rejected J laquo Value is csHmaled EBCccdsCoaaecliciil DHSSlaadards

TABLE 4-14 PHASE 2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER TCL SVOC ANALYSES AUGUST 1991

SRSNE INC SITESOUTHINOTON CONNECTICUT UNITS (ugl)

CTDHS MCLS COMPOUND UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS i REA STANDARDS (ugl) W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

(laquogl) TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + ) P-4A P-SA PHENOL bull

600 13-DICHLOROBENZENE 2J 75 75 14-DICHLOROBENZENE 10

600 12- DICHLOROBENZENE 2-METHYLPHENOL 12 15 16 4-METHYLPHENOL 13 SJ 4J ISOPHORONE 9J 2J 24-DIMETHYLPHENOL 2J 124-TRICHLOROBENZENE NAPHTHALENE 2J 25 J 3J 4 - C H L O R O - 3 - METH YLPHENOL 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 24-DINITROPHENOL DIETHYL PHTHALATE PHENANTHRENE DI shy N shy BUTYLPHTHALATE 3J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE DI shy N -OCTYLPHTHALATE

TOTAL 0 0 0 65 J 255 J 27 J 0

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l f l l l l l l ) i I

I l l i l l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I I I I I i E i e i i t

CTDHS STANDARDS

(raquogl)

1 1

CT DHS STANDARDS

(ugI)

1 1

CTDHS STANDARDS

(ugl)

1 1

MCU

(ugl)

OS 05

MCU

(ugl)

05 05

MCU

(ugl)

OS OS

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44- - DDD AROCLOR 1254 AROCLOR 1260

COMPOUND

ALDRIN 44 - DDD

A R ( X L 0 R 1254

AROCLOR 1260

TABLE 4-15 PHASE 2 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

TCL PESTICIDESPCB ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC SITE RIFSSOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UNITS (ugI)

1 UPGRADIENT OPERATIONS AREA W OPS AREA LAZY LANE DELAHUNTY

TW-10 MW-129 P-15 P - I A P - 2 A ( + )

13 SF

TOTAL 0 0 0 13 0

CIANCI PROPERTY

P-3A P - l l A P - 1 2 A ( + ) P-14 MW-123A 0070 017

TOTAL 024 0 0 0 0

TOWN PROPERTY

MW-12IA MW-121C MW-124C MW-127C MW-128

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0

P-4A

0

MW-125A

0

M W - 5 ( + )

0

P-SA

0

MW-125C

0

MICKEYS GARAGE

MW-126C

1 0 1

+ ) = Sample value averaged wilh its duplicate Eicceds Federal MCL J 3s Value is Estimated Eieeedi Coiacclkat DHS Staadards

CTDHS MCU COMPOUND STANDARDS (ugfl) W OPS AREA

(laquolaquo) TW-10

ALUMINUM 58400 J ANTIMONY

50 ARSENIC 80 1000 2000 BARIUM 1490 S

BERYLLIUM 73 J 5 5 CADMIUM

CALaUM 35000 SO 100 CHROMIUM 731 S

COBALT 404 1000 1300 COPPER 142

IRON 47400 J 15 15 LEAD 676 J SF

MAGNESIUM 21800 5000 MANGANESE 5400 S

2 2 MERCURY NICKEL 674 POTASSIUM 12200

10 50 SELENIUM 20000 SODIUM 6540

THALLIUM VANADIUM 123 ZINC 171

(+) = The sample value was averaged with its duplicate J = Value is estimated

TABLE 4-16 PHASE2 BEDROCK OROUNDWATER

TAL INORGANICS ANALYSES AUGUST 1991 SRSNE INC STTE SOUTHINGTON CONNECTICUT

UN n S (ugl)

UPGRADIENT LAZYLANE DELAHUNTY

MW-129 MW-129 P-15 P-15 FILTERED FILTERED

248 J 23500 649

SOI 880 845 722 244

301

86900 S3500 39300 295(10 342 139 621

3$7J 24600 239 208 SP

3600 3510 9410 1250 29 11 J 841 147

309 6500

9580 11100 17000 23900 S

5691 S46

Exceeds Federal MCU R e Value is Rejected Exceeds Coaaecticul DHSSuadard

OPERATIONS AREA

P- IA

71300 R

80 J 26901 SP

831 R

140000

m m bull 4431

14601 SP 89700

50J1 SF 33400 40001

1011 196001

128001

1521 893

P-4A

9530

401 780 191

44200

104 568

13300 137 5660 1830

6890

3281

P-SA

906

106

59200

56 1930 53

1490 453

6320

P-2A(+)

527501

7J 1840J S

5851 4151

41S501 I H I SiF

26731 11281 S 998501

41351 SF 2270DI 25601

10211 124651

169101

13641 3931

I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I f i l l