pathway analysis report, risk assessment.pathways by which huma n receptor mas y become expose tdo...

Xk ALLIANCE TechRol°9ies Corporation

April 17, 1992 1

I Mary H. Grealish

i Regional Project Officer 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Haste Management Division JFK Federal Building, Room 2203 Boston, Massachusetts 02203 i Reference: Contract No. 68-W9-0003, TES 6

Work Assignment No. C01125 v Tansitor Electronics, Inc. Site, Bennington, Vermont

Risk Assessment (Ref. 1-635-219)

Subject: Deliverable: Pathway Analysis Report

| Dear Ms. Grealish:

In accordance with the reporting requirements of the subject Work , ,_ Assignment, enclosed are two (2) copies of the Pathway Analysis | Report for the Tansitor Electronics, Inc. Site, Bennington,

Vermont. This submit tal satisfies the second deliverable requirement for this Work Assignment. One copy is for the WAM; the

', other copy is for Anne Marie Burke of the Risk Assessment Group.

This submit tal is a modified version of the first interim | deliverable called for in the Work Plan. The format of this \ deliverable was requested by the EPA WAM.

Questions regarding this submission should be directed to the \ Alliance Project Manager, Naida Gavrelis at (508) 970-5757 ext 1 5145, or me.

\ Sincerely yours,

Peter Spawn Regional Manager

PS/eg Enclosure _

V cc: Terrence Connelly/EPA Work Assignment Manager '^

Anne Marie Burke/EPA Risk Assessment Group Jill E. Robbins/TES-6 Contracting Officer (letter only) Jack Lewis, Jr./Alliance TES-6 Contracts Manager (letter only) Naida Gavrelis/Alliance Project Manager

Boott Mills South • Foot of John Street Lowell Massachusetts 01852 • (508) 970-5600

PATHWAY ANALYSIS REPORT TANSITOR ELECTRONICS, INC.

BENNINGTON, VERMONT RISK ASSESSMENT

Prepared for

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Waste Management Division

JFK Federal Building Boston, Massachusetts 02203

Work Assignment No.:

EPA Region:

EPA Site/Facility I.D. No.:

Contract No.:

Alliance Document No.:

Alliance Project No.:

Alliance Project Manager:

Alliance Telephone No.:

Subcontractor:

Subcontract No.:

Subcontractor Project Manager:

Telephone No.:

EPA Work Assignment Manager:

Telephone No.:

Date Prepared:

C01125

I

VTD000509174

68-W9-0003 (TES-6)

A92-460

1-635-219-0-1BC3-0

Naida Gavrelis

(508) 970-5600

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Terrence Connelly

(617) 573-9638

April 17, 1992

ALLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION Boott Mills South

Foot of John Street Lowell, Massachusetts 01852

(508) 970-5600

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE Tecnnoiog es wO'Doraton

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

A92-460.txt 11

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE "ecnnoioqies ̂ foo'aion

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1 1.1 Objective .............................................. 1 1.2 Background Information .................................... 1

2.0 PUBLIC HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT ............................ 2 2.1 Toxicity Values and Criteria/Guidelines ......................... 2 2.2 Selection of Contaminants of Concern .......................... 2 2.3 Selection of Exposure Pathways .............................. 3 2.4 Exposure Parameters ................ .. ..................... 4

3.0 ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ............................... 4 3.1 Selection of Contaminants of Concern .......................... 5 3.2 Selection of Indicator Species ................................ 6 3.3 Selection of Exposure Pathways .............................. 6 3.4 Risk Characterization ...................................... 7

4.0 OUTSTANDING ISSUES ....................................... 7

5.0 DATA GAPS/RECOMMENDATIONS ............................... 8

REFERENCES .................................................... 10

Attachments Page

A Tables ..................................................... 11 B Background Summary Statistics ................................... 62 C Public Health Summary Statistics .................................. 66 D Ecological Summary Statistics ..................................... 94

A92-460.txt

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE Tei_nr^ ̂ g-s ̂ 'ix'at en

TABLES

Number Page

1 Toxicity Values for All Contaminants Detected at the Tansitor Electronics Site . . 12 2 Applicable, Relevant, and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) and To Be

Considered (TBC) 15 3 Tansitor Electronics Site: Public Health Contaminants of Concern 19 4 Public Health COC Exclusion Rationale 23 5 Tansitor site: Summary of Exposure Pathways 32 6 Exposure Pathway: Digestion of Ground Water for Present and Future

Scenarios 36 7 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Onsite and Disposal Area Surface

Soils for Present Scenario 37 8 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Onsite and Disposal Area Surface

Soils for Present Scenario 38 9 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Onsite and Disposal Area

Surface/Subsurface Soils by Resident for Future Scenario . . 39 10 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Onsite and Disposal Area Surface/

Subsurface Soils by Resident for Future Scenario 40 11 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Stream Sediments for Present

Scenarios 41 12 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Stream Sediments for Present

Scenario 42 13 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Stream Sediments for Future

Scenario 43 14 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Stream Sediments for Future

Scenario 44 15 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Fire Pond Sediments while

Swimming for Present Scenarios 45 16 Exposure Pathway: Incidental Ingestion of Fire Pond Sediments while

Swimming for Future Scenario , 46 17 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Fire Pond Sediments while

Swimming for Present Scenario 47 18 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Fire Pond Sediments for Future

Scenario 48 19 Exposure Pathway: Ingestion of Fire Pond Surface Water while Swimming

for Present Scenario 49 20 Exposure Pathway: Ingestion of Fire Pond Surface Water while Swimming

for Future Scenario 50 21 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Fire Pond Surface Water for Present

Scenario 51 22 Exposure Pathway: Dermal Contact with Fire Pond Surface Water for Future

Scenario 52 23 Ecological Contaminants of Concern, Tansitor Site 53 24 Ecological COC Exclusion Rationale 56

A92-460.txt IV

XK ALLIANCE RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL S4f«?t

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Alliance Technologies Corporation, Inc., under Work Assignment C01125 of EPA Contract 68-W9-0003 (TES 6), is conducting a baseline public health and ecological I risk assessment to support EPA enforcement activities related to the Remedial Investigation (RI) at the Tansitor Electronics, Inc. Superfund site (Tansitor) in

I Bennington, Vermont. Data collected by the responsible party's consultant, • Environmental Project Control, Inc. (EPC) during the Remedial Investigation will be

used by Alliance to perform the risk assessment.

* 1.1 Objective

1 As part of this work assignment, Alliance was tasked with preparing this interim Pathway Analysis Report to present the following information: I • List of contaminants of concern (COCs) listed by environmental medium;

• Existing toxicity information and ARARs for site contaminants (used to develop list of COCs);

, • Summary of exposure pathways and exposure scenarios for both public health and ecological receptors;

,— • Exposure parameters to be used in the calculation of dose estimates; t

• Summary of ecological risk characterization methodology to be used; and

[ • Summary of data gaps identified while preparing the deliverable.

| The purpose of this Pathway Analysis Report is to allow EPA to review and agree \ upon Alliance's proposed inputs and assumptions prior to the development of the Draft

Risk Assessment Report and to assist EPC in preparing the Work Plan for Phase IB RI { field activities. The methodologies used in the development and selection of all input ? data are described briefly below.

| 1.2 Background Information

( The Pathway Analysis Report was developed primarily on the basis of the following information:

. • Current EPA Region I and Headquarters risk assessment guidance (see ! references);

• Scoping Investigation and Phase LA RI sampling results provided to Alliance j by EPC on computer disk;

. A92-460.txt 1

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL

• Phase LA Site Characterization Report (GZA, 1992); and

• Discussions with EPA Region I and correspondences with EPC.

2.0 PUBLIC HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

2.1 Toxicity Values and Criteria/Guidelines

Table 1 presents the toxicity values for all contaminants detected on site. These values were used in assessing relative toxicity of contaminants in the COC selection process and will be used in the risk calculations in the quantitative risk assessment. Only chronic toxicity values are included. Acute exposures are not considered to be significant The Aslope factoj^.are provided for those chemicals classified as potential carcinogens, where available. Reference doses are provided for the assessment of noncarcinogenic health effects.

Table 2 presents EPA drinking water MCL/MCLGs, State of Vermont Ground Water Standards, EPA sediment criteria, NOAA sediment guidelines, and Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC). These values were also used to aid in the COC selection process. In addition, the sediment criteria and the AWQC will be used in the quantitative assessment of ecological risk at the site.

2.2 Selection of Contaminants of Concern

Alliance employed a qualitative method to select COCs. For each medium, all detected contaminants were first grouped by chemical class (volatile organics [VOCs],

I ( semi-volatiles [SVOCs], pesticides/PCBs, and inorganics) to ensure that contaminants - ^ from each class were represented as COCs. The COCs were selected based on the

., f . •. "* following criteria: contaminant concentration; toxicity (see Table 1); frequency of . ' ' " * - f detection; comparison of inorganic contaminant concentrations to background

• -f. *"* concentrations (contaminants with concentrations less than three times background , .< •** were eliminated), if available; and consideration of the chemical and physical

,'-" properties of organic contaminants that determine their mobility, persistence, and likelihood for bioaccumulation in the environment. In general a chemical was retained as a COC if it was detected in greater than five percent of the samples, unless its toxicity level is several orders of magnitude lower than that of other COCs. In addition, any contaminant detected at concentrations exceeding Federal or State of Vermont ARARs were included as COCs (see Table 2).

In general, the most toxic, mobile and persistent contaminants, and those found frequently and at high concentrations at the site were selected as COCs. However, the method used was conservative, favoring the inclusion of most contaminants in the analysis rather than the selection of only a few "indicator" chemicals. The Disposal Area was regarded as a hotspot based on site history and on an evaluation of the

A92-460.txt 2

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL jA ALLIANCE

contamination in this area in comparison to contamination elsewhere at the site. A summary of the COCs selected by medium is presented in Table 3. In addition, Table 4 lists all the contaminants detected at the site by medium as well as the

j frequency of detection, the minimum, mean, and maximum detected concentrations; ^ and the rationale for exclusion if a COC was excluded. Background and public health

summary statistics are provided in Attachments A and B, respectively.

* 2.3 Selection of Exposure Pathways

The physical characteristics of the site were examined in order to adequately assess the pathways by which human receptors may become exposed to site contaminants. Exposure scenarios were then developed with consideration of demographics, land use,

\ and human behavior patterns. A summary of the exposure pathways considered for 1 quantitative and qualitative analysis and the site data- to be used for the analyses are

presented in Table 5. The pathways considered include

• Ingestion of ground water; • Inhalation of volatile emissions from ground water; • Incidental ingestion of soil; • Dermal contact with soil; • Incidental ingestion of sediments; • Dermal contact with sediments; • Incidental ingestion of surface water;

— • Dermal contact with surface water; and • Inhalation of contaminant releases from soil or surface water.

I Ground Water: Based on the current and anticipated future use of bedrock ground 1 water in the area, ingestion of bedrock ground water was considered an exposure

pathway for the quantitative risk assessment. Certain area residents are currently [ drinking untreated bedrock water from private wells, and it is not anticipated that this

practice will change. In addition, although no present use of overburden ground water occurs and data indicate weak yields from this aquifer; there is a potential for future

\ development of wells in this aquifer. Therefore, future ingestion of overburden ground < water was considered an exposure pathway for the quantitative risk assessment.

\ Soils: Current site trespassers may come in contact with contaminated surface soils; no present exposure to subsurface soils is expected. However, with the potential for future residential development and associated excavation/soil turnover, there may be

, future exposure to a combination of surface and subsurface soils (0 to 17 feet). "" Additionally, soils collected within the Disposal Area were evaluated separately from other site soils as the Disposal Area is regarded as a "hotspot." Both surface soils (0 to 2 feet) and surface/subsurface soils (0 to 6 feet) will be evaluated for this area. Six feet was the maximum depth sampled in the disposal area.

A92-460.txt 3

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE

Sediments: Sediment samples were collected from several onsite streams, the Fire Pond, and ground water seeps. Current exposure to stream sediments and Fire Pond sediments was evaluated since exposures are possible by trespassers. In addition, if future residential development occurs, exposures of residents may occur. Exposures to sediments in the ground water seeps were considered unlikely due to the dense underbrush in the area and; if exposures occur, they are assumed to be insignificant

Surface Water: As with sediments, surface water samples were collected from several onsite streams, the Fire Pond, and ground water seeps. In addition, water was collected from a drainage line running under the main site building. As above, exposures to stream and Fire Pond surface waters was considered a current and potential future pathway, by a trespasser, and resident, respectively. A swimming scenario will be evaluated foe the Fire Pond. A wading scenario will be evaluated for on-site streams. Exposures to surface waters from the ground water seeps and drainage line were considered unlikely.

Air: No site air data are available. However, based on the low concentrations of VOCs in surface soils and surface water, the air pathway is not currently considered to be significant In addition, due to the vegetative cover in the area dust emissions are not expected to be significant If the cover and soils are disturbed in the future, air emissions may increase. The air pathway under future conditions will be assessed qualitatively in the risk assessment

2.4 Exposure Parameters

The parameters to be used to calculate exposure doses are summarized in Tables 6 through 22. The tables correspond to the scenarios presented in Table 5. The parameters are summarized only for those scenarios that are to be evaluated quantitatively.

Values used for exposure parameters generally reflect reasonable maximum assumptions. Region I guidance values (EPA, 1989a) were used where available. If specific inputs were not prescriptive, the following sources were used: Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS), Volume I (EPA, 1989b), Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure Factors (EPA, 1991), Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual (EPA, 1988), The Exposure Factors Handbook (EPA 1989c).

3.0 ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT

A characterization of the aquatic and terrestrial habitats present on the Tansitor site and an identification of potential ecological receptors will be presented in the ecological risk assessment The habitat characterization and identification of receptor species will be based on information provided in the Phase 1A Characterization Report

A92-460.txt 4

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE Tecnnokxjies

i1 "~

i .

t

\

i

t

f

f

(GZA, 1992) and information obtained from various literature sources. The following discussion identifies environmental contaminants of concern, wildlife receptors,

potential exposure pathways, and other aspects of the methodology proposed to conduct the ecological risk assessment

3.1 Selection of Contaminants of Concern

The COCs were selected based on the following criteria: contaminant concentration; toxicity to aquatic/terrestrial biota; frequency of detection; comparison of inorganic

contaminant concentrations to background concentrations (contaminants with concentrations less than three times background were eliminated), if available; and consideration of the chemical and physical properties of organic contaminants that determine their mobility, persistence, and likelihood to bioaccumulate in the environment.

A discussion of the medium-specific COC selection process is presented below. A summary of the COCs selected by medium is presented in Table 23. The rationale for exclusion of chemicals as COCs is presented in Table 24.

Surface Water: Surface water sampling data were assessed by location in four sample groups: Fire Pond samples, intermittent stream samples, perennial stream

samples, and downstream samples. The Fire Pond, intermittent stream, and perennial stream represent three distinct freshwater communities, each comprised of biota

adapted for the particular conditions encountered within each of these areas. In addition, concentrations of contaminants differed within each of these sample groups. Therefore, these communities are analyzed separately. The downstream sample group represents the perennial stream habitat below the confluence of the intermittent stream. Contaminants present within this sample group may be influenced by contaminants present within the intermittent stream.

Surface water samples obtained upgradient of the suspected contaminant source were used as background for the Fire Pond and intermittent stream sample groups. A surface water sample from the perennial stream collected upstream of the site's drainage to the stream was used as background for the perennial stream sample groups.

Sediments: Sediment sampling data were assessed in the same groups as surface water data (Fire Pond, intermittent stream, perennial stream, and downstream).

Surface Soils: Surface soil samples (0 to 2 feet) were collected from the waste disposal area and within potential source areas at the Tansitor site. Surface soil

contaminants were assessed for each of these two groups for the ecological risk assessment

A92-460.txt 5

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL - ALLIANCE I

i

3.2 Selection of Indicator Species

Information obtained from the site characterization report (GZA, 1992) and literature sources will be used to generate a list of potential receptor species that may inhabit the site or immediate vicinity. Indicator species will then be selected based on the following:

• species that are endangered, threatened, or of special concern;

• species that are of economic or recreational importance;

• species that are important to the structure and function of the ecosystem which they inhabit; and

• species that are indicative of ecological change and/or susceptible to adverse effects from contaminants present on the site.

Indicator species will be identified for both aquatic and terrestrial habitats present on the site or in the immediate vicinity.

3.3 Selection of Exposure Pathways

Ecological receptors inhabiting the site or vicinity may potentially be exposed to contaminants of concern through the following pathways:

• dermal contact with and/or ingestion of surface water and sediment contaminants;

• contact with and/or ingestion of surface soil contaminants; and • ingestion of contaminated biota in the food chain.

Based on measured concentrations and comparison to known toxicity thresholds, exposures to surface water and sediments appear to represent the most significant pathways by which contaminants will affect biota. Soil and food chain pathways represent less significant pathways. Although mean surface soil inorganic contaminant concentrations are similar to background concentrations, maximum concentrations of surface soil inorganic COCs are elevated above background levels and organic COCs were detected at several sample locations. Terrestrial organisms may potentially be at risk in these areas. Vegetation may be exposed to COC levels that result in adverse effects. Herbivores (and their predators) may also be at risk as COCs are transported within the food chain. Each of these exposure pathways will be evaluated as described in Section 3.4.

A92-460.txt 6

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL L̂ ALLIANCE ^4JPw& Tecnroiogies Corporation

3.4 Risk Characterization

Surface water and sediment contaminant concentrations will be evaluated by calculating risk indices for contaminants where criteria/guidelines are available. A risk index for each chemical of concern will be calculated by comparing exposure point concentrations (mean and maximum concentrations measured) to the available criterion/guideline. If criteria/guidelines arc unavailable, literature toxicity values will be obtained by conducting a review of the literature (e.g., AQUIRE database). An equilibrium partitioning approach for nonionic organic compounds will also be utilized for sediment contaminants for which sediment criteria/guidelines are not available but AWQC (or literature toxicity values) are available.

Potential effects of surface soil contaminant concentrations will also be evaluated. A general review of phytoxicity effects associated with' contaminants of concern identified in surface soils will be conducted. Ingestion of contaminated soils and biota in the food chain will also be addressed. Alliance proposes to model exposures to an appropriate indicator species (e.g., mammal herbivore such as a hare/rabbit) in order to assess potential impact from these two pathways. An herbivore could be exposed to COCs via soil contact/ingestion and consuming plants that have accumulated contaminants through root uptake and transport to edible portions of the plant. Risk indices will be calculated using dose estimates and toxicity values available from the literature for each COC. A general discussion of the potential for bioaccumulation and biomagnification for the COCs will also be presented in the risk assessment.

4.0 OUTSTANDING ISSUES

The following issues need to be resolved prior to preparation of the draft Risk Assessment Report:

• Split Samples: Alliance has not completed its formal data comparison of the split samples taken during the scoping and Phase LA investigations; however, initial review of these data revealed some notable differences between the split sample and GZA data, including higher silver concentrations in disposal area soils and the detection of pesticides in perennial stream sediments.

If differences in the two data sets are determined to be significant, the split sample data may be combined with the existing data, pending EPA approval, prior to performing the quantitative risk assessment. In doing so, maximum values may change and additional COCs may be selected (e.g., pesticides in sediments).

• Use of the overburden aquifer as a drinking water source is strictly a theoretical pathway. While the yield from the aquifer is low based on GZA flow data, Alliance's inclusion of this pathway is considered prudent given the contaminants detected in this medium.

A92-460.txt 7

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL XKf4

• Preliminary normality tests were performed on the site data to evaluate data distribution (normal versus log normal). The distribution of data is varied depending on contaminant, matrix, etc. Further analysis is necessary. The summary statistics presented in Attachments B, C, and D of this report present geometric means. If additional analysis reveals a normal distribution of data the arithmetic mean will be used to calculate average concentrations.

• As a general rule, inorganics detected at maximum concentrations less than three times the mean background concentrations were eliminated as COCs. Certain contaminants (e.g., cadmium) may present risk at these levels even though the risk may not be site-related.

• Alliance proposes to model biota exposure to COCs detected in surface soil samples. Although not proposed in the Risk Assessment Work Plan, Alliance believes that these exposure pathways (food chain transport and ingestion of contaminated soil) need to be assessed. This issue should be discussed with EPA further.

• Further evaluation of tentatively identified compounds (TICs) detected frequently in site soils and sediments is necessary. This evaluation will indicate whether analysis to confirm the identity and reliably measure the concentration of TICs is needed.

5.0 DATA GAPS/RECOMMENDATIONS

During Alliance's review of GZA's Site Characterization Report and field sampling data, the following data gaps were identified:

• The Scoping and Phase IA investigations included only one Fire Pond sediment and surface water sampling location (SW-100). SW-100 is located in the middle of the pond at its deepest point Additional sampling of surface water and sediments at the northern side of the pond in shallow waters should be collected to provide information on water and sediment quality where contaminated ground water is entering the pond and is likely to be less diluted.

• It is recommended that additional stream and ground water seep samples be taken under different ground water flow conditions to observe if there is any seasonal variability in the data.

• The deepest soil samples in the Disposal Area were taken at four to six feet at which depth the highest contaminant concentrations were detected. Additional samples at greater than six feet should be taken to fully characterize the vertical extent of subsurface contamination.

A92-460.txt 8

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL j ALLIANCE f ai on

Additional sampling of the surface water and sediments of the intermittent and perennial streams (below the confluence of the site's intermittent stream) is warranted to characterize the extent of inorganic (particularly silver) contamination. Sampling should be conducted of the intermittent stream, the point where the intermittent stream discharges into the perennial stream, and a minimum of three samples downstream (one sample location at sample station 140 and the remaining samples spaced several hundred yards downstream).

f

A92-460.txt

\ RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE Technologies C-, ;xr a or

REFERENCES

Alliance, 1991. Scoping Investigation Oversight Summary Report, Tansitor Electronics, Bennington, Vermont, RI/FS Compliance Oversight, Volumes I and n, prepared for the U.S. EPA, October 25, 1991.

EPA, 1988. Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual, EPA 540/1-88/001, OSWER Directive 9285.5-1, April 1988.

EPA, 1989a. Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA 901/5-89-001, June 1989.

EPA, 1989b. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1, Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A), Interim Final. EPA 540/1-89/003. December 1989.

EPA, 1989c. Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8-89/043, 1989.

EPA, 1991. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure Factors.

GZA, 1992. Draft Phase IA Site Characterization Report. Tansitor Electronics, Inc. Site Bennington, Vermont. March, 1992.

A92-460.txt 10

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL J& ALLIANCE Technologies Corporation

i ATTACHMENT A

TABLES

"~ A92-460.txt 11

\ RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE

TABLE 1. TOXICITY VALUES FOR ALL CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT THE TANSITOR ELECTRONICS SITE.

CARCINOGENIC CHRONIC

Weight Oral Slope Chronic CONTAMINANT of Evidence Factor OralRfD

Classification (mg/kg/day)-l (mg/kg/day) Volatiles

Acetone D a l.OOE-01 a 2-Butanone (MEK) D a 5.00E-02 b Chloroethane (ethyl chloride) B2 d 2.90E-03 d 4.00E-01 d Chloroform B2 a •6.10E-03a l.OOE-02 a 1,1-Dichloroethane C a l.OOE-01 b 1 ,2-Dichloroe thane B2 a 9.10E-02a 1 ,1 -Dichloroethylene C a 6.00E-01 a 9.00E-03 a 1,2-Dichloroethylene (total) — l.OOE-02 i N,N-Dimethylform amide a l.OOE-01 b Ethanol — Methylene chloride B2 a 7.50E-03 a 6.00E-02 a Tetrachloroethylene B2 b 5.10E-02b l.OOE-02 a Toluene D a 2.00E-01 b 1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane C a 5.70E-02 a 4.00E-03 a 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane D a 9.00E-02 b Trichloroethylene B2 b 1.10E-02 b 6.00E-03 d Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon-113) a 3.00E+01 a Vinyl chloride (chloroethylene) A b 1.90E+OOb Xylenes D a 2.00E+00 a

BNAs Acenaphthene a 6.00E-02 a Anthracene D a 3.00E-01 a Benzoic acid D a 4.00E+00 a Benzo(a)anthracene B2 a 5.79E+00 e Benzo(a)pyrene B2 a 5.79E+00 a Benzo(b)fluoranthene B2 a 5.79E+00 e Benzo(g,h,i)perylene D a 4.00E-03 k Benzo(k)fluoranthene B2 a 5.79E+00 e Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate B2 a 1.40E-02 a 2.00E-02 a Chrysene B2 a 5.79E+00 e Dibenzofuran D a 4.00E-03 d Dibenz(a,h)anthracene B2 a 5.79E+OOe

L Fluoranthene D a 4.00E-02 a

12

TABLE 1. TOXICITY VALUES FOR ALL CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT THE TANSITOR ELECTRONICS SITE, (continued).

CONTAMINANT

Fluorene Indeno( 1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene

2-Methylnaphthalene Naphthalene 4-Nitrophenol Phenanthrene Pyrene

Inorganics Aluminum Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium, VI (1) Cobalt Copper Cyanide Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Tantalum Thallium


Weight Oral Slope Chronic of Evidence Factor OralRfD Classification (mg/kg/day)-l (mg/kg/day)

D a 4.00E-02 a B2 a 5.79E+00 e

4.00E-03 k — D a 4.00E-03 b D j D a 4.00E-03 k D a 3.00E-02 a

« A a 1.75E+OOf 3.00E-04 a

a 5.00E-02 b B2 a 4.30E+00 a 5.00E-03 a Bl a 5.00E-04 a,g ~ A a 5.00E-03 a ~ d D a 4.00E-02 d D a 2.00E-02 a D d 5.00E-01 d B2 a ~ D a l.OOE-01 a D a 3.00E-04 b A a 2.00E-02 a,h ~ D a 5.00E-03 a D a 5.00E-03 a

— ~ ~ 7.00E-05 b

13

TABLE 1. TOXICITY VALUES FOR ALL CONTAMINANTS DETECTED AT THE TANSITOR ELECTRONICS SITE, (continued).


Weight Oral Slope Chronic CONTAMINANT of Evidence Factor OralRfD

Classification (mg/kg/day)-l (mg/kg/day) Vanadium D c 7.00E-03 b Zinc D a 2.00E-01 b

a. U.S.EPA, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). April 1,1992. b. U.S. EPA, Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST)'. FY1991. c. U.S. EPA, Drinking Water Regulations and Health Advisories. November 1991. d Interim value from ECAO. (see text of risk assessment for specific reference.). e. Oral slope factor for B(a)P used for PAHs classified as B2 carcinogens. f. Arsenic oral slope factor derived from unit risk in IRIS. g. Cadmium RfD is for water; l.OE-03 mg/kg/day is RfD for food. h. Value is for nickel, soluble salts. L Value is for the cis isomer. j. Carcinogenic classification listed in the Health Effects Assessment Document.

~ ~ . Oral RfD for napthalene used for noncarcinogenic PAHs which lack Oral RfDs. 1. Not analyzed for, used as the Oral RfD for total chromium per Region I guidance.

14

8 w Q

1

CO

is S

s

- s S

Pre m

fifl)

HI o u

s 8

iOB

s n

!

O o

til o cr

1 o vo 52 3 o& o\ 111

DC

AB

LE

2

Prim

a

Ant

A ALLIANCE 16

I o

"i1 i°

Q w D Z

O u ci

a 3

§u

u

oli.

8i-UJ

111OQC

GC LJJ GL

O

^ o LUa:

ALLIANCE 17

Action L

iml

Z a~ "1 E 00 ek ^ * ° o s

1 1! 1 i F5 , ° i^ ' Is- I I B

S Si! 1 f i a 1e«>o 5- E c O j j Q b* z 1 §: :s ! - i ! I l ? S ^ B

b u 1 41 I

y*N fm *. 5 -—s -3 'cS 5 -5 J£ i

p

1II 11 -a1 j j , , i * 1iI 1 «g a g e n £t Ib >.

-I 1 ? Q JB

I •3 s 3 st: «S . s £ <

a

- § ^ j§ tu

P 1«M 1 I • 1 1*"* 1 *"* |l 1 J 8| 51"? 2 S a g u u f*"1 • S o w -Z e B . v o j^^\ «*

lj iu =1 S *

Pre

ventiv

eO u |.| Jj Jl

if |1 il 15 ?uI 5 111 Q0' w ij T £"1 |I || Pf S}^ |i 8 e 2 2; »- 7 « to J S o

| ' g 2 ^B - °° ̂ 1' R S | tS -- 1 i s!.2 JP ' s o -1 0 : j ei ! , , , ; cr1^ loS-ll ! £ sj -S § O« ^ ° s * i a> i s ^ ; . a S g

MC

L/M

CLG

(a)

0 0.0

5/0

.05

f| !I*t 1 BI tm ifLiii

. § u S ? | 5 g i S ^ - 2 = . a . g ^ ^ 3

|g|i^« a i -a !&&-2&! .Sf i4IT l D ( S < W w S > K < < < i : > > J 2 S I e

i|I|| o1 1 g1Z £ in J! (2 fS >. S3 o LU

^ V rf ja o -d ti

Ul a

go

'

y2O

8

«•

LL.

UJ

CC Ul a.

a

I

XX

1

OS

co

wu §U

§

X OU

wXu3 CQ

CO

CO

OS O

co

CO

a

ao

I3

19

8u

,2-D

ichl

NJ4

-Di

,2-T

loro

loro

yl C

hl

2

I

= •= i Si*

X X

QW D

X X X X X X

en

s o LL z o o I-UJ

111 o cr 2 in

2 —is

cc s<

Q. Q

SEM

IVO

L

Ace

naph

t

CO Bis

(2

Di

Inde

no(l

,2

Nap

ht

4-N

i

!I 1 20

IJia

X X X X X X X X

il X X X X X X X X X X X X X•Hi

X X X X XIII X X X X X Xtil*-11

Q

sj, X X 0

en X X * 13

U

UHJ1 III o u_ 3 l-

H

slili X 8 a

1

ni X

gD

X

O U

w UJ a

X 8 LU

HI O (T

£ HI

S s o

UJ 8 s EC

N

22

as

IM - V JQ

3

I

SO

00

S 8

s

Z

! a a a a

a

a a a

a

Jvl

\ x

CO

NTA

CR

)

PB)

G

G

OL

ET

IC (A

S)

CA

LCIU

M (C

A CR

)

CO

BA

LT

lR

FE)

PBG

IUM

(MG

NG

A

C/3

1 U o o

S o 1

to c

fv £ J

1 JiI s.

J3

I !

J

j

I i S § 8 8 p:

o S!

g•a £ s?

8 8 8 I

8 S 8 S s 8

8 8 8 s

I- i 1

|

U3

g m o

Oi

S HH &0

OJ o O U

CON

TA DIC

HL

OR

O ORC

ET

S(2

AS

BA

CD

) § î

COBA

LT

CY

AN

I

lRO

N(F

E)

G GA

E

NIC

ASS

IUM

(K

)

SIL

VA

NA

DIU

M

ac o

24

CO 09 03 ri a

I

1 S a I .2

oo Ii I1

NIC

le

ss

ASS

IUM

(K)

G

iI 8 o 3 v

1 I i

§ Pi 8 § 8

1 CJ

8 8 8

$g sg

IZ ° i co

•I

I < UJ eu IU

M (M

G

061

UJ

N.N

-D

OR

OET

06

§U

1I

S(2-

ETH

YL

§ ea

AD

UM

(CA

CM

(CR

)

CO

BA

LT

AN

IRO

N (F

E)

AD

I,S!2O

ICH

L gHH 00

CO

NT

VA

N

fecd

u o u

td a

S

03 C

t ti

i S sJJ

a i S

entia

l

B

ZOIC

AC

IDlo

xici

Ii i 8 S 8 8 8 8

PJ

8 8 8 00 10

58

1

J 2"

o i g

eS

1

UO

E

ALU

AS

CA

D

CD

)

CH

RO

CR)

COBA

LT

IR

m

G IU

M (M

G)

z

I ZFL

U

ZO(G

, 1 »o |

I

RAI u

CO

NT

ZIN

C

APH

T

S

UJ u

s

1a •c

UJ

9 s,8

26

8

•3

1 8

•o

1 1I

S1

POS i

i 8 3 s

S

8

8

8 8 3 s s

0

cJ

8

a a

i w

I

I

CO e U

CON

T NG

A

NIC

ASS

IU

UM

(NA OR

O

ORO

ET

TOL

AP

NTH

E

I E

» i a"

I

ENZO

I A

C

S(i-

ETH

YS

ffi

IBEN

ZO IM A

PHT O

P

O

cu

w

8

X

CO ca ri e

•t u§

- 1 £•s 1 .2 •o Jt I 3. i c

•a

3 1o O; S §?3

i 05

G

23

NG

A

E

28

s 8 S 8 8 w-i

a

R 5? 8 S

& I 1 u

S

I

HG

NIC

ASS

IUM

OD

I AD

I

ZI

OR

H I

,2-D

I

ROETw

8

CO

8 O

RO

ALU

CON

TAM

IN

AD

O fc*H

CO

X PJ U

8

Ii

I en

s

28

&•s

3

1 3

O vt S

0

OS

S r3

§ a S 3 8

8 3

8

z il

1 gu

(U

O

CH

LOR

OET

HA

NE

CHLO

R CH

LORO

ETH

OR

APH

T

K)F

LUO

RAN

T] £

1 5f 3

1

CO

d CO

CA

IRO

N

MG

GA

E

Y (H

DIU

M (N

A

ZN

ORO

ET

MG

NG

A

HG

11 CO

O O U

cu

I

Dffi

ZO

X

s 3 I I o

i

8 3

§: § S

g;

8 8 8 8 8

l 8 8 8 8 8 g 8

RAN

T

ALU

48

ENIC

(AS

CA

D

CA

CO

B

CO

)

D(P

B

HG

NIC

POTA

64

sr

AG

VA

NA

DI

ENIC

(AS e

C

M (C

RO

M

"8

I o

a

o g c* i

§

HH

SJ U

UJ U

S B

tu

U

ON

«

NG

A

I 30

1 8

8

s

s

8

8

8

" 8 s

I • » a

| c*

1 3I CO

NTA

A

NT

O

o o u

si u

E

AD

I

zi

Z

PL,

•*"

31

1 a a O 1 LC

Rad

onal

e fo

r Se

lecd

on o

r E

xclu

sio

DSU

RE

PAT

HW

AY

S

Are

a m

ay b

e re

side

ndal

ly d

evel

op §

Inha

lado

n of

Ove

rbur

dc

Gro

und

Wat

er C

onta

mi

Inha

lado

n of

Con

tam

in

that

Vol

atili

ze f

rom

Bei

or

Ove

rbur

den

Gro

und

and

Seep

int

o B

asem

en

v^d,X U 2 Itt. 0 S ^ S

•s ^•4 u^s

give

n si

te c

hara

cter

istic

s an

d lo

cati

X X X X X X bu

t lim

ited

due

to t

hick

und

erbr

usl

n CO

Ul oCO i 8 „ o o o o o o o

Z Z Z Z Z Zi £ *"Oi0 15 fc U Z

give

n si

te c

hara

cter

istic

s an

d lo

cati

CO 111 i 111

H pi DC « o o o o 3 M 8 S1i * *

o

Z Z Z Z >*" *Sg

ca

B1 , I •a 1 4> 1i I 8

i 1 i 1 I 11

= 1

%

1 •8 w

fi O i l l , a •s

'i 1 f- S *y • ;f •8 4 .» 'o '3

00

f t '1 00 J3 1ag

£ c " *3 C •a

s 11 3S g '3 i a| 1 •«! svt '§ ^ O ,fc H

<

V u fS M V» 1 "^O 3 ^iS* 6 I 6 6|1

a _(3 "s i •S •8 15 •» o .S §•! S

Inge

sdon

of

Bed

rock

G

Wat

er

Mos

t ar

ea r

esid

ents

(w

ithin

1 m

ilesi

te)

rece

ive

thei

r dr

inki

ng w

ater

fi

priv

ate

bedr

ock

wel

ls.

« Ingesdon

of O

verb

urde

in

the

fut

ure.

Inha

lado

n of

Bed

rock

G

roun

d W

ater

Con

tam

i

M

ean

grou

nd w

ater

con

cent

rado

nsvo

ladl

es a

re l

ow.

Mea

n gr

ound

wat

er c

once

ntra

dons

vola

dles

are

low

.

Mea

n gr

ound

wat

er c

once

ntra

dons

vola

dles

are

low

.

[ Incident

al I

nges

tion

of

Surf

ace

Soils

T

resp

assi

ng b

y yo

uths

is

poss

ible

rS

give

n si

te c

hara

cter

istic

s an

d lo

cati

but

limite

d du

e to

thi

ck u

nder

brus

lm

ost

area

s.

Tre

spas

sing

by

yout

hs i

s po

ssib

le

mos

t ar

eas.

Inci

dent

al I

nges

tion

ofTr

espa

ssin

g by

you

ths

is p

ossi

ble

Dis

posa

l A

rea

Surf

ace

i gi

ven

site

cha

ract

eris

tics

and

loca

ti bu

t lim

ited

due

to t

he p

rese

nce

of

fenc

e.

Der

mal

Con

tact

with

Tre

spas

sing

by

yout

hs i

s po

ssib

le

Disp

osal

Are

a Su

rfac

e ,

but

limite

d du

e to

the

pre

senc

e of

fe

nce.

32

ir 1

Gro

und

Wat

er

Dur

ing

Show

ers

1 During S

how

ers

Surf

ace

Soils

U !«

rr LU

Q Ul

1 I

33

1 [ Inciden

tal

Inge

stio

lSu

rfac

e/Su

bsur

face

1

Der

mal

Con

lact

wi

Surf

ace/

Subs

urfa

ce

Inci

dent

al I

nges

tiol

Surf

ace/

Subs

urfa

ce

Der

mal

Con

tact

wi

Disp

osal

Are

aSu

rfac

e/Su

bsur

face

i

Inci

dent

al I

nges

tiol

Stre

am S

edim

ents

Der

mal

Con

tact

wi

Sedi

men

ts

Inci

dent

al I

nges

tiol

Pond

Sed

imen

ts

Der

mal

Con

tact

wi

Pond

Sed

imen

ts

O UJ ^C QC

ts O

S Q

Q | 1

O g •s

1 i X X X X X X X X X X X X

U • '" ^" Z >• Z >• Z r" Z >" I £

18

i UJ UJ

§' 0- tr p g wo o o o Z o S 2 S£ z Z Z Z > Z >• z £ z > Z zUJ

,s . f tau S O ! i 1 s Mi "O Q, TJ 8* :s .•3 M* '" £r "̂

v ^ g '8 P 81 1 J £1

£ 12

H a! H ai t— c£

s u cr i UJco *" tj M 2 tS 1 a. 'oJ o co •S CX3 * 1 •3 ™ * -3 13 •S

I ! ,1 1 1CO CO

ii J 1 1

1 1 1 i

l|TJ 1

CO 1 a i iw ^j il 1 | | 1

6 - 13 Q 1 I 6 1sl 1 1

1 3i5 ^t 3 3 ^ ^ 5 3j

give

n si

te c

hara

cter

istic

s an

d lo

catio

i

give

n si

te c

hara

cter

istic

s an

d lo

catio

i

Rat

iona

le f

or S

elec

tion

or E

xclu

sion

Dur

ing

exca

vatio

n fo

r fu

ture

de

velo

pmen

t sub

surf

ace

soils

may

en

d up

in to

psoi

l (0

-170

Dur

ing

exca

vatio

n fo

r fu

ture

de

velo

pmen

t sub

surf

ace

soils

may

en

d up

in to

psoi

l (0

-170

Dur

ing

exca

vatio

n fo

r fu

ture

D

ispos

al A

rea

deve

lopm

ent s

ubsu

rfac

e so

ils m

ay

end

up in

tops

oil (

0-60

Dur

ing

exca

vatio

n fo

r fu

ture

de

velo

pmen

t sub

surf

ace

soils

may

en

d up

in to

psoi

l (0-

60

Tres

pass

ing

by y

outh

s is

pos

sibl

e

Are

a m

ay b

e re

side

ntia

lly d

evel

oped

in th

e fu

ture

.

Tres

pass

ing

by y

outh

s is

pos

sible

gi

ven

site

cha

ract

eris

tics

and

loca

tioi «

Inci

dent

al I

nges

t

G

roun

d W

ater

S

Q g 3W D |

|•s O

aU X X X X

Inci

dent

al I

nges

tG

roun

d W

ater

S

1

tu

3 „ HIQo o o o o oH LL sS ^ Z Z Z Z z £ Z >• 5 5 ^ s 1

ca

>n o

r E

xclu

sio

a

$ 1 1 f 8 3 JB 6 ^ ** W **

iiiij! i-

Rat

iona

le :

^ i! s 1 1 d

111 fill

Q w a 3

1 •s O 1 1

3 S 1 1 2 j2

HI o

ta 111

£ LU O oc o

1 2 £

1 a s DC Ol a.

II

O\ in I] < E

ir -i 1J

TABLE 6. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INGESTION OF GROUND WATER FOR PRESENT AND FUTURE SCENARIOS

VARIABLE RANGE MIDPOINTVALUE

USED RATIONALE REFERENCE

Receptor Population Local Residents

Body Weight (kg)

Adult Resident 70 Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I

Duration of Exposure (years)

Adult Resident 1-70 35 30 . 90th percentile for time at a single residence

RAGS Suppl.

Exposure Frequency(days/year)

1 - 350 175 35$ Per EPA Guidance RAGS Suppl.

Ingestion Rate (I/day)

Adult Resident 2 Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I

Averaging Time (days)

noncarcinogens

carcinogens

J0950

25550

Values used are based on exposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime exposure for carcinogens.

EPA, Reg. I

RAGS Suppl.: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Vol. I. Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure Factors, Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. March 1991. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001, June 1989.

A92-460 txt 36

X'4 ALLIANCE RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL

TABLE 7. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INCIDENTAL INGESTION OF ONSITE AND DISPOSAL AREA SURFACE SOILS FOR PRESENT SCENARIO

VARIABLE

Receptor Population

Body Weight (kg) Youth (Age 9-18)

Relative Absorption Factor VOCs SVOCs Inorganics -lead

Duration of Exposure (years) Youth

Exposure Frequency (days/year)

Ingestion Rate (mg/day) Youth

Averaging Time (days) noncarcinogemc carcinogenic

VALUE RANGE MIDPOINT USED

30.7-66.7 48.7 50

100% 100% mm 30%

1-10 5 10

1 - 350 175 39

too

365$ 25550

RATIONALE

Trespassers

REFERENCE

50th percentile values in range, value used is average of range

EFH

Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I

•,

Total years in age group

Assumes youth trespasses 1 d/wk during spring, summer and fall (39 weeks total).

' Value used is specified for children more than 6 years old

Value used is based on exposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime for carcinogens

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8/-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment 1989. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA-901/5-89-001. June 1989. .

A92-460 txt 37

ALLIANCE RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL

L TABLES. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH ONSITE AND DISPOSAL AREA SURFACE SOILS FOR PRESENT SCENARIO

VARIABLE RANGE MIDPOINT VALUE RATIONALE REFERENCE USED

Receptor Population Trespassers

Body Weight (kg) Youth (Age 9-18) 30.7-66.7 48.7 50 50th percentile values EFH

in range, value used in average of range

Duration of Exposure (years) Youth 1-10 5 ^ 16< Total years in age

group

Exposure Frequency (days/year) Youth 1 - 350 175 39 Assume youth

trespasses 1 d/wk during spring, summer and fall (39 weeks total).

Soil Contact Rate (mg/day) Youth 500 As suggested by EPA, Reg. I

Region P

Absorption Factor (percent) Volatile Organics 0-100 50 50 , Values used are EPA, Reg. I Semi-volatile Organics 0-100 50 5 considered most Inorganics 0-100 50 Negligible realistic values

Averaging Time (days) Value used is based on EPA, Reg. I noncarcinogenic 3650 exposure duration for carcinogenic 25550 noncarcinogens and

lifetime for carcinogens

"500 mg/day soil contact rate assumes 2,000 cm2 of exposed body surface area; a 0.5 mg/cm2 soil deposition rate; and a 50 percent body coverage with soils. EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment 1989 RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001. June 1989.

A92-460 txt 38 k ALLIANCE


••

TABLE 13. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INCIDENTAL INGESTION OF STREAM SEDIMENTS FOR FUTURE SCENARIO

VARIABLE

Receptor Population

Body Weight (kg) Child (

—

1-61 -70

1 - 350

— 15 70

100%100% 100%

30% 50%

3 6 35 3&

175 ISO

200 100

21$0 25550

10950 25550

RATIONALE

Local Residents

Per EPA Guidance

Per EPA Guidance v

Total years in age group 90th percentile for time at a single residence

Per EPA guidance

Per EPA Guidance

Value used is based on exposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime for carcinogens

REFERENCE

EFH EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8/-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. 1989. RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfiind, Volume I, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA-901/5-89-001. June 1989.

A92-460.txt 43 ALLIANCE


TABLE 14. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH STREAM SEDIMENTS FOR FUTURE SCENARIO

VALUE VARIABLE RANGE MIDPOINT USED RATIONALE REFERENCE

Receptor Population Resident


TABLE 15. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INCIDENTAL INGESTION OF FIRE POND SEDIMENT WHILE SWIMMING FOR PRESENT SCENARIOS



Receptor Population Trespassers

Body Weight (kg) Youth (Age 9-18) 30.7-66.7 48.7 5$ 50th percentile values

in range, value used is average of range

EFH

Relative Absorption FVOCs SVOCs Inorganics -lead

actor 100%100%

Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I

Duration of ExposureYouth

(years) 1-10 5 10 Total years in age

group

Exposure Frequency (days/year) 1-350 175 13 Professional judgement Assumes youth swims 1 d/wk during summer (13 weeks total).

Ingestion RateYouth

(mg/day) 100 Value used is specified

for children more than 6 years old

EPA, Reg. I

Averaging Time (days) noncarcinogenic carcinogenic

365025550

Value used is based on exposure duration for noncarcinogens and

EPA, Reg. I

lifetime for carcinogens

EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8/-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. 1989. RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA-901/5-89-001. June 1989.

A92-460 txt 45 ALLIANCE


TABLE 16. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INCIDENTAL INGESTION OF FIRE POND SEDIMENTS WHILE SWIMMING FOR FUTURE SCENARIO

VARIABLE

Receptor Population


15, 70

100% 100% 100%

30% 50%'

3 6 35 30

175 26

200 100

1190 25550

10950 25550

RATIONALE

Local Residents

REFERENCE

Per EPA Guidance EFH EPA, Reg. I

Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg.I

Total years in age group.90th percentile for time at a single residence

Professional judgementAssumes youth swims 2 day/wk for summer (13 weeks).

EPA, Reg. I

RAGS Suppl.

Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg.I

Value used is based onexposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime for carcinogens

EPA, Reg. I

EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8/-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. 1989. RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA-901/5-89-001. June 1989.



TABLE 17. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH FIRE POND SEDIMENTS WHILE SWIMMING FOR PRESENT SCENARIO

VARIABLE

Receptor Population

Body Weight (kg) Youth (Age 9-18)

Duration of Exposure (years) Youth

Exposure Frequency (days/year) Youth

Soil Contact Rate (mg/day) Youth

Absorption Factor (percent) Volatile Organics Semi-volatile Organics Inorganics


noncarcinogenic carcinogenic

RANGE

30.7-66.7

1-10

1 - 350

0-1000-1000 - 100

MIDPOINT

48.7

5

175

50 50 50

VALUJ USED

50

W

13

500

58 5

Negfigtbte

3650 25550

I

RATIONALE REFERENCE

Trespassers

50th percentile values EFH in range, value used in average of range

Total years in age group

Professional judgement Assume youth swims 1 d/wk during summer (13 weeks total)

Per EPA guidance' EPA, Reg. I

Values used are EPA, Re? considered most realistic values

Value used is based on EPA, Reg. I exposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime for carcinogens

'500 mg/day soil contact rate assumes 2,000 cm2 of exposed body surface area; a 0.5 mg/cm2 soil deposition rate; and a 50 percent body coverage with soils. EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook, EPA 600/8-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment 1989 RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program. Draft Final. EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001. June 1989.

A92-460 txt 47


l

TABLE 18. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH FIRE POND SEDIMENTS FOR FUTURE SCENARIO

VALUE VARIABLE RANGE MIDPOINT USED RATIONALE REFERENCE



TABLE 19. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INGESTION OF FIRE POND SURFACE WATER WHILE SWIMMING FOR PRESENT SCENARIO



Receptor Population Trespasser (Youths)

Body Weight (kg)

Youth (Age 9-18) 50 Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I

Exposure Time (hours/day)

2,6 Per EPA Guidance RAGS

Duration of Exposure (years)

Youth 1 - 10 5 10 Total years in age group

Exposure Frequency(days/year)

1-350 175 13 Professional judgement Assumes youth swims 1 day/wk for summer (13 weeks).

Ingestion Rate (I/hour)

Youth 0.05 Per EPA Guidance EPA, Reg. I


noncarcinogens

carcinogens

3650

25550

Values used are based on exposure duration

for noncarcinogens and lifetime exposure

EPA, Reg. I

for carcinogens.

RAGS Suppl.: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Vol. I. Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure Factors, Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. March 1991. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001, June 1989.



TABLE 20. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: INGESTION OF FIRE POND SURFACE WATER WHILE SWIMMING FOR FUTURE SCENARIO

VARIABLE RANGE

Receptor Population

Body Weight (kg)

Child (

VALUE ESED

15 7$

2£

6 3$

' 26

0.05

2190 25550

10950 25550

RAGS Suppl.: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Vol. I.

RATIONALE

Resident

Per EPA Guidance

Per EPA Guidance

Total years in age group 90th percenule for time at a single residence

Professional judgement Assumes youth swims 2 day/wk for summer (13 weeks).

Per EPA Guidance

Values used are based on exposure duration for noncarcinogens and lifetime exposure for carcinogens.

REFERENCE

EFH EPA, Reg. I

RAGS

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

EPA, Reg. I

Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure Factors, Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. March 1991. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final, EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001, June 1989.



TABLE 21. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH FIRE POND SURFACE WATER FOR PRESENT SCENARIO



Receptor Population Trespasser/Resident

Body Weight (kg) Youth (Age 9-18) 30.7 - 66.7 48.7 50 50th percentile values

in range, value used is average of range

EFH

Exposure Tune (hours/day) 23 Per EPA guidance RIGS

Duration of ExposureYouth

(years) 1-10 5 10 Total years in age

group

Exposure FrequencyYouth

(days/year) 1-350 175 13 Professional judgment

Assumes youth swims 1 d/wk during summer (13 total weeks)

Skin Surface Area Contacted (sq centimeters)

Youth Total Body 14,667 Per EPA guidance,

age-specific data RAGS

Dermal Permeability Constants (cm/hour)

Chemical-specific variable literature


Youth noncarcinogen carcinogen

365-36501095-25550

1825 18250

3650 25550

Range, midpoint, and value used are based

on exposure duration

EPA, Reg.I

EFH: U.S. EPA, Exposure Factors Handbook (EFH), EPA/600/8-89/043. Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. 1989. RAGS: U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume /, EPA 540/1-89/002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December 1989. EPA, Reg. I: U.S. EPA, Supplemental Guidance for the Superfund Program, Draft Final. EPA Region I, EPA 901/5-89-001. June, 1989.



L TABLE 22. EXPOSURE PATHWAY: DERMAL CONTACT WITH FIRE POND SURFACE WATER FOR FUTURE SCENARIO VALUE

VARIABLE RANGE MIDPOINT XfSED RATIONALE REFERENCE



Sedi

men

t

t 1 s S.

II

]l X CO

06

So

t-

X8 tu O

H

1

|

8

J 5

u

a

i

_

w S 1

3

i1||

*

I! H §

I * "

1 §

l« i i ]| 5

t.

iQ ,t£« *s •a o. t.

3^=

N.N

-Dim

ethy

lfor

mam

i

\ B

is(2

-eth

ylhe

xyl)p

hlha

X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X Q U.

O

01

LU O rr 2

X X X X X X X X X X

X X

s rrty 3. LU

Dib

enzo

fLlra

n

4-N

itrop

heno

l

Ace

naph

lhen

e

Ant

hrac

ene

Ben

zo(a

)anl

hrac

ene

|| B

enzo

(a)p

yren

e

Ben

zo(b

)flu

oran

then

e

Ben

zo(k

)flu

oran

then

e

Ben

zo(g

,h,i)

pery

lene

a.

a Q LUo _1 O

a o

1:a

Che

mic

al

| V

OLA

TILE

S

Chl

oroe

lhan

e

1,1

-Dic

hlor

oelh

ane

|| 1,

1, 1

-Tric

hlor

oelh

ane

|| M

elhy

lene

Chl

orid

e

53

ii I I

1

1

i 13

ĝ I a

11

Ii

i| 21

11 1 i

i* e

||

1*8at

•sI?

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X

X X X

X X X

X X X X X X X X

u a

o o

111 111 o< Q LLJ

1

INO

RG

AN

ICS

Alu

min

um

Ars

enic

o

Nap

htha

lene

Phen

anth

rene

O

OE

CO

1 C

hrom

ium

u u 1 •o (4u M

anga

nese

1•s a s E a

54

c

I

I X

X

Pe HI

Q

LU

HI O crO

LU Q_

Q_

Q

o O LU DC

cc

03 •5 =i ri d$1 a

1 1 ? I1•§>

1 M

SS±level

I o o 8 _

1 •g -s ? f

oo a, £ 5 ;f 1 I -a o _o.2 JS S£

vO

S 3 8

8

8 8

8

8

8

a

8

8

8

8 8

8

I Ii 1

I

•<

£ D

IUM

(MG

NG

A

E

1

I oe.

! ^2 I2V) ca

.5

a -H *

oi ai &

gS a

Ji

1

3

00

a S -o 8 8 o 5

•8,a

o S S S§ 8

8 8 S O

OO S ol̂ i

o 8

9 a

A,H

)AN

T

FLU

ORA

E

CL

S% of

Ui NA

NT

E

UM

M (

AL)

UM

(BA

CA

D

CD

UM

(CA

68

UM

BALT

GN

ESIU

M (M

G

44

G

1 I &

S -8

I« a •o o3

O o

UJ

O

I

UO

N

T

I Iffl tt

CON

TA

BEN

g gon

o o

CJ o o

.So

UJ

c £. £• e- £• &

"C G o m .£ fr

K 5 M X • — 3 s 3 3£• 2- .£ —

1 1 •3 1 f .£ 'u "2 f "3 '§» 'S

5 £ S

uion

/eco

logi

ition

/eco

logi

Uio

n/ec

olog

i

ilion

/eco

logi

'o ;g 1 'C 'x

*

oo I.1 -a o1 S c11 SM C3 5 JB 1

lent

, low

tox

|

S%

lent

, low

tox

5 bg lent,

low

tox

ienl

, low

tox

lent

, low

tox

Io

~ '3 uK Q£ « c

"̂ t3 s to£j to

i "±3 to•y &t S 3 icCc gc

•a § § §1 i i§ Ĝ C8 3s•y _2

3i •g ;a Tl TJ "3 g•3

•a 73

(v j> wnu'ivj |

i5 1

o g o 0 O o CM 0> o VC 0 o1 S § «0 en Vi I VO 1 I o w-t 0 5

r ' 1 1 S i * i 1 1 I o

1,1,

1-TR

ICH

LOR

OET

HA

] o o « o vO O o IT) 1 8 £ 8 5 1s E ° § I o vn c*i o •£ wn 2 S•« a S i 1 1 1 11 1 1 1

o r- M f-4

t. " "o

| TE

TRA

CH

LOR

OET

HEN

l i™ 3 c

| TR

ICH

LOR

OTR

IFLU

OR

I « en *"**

" S "3 HSa.

i 1 S£ 3 m o

81

88 V V

M V) M1 s 1 1U S1 1 1 V u

1'

O

fc Z

| 1,

1-D

ICH

LOR

OET

HA

NE

| 1,

1-D

ICH

LOR

OET

HA

NE

| 1,

1-D

ICH

LOR

OET

HEN

E

1 1,

2-D

ICH

LOR

OET

HEN

E

| C

IILO

RO

ETH

AN

E

[ N.N

-DIM

ETH

YLF

OR

MA

al S

trta

m)

1 1,

1,1-

TRIC

HLO

RO

ETH

A

1 TR

ICH

LOR

OET

HEN

E

1 M

AG

NES

IUM

(M

G)

| M

AN

GA

NES

E (M

N)

| M

ERC

UR

Y (

HG

)

1 PO

TASS

IUM

(K)

CA

LCIU

M (

CA

)

IRO

N (F

E)

MA

GN

ESIU

M (M

G)

MA

NG

AN

ESE

(MN

)

1 CA

LCIU

M (C

A)

MA

GN

ESIU

M (M

G)

|siL

VE

R(A

G)

CO

NTA

MIN

AN

T

1 ZIN

C (Z

N)

ALU

MIN

UM

(AL)

| C

ALC

IUM

(CA

)

| IR

ON

(FE)

SOD

IUM

(NA

)

SOD

IUM

(NA

)

ZIN

C (Z

N) I

Q

(NZ

)DN

IZ|

UXin u o

CJ t 1 u•u ^^ u a 5.5 3 8̂£ ŝ £

g 5 i« aw

oo o CJtu •s ?c« 'c cs ̂ 1S V J*o

^ C/5 to 53 oS "o U3 — 13 •oo I

V c_ gu-^I i

1E >

Vi—i t O .b c_ u.

V

fr 'G 3 •0 X "5 §a Sfr "3

'3> g •'G

1 I '§" 1JS 'i S S S 5 *

"3 -g o.1 o -§ -§ .5 x « U) f>j —g —|̂I •| en I'aS la"5 c i s g §

M•a •g g 3 •5 u •a•a '3 3 8IU » s c^ _oU s ttS ^

— P-; CM OO P-; en § en •«T S S? S § S en o wl g I DO ON en o 1 &> ||O r~ oo vi r— i i oo oo P- i i 30 en i S 1 I 9

oo

S

5 1 u

a o g a g §oq en S Oen r- S 00 0 g g 0V) s § 0 8 o o en 8 8 g S s g

V) | - -g -|5? S 0 S M̂ oo « 2 2 § OO sS

8 en rJ P; ^ OS en CM 8 00 en en 8 OS

|i|! 1 r-

w» o o o o o O O o o o o8 oo en en o a S en en S 8 S CM S * 00 i s S en oo OS S i |1 a o 1 |

OO 2 r— oo "* 1 8 1 1 en 1

J (S § ~ r—

BEN

ZO(B

)FLU

OR

AN

TH1

u _ _ |

BEN

ZO(G

(H,I)

PER

YLE

N]

CM CM CM CM en en cn en en en en en en en en en en en en en en cn en en en en en B

ENZO

(K)F

LUO

RA

NTH

1 — — —I ̂ J 1

Z co 1

CM c-« CM en en en fN en CM en en CM en en CM |

DIB

ENZ(

A,H

)AN

THR

AC

1**

IND

ENO

(1,2

,3-C

D)P

YR

E1

r-

CU U J tu tu m tu § Zi

§u

1 I oo

S3 HUJ

BIS

(2-E

THY

LHEX

YL)

PH

CH

RY

SEN

E

CO

NTA

MIN

AN

T

MA

GN

ESIU

M (

MG

)

MA

NG

AN

ESE

(MN

)

MER

CU

RY

(HG

)

SOD

IUM

(N

A)

1,1-

DIC

HLO

RO

ETH

AN

E

CH

LOR

OET

HA

NE

CH

LOR

OFO

RM

O

BEN

ZO(A

)PY

REN

E

ALU

MIN

UM

(A

L)

| A

RSE

NIC

(AS)

| B

AR

IUM

(B

A)

1 C

AD

MIU

M (

CD)

[ CA

LCIU

M (

CA)

[ C

HR

OM

IUM

(CR)

NA

PHTH

ALE

NE

PHEN

AN

THR

ENE

DIB

ENZO

FUR

AN

FLU

ORA

NTH

ENE

| FL

UO

REN

E

TO

LU

EN

E

ACE

NA

PHTH

ENE

AN

THR

AC

ENE H

UJ

I 3]

aoSou UJ

1

|

u a

? V} u

u•«* CN 3 'g CO

CO •a O a — rO

a. 1 E

CO a. 1

1

l_ ! JO •3 S a i

W 0£

nutri

_0

i.a i

S g 8 8 8 8 0 S S

8 8 8 8

8 8 8 8

1" o o

UJ

Z

iO o M

AG

NES

IUM

(MG

B!

VA

NA

D

fa1

S E/5

Y (H

G SAS

S

UM

(BA B

CH

LOR

OFO

ER FE) PB

z î

EL

Cfl I

iNTA

C/5

5 ua o c_ CO S3 ZI uto u X UJ

3 y o o

Tfr" CN PJ

60

£• •3 o

I i- i a

lon/

e

lon/

e *

I e c •a 1

S 55 s S v> o 2 s 3 § S s

111 os v» 8s 5? 3 s

8 g S 8 g Sa s

I

"

O

ENIC

(AS)

CIU

M (C

A

CH

ALT

CO

P

FE)

PB

5 s 1 Q N

GA

SE

KE

SO

ZZ

NTA

o

ATTACHMENT B

BACKGROUND SUMMARY STATISTICS

1 A92-460.txt 62

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL XJr4 ALLIANCE

L MASTER LIST OF BACKGROUND SAMPLE GROUPINGS,

Sample Grouping

Background Bedrock Ground Water

Background Bedrock Ground Water

Background Ground Water



Background Sediments



Background Surface Soils



Background Surface Water



NUMBERS AND ANALYSES

Sample Number Volatile*

MW-101R(204-214')I X

MW-101R(204-214')n X

ERM-lSfo-ieOn X

MW-101M(45-55')n •x MW-101M(45-55')n X

SE-200(0-OJ') X

SE-210(0-0.5') X

SE-220(0-0.5') X

SS- 12(0-10 X

55-17(0-0 X 55-18(0-10 X

SW-200(Mid-Depth) X

SW-210(Mid-DePth) X

SW-220(Shallow) X

BNAs Pesticides Inorganics

X X

X

X

X X

X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

A92-460.txt 63

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL ALLIANCE

2 ti ^ VO 5 « -3 o n •U k)

4J o Vo

05 2 3 *•

5 Q

• • u o o v o o o o o m o O 0 4J %4

- -

* i 0 o oa 1 3

3

U o o •5* i8 0 •n

2

4t O O o o e 0 n a to

o in Ol m o o o O O 0 Ol O 10 S•« ">1 10 o * Iin in •H '̂ 0| • 5 Ol «n ^V C*| to a o « w

2 •1 0| to to 6> r« *•

o e 9 ^ Vo {^

^ -H 0 *» ^

" 2 ° jq 0 o e * Q^ V) o o o o o o in o^ o f> m 0 ^ o « >i m in t> * 1-1 j» ot ri ot ** rf ' 1 - ' m " in •«• ri to * S1 " 2 " •

« 1 i? e -, s Q ^ ^^ o o O o o o o o in o o o o e 0 o o o Ol in o o •1 o o n e n o in 10 ?* ** £ 5 ^g ** " S tJ 0 o o 0| o 0 o o o m o

00 6 8 1 •* *• *< 0 •̂ o t^ «"i in 5g in ^i 3 1 in *» 5 OJ

1 i! •s I i t •3 01 «P1

£ , TZ 4

on 4J U • •I -5

4J £ fr< on

<

on t.

3 s i cD

BA

RIU

M

(BA

)

CA

LC

IUM

(C

Jt

CK

LO

RID

*

CO

BA

LT

(CO

)

CO

PP

KR

(C

U)

KA

RD

MS

S

BJ $ g i iaon

Q

D O oi

,

AL

UM

INU

M

It

l-lgc 1 I 1 |1i g g S s B3Sg gQ S 1 g 2 S §H

; O CJ <

t) N

ca

01

L

ATTACHMENT C

PUBLIC HEALTH SUMMARY STATISTICS

A92-460.UI 66

RECYCLED PAPER ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL Xtt. ALLIANCE

http:A92-460.UI

MASTER LIST OF PUBLIC HEALTH SAMPLE GROUPINGS, NUMBERS, AND ANALYSES U

Sample Grouping Sample Number Volatile; BNAs Pesticides Inorganics

Bedrock Ground Water MW-103R(192-22601 X X X

Bedrock Ground Water MW-1 03R(192-2260IDP X X

Deep Subsurface Soils SB-1A(136-1380 X

X

Bedrock Ground Water MW-103R(192-2260n X X

Bedrock Ground Water Tansitor (256-4000 X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Buzzel (Unknown) X

Residential Wen Data - Tap Sampled Cutler (Unknown) X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Cutler (Unknown) DP X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Fowler (750 X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Husser (Unknown) X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Severs(22-2710 X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Tronson (Unknown) X

Residential Well Data - Tap Sampled Vermonter (50-1710 X

Disposal Area Subsurface Soils SSD-K4-60 X X X

Disposal Area Subsurface Soils SSD-2(4-60 X X X X






Disposal Area Subsurface Soils SSD-7(4-60DP X X X X


Disposal Area Surface Soils SSD-HO-20 X X X

Disposal Area Surface Soils SSD-2(0-20 X X X X



Disposal Area Surface Soils SSD-5(0-2-O X X X X

Disposal Area Surface Soils SSD-5(0-20DP X X X X




X

A92-460.txt 67


Sample Grouping

Deep Subsurface Soils

Deep Subsurface SoHi

| Deep Subsurface Soils


Deep Subsurface Soilti

Deep Subsurface Soils. )• Deep Subsurface Soils

Deep Subsurface Soilh





Deep Subsurface SoOi


Drainage Line Water

Overburden Ground Water







, Overburden Ground Water




i 3verburden Ground Water

I Overburden Ground Water


t Overburden Ground Water



I Overburden Ground Water

Sample Number

SB-1A(138-1400

SB-1A(20-220

SB-1A(22-220DP

SB-IA(98-1000

SB-2

Sample Grouping









Ground Water Seepage Sediment

Ground Water Seepage Sediment

Ground Water Seepage Water

Ground Water Seepage Water

Onsite Streams Surface Water








Onsite Streams Sediments







Fire Pond Sediments

Fire Pond Sediments

Surface Soils

Surface Soils

Surface Soils

Surface Soils

Sample Number

MW- 10611(4-14011

MW-1 07U(5-200II

Mw-iosu(3-8on

MW-109U(3-180n

MW-ELF(2.5- 17.501

Mw-ELF(2.5-n.5on

MW-WLF(3-1801

MW-WLF(3-180n

SE-1 30(0-0.50

SE-135(0-0.50

SW-130 (Shallow)

SW-135 (Shallow)

SW- 110 (Shallow)

SW- 120 (Mid-Depth)

SW-140 (Mid-Depth)

SW-140 (Mid-Depth)DP

SW-150 (Mid-Depth)

SW- 160 (Mid-Depth)

SW-160 (Mid-Depth)DP

SW-170 (Mid-Depth)

SE-1 10(0-0.50

SE-1 20(0-0.50

SE-1 40(0-0.50

SE-140(0-0.50DP

SE-15CKO-0.50

SE-1 60(0-0.50

SE-1 70(0-0.50

SE-1 00(0-0.50

SE-100(0-0.50DP

SS-08(0-10

SS-09(0-10

SS- 10(0- 10

ss-i i(o-io

Volatile*

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

BNAs Pesticides Inorganics

X

X

X X

X

X X

X

X X

X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

A92-460.txt 69


http:00(0-0.50http:70(0-0.50http:60(0-0.50http:SE-15CKO-0.50http:40(0-0.50http:20(0-0.50http:10(0-0.50http:SE-135(0-0.50http:30(0-0.50

Sample Grouping Sample Number Volatlles BNAs Pesticides Inorganics

Surface Soils SS-14(0-O X

Surface Soils 55-15(0-10 X X X

Surface Soils SS- 19(0- 10 X X X

Surface Soils SS-19(0-ODP X X X

Surface Soils ss-20(o-io X

Surface Soils 55-21(0-10 X X X

Subsurface Soils SS-K14-160 X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-1A02-140 X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-2(12-HO X X X

Subsurface Soib SB-3(4-60 X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-4(4-60 X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-5(6-80 X X

Subsurface Soils SB-5(6-80DP X X

Subsurface Soils 58-6(10-120 X

Subsurface Soils SB-6(12-140 X

Subsurface Soils SB-6X4-60 X

Subsurface soils SB-7(8-100 X X X




Subsurface Soils SB-9(6-80DP X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-ELF(1 2-170 X X X

Subsurface Soils SB-WLF(8-100 X X X

Fire Pond Surface Waier SW-100 (Deep) X X X

Fire Poad Surface Waler SW-100 (Mid-Depth) X X X

Fire Pond Surface Water SW-100 (Mid-Depth)DP X X X

A92-460.txt 70


•u e o o o 0 . O

S 0 • °- t

* 2 5 § 0*"* O Oi

. 4J 0 O 0 0 o o

• S o -S • 54* O

2

* * *

• •

o o o o 0 0 0 O 0 o "< 01 >P •» o

p-

O 0 O o 0 0 O O o o•3 S 1! •S • -3 0| 0| 0| 0| o

U .4 S 0| „o oi in o o in 0 c» m o o PI S 01 01

a, § -3 o 0Ain *

40

5119946

tv

32

2120

5446 to o S o n 10 t Ot o t

tv o in o o 10 it *, 5 5 8 in o o o

lo lo m m 0 3 i lo

i 1(c

ontin

ued)

.

w"

O !z o 0£yUJ OS O fc CO

§

SS 1* o a

M

g* i5 2 5 £

i

i| S 1 8 3 3 3 0) ^ • O

| 3 8 8 0 5 |

1 A « •? o p 5 o §E o • o

2

ei0

orii

01oO

01

oo01

oi

O

o o i 01 o 0

n>

o o >t

oi

O

o o i

01 o O

a>

o o «

o1 o

0

1 0) o o

o o It

o1 o o

1 01

o o o o

o o

10

o1 o o

1

o o

i

o o o 2

oi o o

1 01

o o o

o o o 0

0

o 0 p«

1

0

0

in

o e o

oi o o

1 o> o o o o m

o o

0

1 o oPI 1

01

o o o o PI

o o o 0

ei 0

5 i

o 0 o U)n

o o o o

"

o1

o o 1

01

o

0>

o 0

Q 05

o o

o 1

01

0 o 0

o

0 0|

o 0

0

t 01 o 0

0 o 0

o o

o

O 1

O

It 1

01

oin

o

n

oi o o o

1 01

o 01

">

o1 Q

§

1

01

0

tt.

0

o

X § "H sl

£ 01 0, |

CO

AG

RO

UN

D S

UM

MA

RY

STA

TIST

IC

1 Z |

VOC

f 2-

BU

TA

NO

lK

J

AC

STO

N*

'•>

CH

LORO

FORM

1

ICST

HYL

XNI

CB

LOR

ID*

J

BM

A»

BSP

TA

CO

SAia

*

BV

CA

DSC

AN

OIC

AC

ID

J

KSR

CO

RY

(HO

) :

3IL

VIR

(A

O)

i

SOL

IDS,

TO

TAL

:

TOTA

L

OR

OA

HIC

C

AR

BO

N

:

I 11

CO

PP

SR

(CU

)

aa. J8i 1 3 a M

01

• •

L 1

4J

• • • I

« n •Q« I 3 « i , . .

Q

. • * U O O o o O e

o | | J o U) o

i 0| ") ^ a a o tn t"* U) *^

• 5 § OH H • *o X H *> n "i § i H i OS •

0 o 0 o o o 0 o 0 03

0 m3 « -5 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0• **

inin tx

0 o 0 0 o

3 | I n

u VD in Ol Vo tx 0

O

o o o o n

o

11

o

o o o

o 0

00 O

H 0 o

v» o «n

o tx

o 0 tx

o o 0 o\ in 0| 11 0| CO o 0 0 0 o 0 oin

oin

o o

n

0 0 0 0 0 o 2 ^ 5

o o CO 0

11 o Ov »1 o CO 0

Vo Ol

n oto

P» CQ

COCO

Vo 0|

n m c« ^» ^ CO 11 in tx 11

0 0 ft O

m o •i

0 O

* • *u

o = • • 0

O U -H

5 2 3 •

* * u t. to to 0 U> g 1 » 1fc Iff 1 O CO •5

)4 • u 2. t> af i< U « • h, c» io U « • • u >4 «> o H A k jq o «j 14 ^ MSE ft, hi q M M S T9 -H 0 OEXJ Q B« U MI 1 1 J

-H O 4J "D - O «i O tH i| -J « • O O «S 0 CQ • O >* * *J n

(4 * JQ O 0 O "i O O >0 0>

CD •; " g § 5 2 ° On ^» S 5 1 3 * S tv

01 -H 3 9 1-1 os K a - 8 8 o e * s

*H O *J t3 ei « 11 « • u O i-l IX fc o H • u aCO H B. k U 0 O C3 CN •5 s B SH

PJ §

* 'I a> t>. m

t-

1 in O tu 5 CO *o U » «

P 9 -5 S * J5 H CO ££ ti AJ

5P CO

pathway analysis report, risk assessment.pathways by which huma n receptor mas y become expose tdo...

Documents