NYSDEC BROWNFIELD CLEANUP PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE … Plan.BCP.C130164.2010... · nysdec brownfield...

NYSDEC BROWNFIELD CLEANUP PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS REPORT

REMEDIAL WORK PLAN INWOOD, NEW YORK 11096

INDEX # A1-0543-0406

SITE # C130164

Prepared For:

175 ROGER AVENUE LLC 2305 NW 107th Avenue, Suite 107

Doral, Florida 33172

December 6, 2010

Prepared by:

ATC Associates Inc. 104 East 25th Street

New York, NY 10010

Alternative Analysis and Remedial Work Plan New York State Brownfield Cleanup Program 175 Roger Avenue Site # C130164 Inwood, New York December 6, 2010

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................4

1.1 Purpose and Background ...........................................................................................................4 1.2 Site Description............................................................................................................................4 1.3 Proposed Site Redevelopment ....................................................................................................5 1.4 Site History...................................................................................................................................6

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE CONDITIONS.............................................................................................8

2.1 Previous Environmental Investigation ......................................................................................8 2.2 BCP Remedial Investigation.....................................................................................................11 2.3 Qualitative Exposure and Helath Risk Assessment ...............................................................15

3.0 REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND GOALS ..........................................................................17

3.1 Remedial Action Objectives for Subsurface Soils ..................................................................17 3.2 Remedial Objectives for Groundwater ...................................................................................17

4.0 GENERAL RESPONSE ACTIONS & EXTENT REQUIRING REMEDIAL ACTION ................19

4.1 General Response Actions for Soil...........................................................................................19 4.2 General Response Actions for Groundwater ..........................................................................19 4.3 Extent of Impact Requiring Remediation ...............................................................................20

5.0 IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING OF TECHNOLOGIES........................................................21

5.1 Technology Identification .........................................................................................................21 5.2 Technology Screening ...............................................................................................................21

6.0 DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ...............................................................23

6.1 Soil Alternatives.........................................................................................................................23 6.2 Groundwater Alternatives........................................................................................................33

7.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES & RECOMMENDED REMEDY ................41

7.1 Recommended Soil Alternative................................................................................................41 7.2 Recommended Groundwater Alternative................................................................... 42


ii

8.0 REMEDIAL WORK PLAN ...................................................................................................................43

8.1 Building Demolition ..................................................................................................................43 8.2 Selected Remedy............................................................................................................ 44

9.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS...............................................................................................................53

9.1 Future Site Use ..........................................................................................................................53 9.2 Groundwater Use ......................................................................................................................53 9.3 Vapor Intrusion .........................................................................................................................53 9.4 Site Management Plan ..............................................................................................................53

10.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE ..........................................................................................................................54

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Site Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Groundwater Elevations and Contour Map July 18, 2008 4. Proposed Site Redevelopment Plan 5. Gasoline UST Test Pit Location Map 6. Soil Sampling Location Map 7. Total Petroleum VOC’s, Monitoring Wells – June 2008 8. Total Petroleum VOC’s w/Depth, June 2008 9. Total Chlorinated VOC’s, Monitoring Wells – June 2008 10. Total Chlorinated VOC’s w/Depth, June 2008 11. Total Organic Volatiles (VOCs) Measured in Shallow Monitoring Wells (MW) and Probe

Locations (BW) and Measured Concentration of Electron Acceptors and Metabolic By-Products 12. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Compound Concentrations and Electron Acceptors and Metabolic By-

Products with Distance from Monitoring Well Location MW-19 13. Soil Vapor, Sub-Slab Vapor, Indoor Air and Outdoor Air Sampling Locations 14. Approximate Soil Excavation Area 15. Approximate Area of In-Situ Chemical Oxidation 16. Pilot Test Layout 17. Conceptual Oxidation and Anaerobic Treatment Zones

LIST OF TABLES

1.1 Volatile Organic Compounds Measured in Bottom Sediment Sample, July 10, 2007 1.2 Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds Measured in Bottom Sediment Samples, July 17, 2007 1.3 Priority Pollutant Metals Measured in Bottom Sediment Samples, July 17, 2007 2.1 Subsurface Soil – Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), July 2007 2.2 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Measured in Subsurface Soil with Depth, July 2007 3.0 Subsurface Soil – Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), May-June 2008 4.0 Subsurface Soil – Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), July 2007 5.0 Subsurface Soil – Priority Pollutant Metals, July 2007 6.0 Horizontal Groundwater Delineation Assessment, July 2007 – Volatile Organic Compounds 7.0 Monitoring Wells – Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Measured in Groundwater, August 2007


iii

LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)

8.0 Monitoring Wells – Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Measured in Groundwater, June 2008 9.0 Vertical Groundwater Delineation Assessment, August 2007 & June 2008 – VOCs 10.0 Monitoring Wells – SVOCs Measured in Groundwater, June 2008 11.0 Monitor Wells – Priority Pollutant Metals Measured in Groundwater, June 2008 12.0 Summary of VOCs Detected in Soil Vapor and Sub-Slab Vapor Samples 13.0 Summary of VOCs Detected in Indoor Air and Outdoor Air Samples 14.0 Screening of Soil Remediation Technologies 15.0 Screening of Groundwater Remediation Technologies 16.0 Comparative Analysis of Soil Remedial Alternatives 17.0 Comparative Analysis of Groundwater Remedial Alternatives

LIST OF APPENDICES A. Community Air Monitoring Plan B. Soil Vapor Extraction System


1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ATC Associates Inc (ATC) has prepared this Alternative Analysis Report (AAR) and Remedial Work Plan (RWP) on behalf of the Volunteer, 175 Roger Avenue LLC, for the former industrial facility located at 175 Roger Avenue, Inwood New York. It has been prepared in support of Site redevelopment in accordance with the New York State Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP), and pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 375 Environmental Remediation Programs and NYSDEC DER-10 Technical Guidance for Site Investigation and Remediation, December 2002. Historically the Site has been used for sheet metal fabrication, warehouse space and automotive repair operations. The Site is approximately 5 acres in size and is improved with an approximately 155,000 square foot, one-story, warehouse building, which is connected to the local sewer and potable water supply systems. The Site was developed in three stages from 1954 through 1967. The Site was used as a “Sheet Metal Fabrication” factory since at least 1961. Rockaway Metal Products occupied the Site from approximately 1971 until circa 1987. The Site was used as a warehouse by various tenants from 1990 through 2004, including the most recent tenant, Long Island Party Rentals. In 2000, the Site was also formerly occupied by Gunter Auto Shop, an auto repair shop. The Site is presently owned by Nassau County. From the late 1970’s through 1987, Rockaway Metal Products, Inc. manufactured sheet metal office cabinets and partitions. As part of daily operations, spent solvents, paint products and waste oil were collected in 55-gallon drums and temporarily stored in an outdoor drum storage area located along the north side of the Site building, east of the loading docks. Subsequently, the drummed liquids were transferred to a permanently stationed steel, 5,000-gallon tanker trailer located on the north exterior of the building, near the underground storage tanks (USTs). On September 4, 1987, Rockaway Metal Products filed for bankruptcy and abandoned the Site. On June 15 and 16, 1992, United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) personnel conducted a site inspection and discovered the following: approximately 235-240 55-gallon deteriorated and leaking drums, a 5,000-gallon tanker trailer in poor condition, dry wells that appeared to contain sludge materials and USTs that contained potentially flammable liquids. Significant staining was also noted along the northern and southern portion of the Site as a result of the leaking drums and poor housekeeping. From August 1993 through April 1995, approximately 240 55-gallon drums of waste materials were removed from the site. The tanker trailer, one 1,000-gallon heating oil UST located beneath the sidewalk of Gates Avenue on the southeast portion of the Site and UST piping and dispenser systems were also removed from the Site. One 5,000-gallon heating oil UST, one 1,000-gallon xylene and one 1,000-gallon “Solvesso” (a petroleum based solvent) UST were abandoned in place. The proposed Site redevelopment plan calls for the construction of a new commercial facility that will support jobs and help sustain the local economy. The existing Site building will be demolished and replaced with a new 85,656 square foot warehouse and adjoining two story, 48,488 square foot office. In phase two of the project, this new warehouse will be expanded by an additional 84,448 square foot warehouse that will be located on the west, adjacent property. A truck loading dock will be located along the north side of the building and a parking lot and landscape area will be east of the building, along Gates Avenue.


2

Site-specific Chemicals of Concern (COCs) were determined by comparing contaminant concentrations to the applicable standards, criteria and guidance (SCGs) values and to the future land use proposed under 175 Roger LLC’s redevelopment plans. The SCGs applicable to the Site and which will be used in developing the remedial goals for the Site are as follows:

Soil – Commercial Soil Cleanup Objectives (SCOs) as set forth in 6 NYCRR Part 375 – Environmental Remediation Programs.

Drywell Sediment – Protection of Groundwater SCOs as set forth in 6 NYCRR Part 375 –

Environmental Remediation Programs.

Groundwater – Plume containment and, acceleration of natural degradation, with a goal of attaining the New York State Groundwater Quality Standards and Guidance Values as set forth in NYSDEC Division of Water Technical and Operational Guidance Series Memo 1.1.1 (TOGS) Groundwater Quality Standards and Guidance Values.

A detailed analysis of remedial alternatives was performed using the evaluation criteria outlined in NYSDEC DER-10. Based on this analysis, the preferred remedy for the Site consists of the following components:

• Soil – The previously abandoned USTs will be removed. Subsequent to the removal of the abandoned USTs, Site soils will be excavated to one foot beneath the water table (average depth to the water table is 5 feet bgs) where previous investigations indicated COC concentrations in excess of the Commercial SCOs. This will require the excavation and removal of approximately 2,500 cubic yards of soil and the placement of a similar volume of backfill.

• Sediment - Bottom sediment will be removed from drywells where the concentrations of

COCs in the sediment exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs.

• Groundwater – In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) will be applied to the suspected source area of the abandoned UST following their removal. The reagent will be injected in a 100 ft. by 100 ft. area that encompasses the location of the abandoned tanks and the former paint spraying booth. Reagent will be injected in a grid pattern from the water table to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs. Approximately 8 weeks following the ISCO treatment, an electron donor will be injected in the suspected source area and in six barriers across the Site. Two of the six barriers will be placed near the north and south property lines to act as treatment zones to prevent further migration of COCs off-Site. Within each barrier, reagent will be injected from a depth of 10 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs. Within the source area, the injection depth will be similar, but the reagent will be injection in a grid pattern.

• Vapor Intrusion – An environmental easement will be implemented to ensure that the vapor

intrusion pathway is eliminated from all occupied buildings associated with the future development of the Site. A vapor mitigation system will be designed into any new structures that will consist of a sub-slab vapor barrier and passive sub-grade vapor collection system.


3

The passive vapor collection system will have provisions for upgrading to an active system if required.

• Institutional Controls - Environmental easements/deed restrictions will be implemented to

limit future use of the Site to commercial and/or industrial purposes and to prevent the potable use of Site groundwater.

The remedial work plan for the preferred remedy is consistent with New York’s Brownfield Cleanup Program and the Site’s proposed redevelopment in that it:

• is protective of human health and the environment,

• provides for the demolition of the existing abandoned warehouse,

• eliminates the risks associated with the currently deteriorating structure, and

• allows redevelopment of the Site as a commercial facility that will help sustain the local economy.


4

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Background The 175 Roger Avenue Site (Site) is a 5 acre parcel of former industrial land that is being redeveloped by 175 Roger Avenue, LLC under the New York State Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP). The proposed redevelopment and remediation plan for the Site will utilize the Restricted Use Commercial Track 2 Cleanup Objectives in accordance with the BCP regulations to transform the Site from an abandoned, blighted property into a viable commercial property. The goal for the Site is to demolish the current abandoned building, remediate the Site, and construct a new environmentally sustainable commercial facility that will promote economic growth for the area. This Alternative Analysis Report (AAR) and Remedial Work Plan (RWP) has been prepared pursuant to the Brownfield Cleanup Agreement executed for the Site between 175 Roger Ave LLC and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) on November 8, 2006. Both the AAR and WRP has been prepared in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 375 Environmental Remediation Programs and NYSDEC DER-10 Technical Guidance for Site Investigation and Remediation, December 2002.

1.2 Site Description The Site is located at 175 Roger Avenue, Inwood, Nassau County, New York (Figure 1). According to the Town of Hempstead Tax Assessor, the Site is also identified as Section 40, Lot L, Blocks 5, 55, 56, 57, 59, 117, 2579 and 2585. The Site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Roger Avenue and Gates Avenue in a primarily commercial and residential area. The Site is bordered to the north by Roger Avenue, with a parking lot (former Shell terminal) to the northwest, a gravel/soil recycling facility and Sony Pictures and Entertainment to the northeast. Further north is the Negro Bar Channel, a waterway to Jamaica Bay. South of the Site are residential properties, followed by Bayview Avenue. The Site is bordered to the east by Gates Avenue, followed by commercial buildings occupied by D. Daniels Sanitation and MGR Equipment Corporation. Immediately west of the Site is Expeditors, a freight and cargo company. The Site consists of a 5 acre parcel of land that is currently developed with an approximately 155,000 square foot, one-story, vacant warehouse building with a partial mezzanine. The partial mezzanine area was formerly used as office space. A loading dock with three bays is located along Gates Avenue on the southeast portion of the Site. A garage door associated with a former auto repair shop tenant is located on the northern portion of the Site along Roger Avenue. A third garage door is associated with a loading dock that located on western portion of the Site building. The Site building was formerly heated by fuel oil processed by a dual phased boiler system. Interior finishes of the former office area include carpeting, two-foot by two-foot and two-foot by four-foot ceiling tiles, and painted and/or wallpapered dry wall. Interior finishes of the warehouse area consist of concrete floors, drywall or concrete walls, and unfinished metal ceilings. A former paint spraying both and drying


5

room is located in the warehouse. The remainder of the Site consists of asphalt or concrete paved driveway/parking areas and grass. Utilities available to the Site include electricity, natural gas, municipal water, and sanitary sewer services. Three underground storage tanks (USTs) were reportedly abandoned along the north side of the interior of the existing Site building (Figure 2). A 1,000-gallon “Solvesso” UST is located partially beneath the floor of the former auto body repair shop. A 1,000-gallon xylene UST is located south of Roger Avenue and a 5,000-gallon fuel oil tank is located west of the former auto repair shop. Nine (9) drywells are located throughout the northwest portion of the Site (Figure 2). The drywells are constructed of 9-foot diameter concrete rings with an open bottom. Depth to drywell bottom ranged from 5 to 7 feet below ground surface (bgs). Standing water is present in several of the drywells. The Site ground surface is approximately 10 feet above mean sea level. The ground surface at the Site is generally flat and has a gentle slope towards the northwest. The Site is located approximately 550 feet south of the Negro Bar Channel, which eventually drains into Jamaica Bay. The Site contains no areas classified as wetlands, and is covered with concrete, asphalt and surrounded by paved roadways and sidewalks. On-Site drywells collect surface water runoff from paved driveways and parking lots. The uppermost unconsolidated unit beneath the Site consists of Pleistocene glaciofluvial sediments derived from melt-water of the retreating glaciers, as well as recent shore and salt marsh deposits. Boring logs indicate that brown to reddish brown, medium to fine sands with little gravel is present to approximately 20 feet bgs. Underlying these deposits is dark gray sandy silt from 20 to 35 feet bgs. A marine clay confining layer is present at approximately 35 feet bgs. The Pleistocene sediments are underlain by the Gardiners Clay confining layer at approximately 70 feet bgs. Beneath the Gardiners Clay is the Magothy Aquifer that occurs at approximately 110 - 120 feet bgs in the vicinity of the Site. A portion of the Jameco Aquifer may be overlying the Magothy Formation in this portion of Long Island at approximately 70 feet bgs. Depth to groundwater throughout the Site ranges from 4 to 6 feet bgs and appears to be tidally influenced. A groundwater divide appears to run beneath the Site building, with an apparent groundwater flow direction towards both the northwest and southeast (Figure 3). Potable water is supplied to the Site and surrounding area by Long Island Water. No public water supply wells are located within one mile of the Site. Site sewage is conveyed off-Site to the local wastewater treatment plant. 1.3 Proposed Site Redevelopment The proposed Site redevelopment plan calls for the construction of a new commercial facility that will support jobs and help sustain the local economy. The existing Site building will be demolished and replaced with a new 85,656 square foot warehouse and adjoining two story, 48,488 square foot, office (Figure 4). In phase two of the project, this new warehouse will be expanded by an additional 84,448 square foot warehouse that will be located on the west, adjacent property. A truck loading dock will


6

be located along the north side of the building and a parking lot and landscape area will be east of the building, along Gates Avenue. 1.4 Site History Historical documentation reviewed for the Site indicates that the Site was built in three stages from 1954 through 1967. The Site was used as a “Sheet Metal Fabrication” factory since at least 1961. Rockaway Metal Products occupied the Site from approximately 1971 until circa 1987. In 1987, Rockaway Metal Products abandoned the Site and left hazardous waste materials improperly stored and disposed of on-Site. The Site was used as a warehouse by various tenants from 1990 through 2004, including the most recent tenant, Long Island Party Rentals. In 2000, the Site was also occupied by Gunter Auto Shop, an auto repair shop. The Site was acquired by Nassau County Department of Real Estate in 1995 who continues to own the Site. According to files reviewed at the USEPA, from the late 1970’s through 1987, Rockaway Metal Products, Inc. (former Site tenant) leased the Site from 175 Inwood Associates for the manufacturing and enamel spray-painting of sheet metal office cabinets and partitions. As part of daily operations, spent solvents, paint products and waste oil were collected in 55-gallon drums and temporarily stored in an outdoor drum storage area. Subsequently, the drummed liquids were transferred to a permanently stationed steel, 5,000-gallon tanker trailer located on the exterior of the building. On September 4, 1987, Rockaway Metal Products filed for bankruptcy and abandoned the Site. On June 15 and 16, 1992, USEPA personnel conducted a site inspection and discovered the following: approximately 235-240 55-gallon deteriorated and leaking drums, 22 pressurized cylinders of propane, oxygen, and acetylene in good condition, six propane tanks, a 5,000-gallon tanker trailer in poor condition, dry wells that appeared to contain sludge materials and USTs that contained potentially flammable liquids. Significant staining was also noted along the northern and southern portion of the Site as a result of the leaking drums and poor housekeeping. From August 1993 through April 1995, approximately 240 55-gallon drums of waste materials were removed from the site. The tanker trailer, one 1,000-gallon heating oil UST located beneath the sidewalk of Gates Avenue on the southeast portion of the Site and UST piping and dispenser systems were also removed from the Site. One 5,000-gallon heating oil UST, one 1,000-gallon xylene and one 1,000-gallon “Solvesso” (a petroleum based solvent) UST was abandoned in place. According to the regulatory agency database and the USEPA representative, the CERCLIS Site Status lists the Site as cleaned up and no further action is warranted pertaining to the removal of hazardous waste stored at the Site. The Site is also listed on the NYSDEC Spills database for a waste oil release of unknown volume. This incident received a “case closed” regulatory status on February 8, 1995 Information reviewed at the USEPA also indicates that 17 groundwater monitoring wells were installed throughout the exterior of the Site. Information reviewed at the USEPA also indicates that groundwater monitoring wells MW-1, MW-3 and MW-12 were sampled in May and June 1994 by PT & L Environmental Services, Inc. All groundwater samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), base neutral compounds (BNs) and priority pollutant metals (PPM). Analytical results from both sampling rounds indicate that PPM such as arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and zinc were detected above groundwater quality standards for Class GA water.


7

Information reviewed at the USEPA also indicated that the Nassau County Department of Health (NCDOH) inspectors collected samples from two (2) drywells closest to a drum storage area. Analytical results indicated that xylene and lead was detected at 610 micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg) and 240 ug/kg, respectively. In June 1994, one composite sediment sample was collected by PT & L Environmental Services, Inc from five drywells (identified as 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9). The composite sample was analyzed for Toxic Compound Leaching Characteristics, RCRA characteristics, total polychlorinated biphenyls, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). The TCLP analyses detected lead at 2.5 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and TPH was detected at 18,900 mg/kg. The Site is listed on the UST and Chemical Bulk Storage database. According to the regulatory agency database, two (2) xylene 1,000-gallon USTs that were installed in 1994 are registered to the Site. In addition, one 1,000-gallon gasoline and two (2) empty USTs are also registered to the Site. According to NCDOH field notes, the two (2) 1,000-gallon xylene USTs and a 5,000-gallon fuel oil UST were abandoned in place in June 1995. A 1,000-gallon fuel oil UST was removed in June 1995.


8

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE CONDITIONS 2.1 Previous Environmental Investigation “Site Investigation, Long Island Party Rentals, 175 Roger Avenue, Inwood, New York”, dated June 27, 2005, prepared by ATC Associates, New York, New York. A Subsurface Site Investigation was conducted to assess if the various potential on-site areas of environmental concern documented in the 2005 Environmental Site Assessment had adversely impacted soil and ground water quality at the Site. In addition, a geophysical investigation was performed to assess the presence of abandoned USTs remaining beneath the Site. In order to investigate the status of the abandoned USTs, an electro-magnetic and ground penetrating radar (EM-GPR) Survey was completed at the Site. The EM-GPR survey identified the following:

• One anomaly consisting of disturbed soil was observed on the sidewalk of the southeast portion of the Site, along Gates Avenue. This anomaly measured approximately four feet by six feet and is consistent with the location of a former 1,000-gallon fuel oil UST.

• One rectangular anomaly was observed partially beneath the floor of the former auto repair shop, located along Roger Avenue. This anomaly measured approximately four feet by five feet and is consistent with a 1,000-gallon “Solvesso” (a petroleum based solvent) UST that was reportedly abandoned in place in 1995.

• One rectangular anomaly was observed in front of the former auto repair shop, along Roger Avenue. This anomaly measured approximately four feet by five feet and is consistent with a 1,000-gallon xylene UST that was reportedly abandoned in place in 1995.

• One rectangular anomaly was observed beneath a concrete pad located adjacent west of the former auto body repair shop. This anomaly measured approximately six feet by twenty-four feet and is consistent with a 5,000-gallon fuel oil UST that was reportedly abandoned in place in 1995.

• Several circular anomalies were observed in front of the former auto body repair shop and along the northern portion of the Site. These anomalies measured approximately 3 feet in diameter. The source of the anomalies was unknown, but may be related to buried 55-gallon drums.

In addition, the EM-GPR Survey identified the water main line, two (2) electrical lines, and several inactive pipe lines associated with the USTs. The water main enters the Site building from the corner of Roger Avenue and Gates Avenue. A water line is also located along the northern perimeter of the Site. Two electrical lines were identified from Roger Avenue and cross over the suspected former 1,000-gallon xylene UST. Inactive pipe lines were identified parallel to each other off of the southwest corner of the concrete pad. These lines are suspected to be associated with the 5,000-gallon fuel oil UST that was reportedly abandoned in 1995. Twenty-two (22) soil borings were advanced throughout the Site via hand augering methodology. The soil borings were advanced to depths ranging from 0.5 to 5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Soil


9

samples, collected from selected intervals, were submitted for laboratory analysis based on visual observations and field instrument (photoionization detector (PID)) response. Select soil samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) under EPA Method 8260, semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) per EPA Method 8270 and Priority Pollutant (PP) Metals under EPA Method 6010. Groundwater was encountered throughout the Site at approximately 5 feet bgs. The results of this soil investigation are summarized below by areas of environmental concern identified in the ESA or as a result of the EM-GPR survey.

Former 1,000-gallon Fuel Oil UST One soil boring was advanced through the center of an anomaly that was consistent with a former 1,000-gallon fuel oil UST which was reportedly removed in 1995. This anomaly was located on the sidewalk of the southeast portion of the Site, along Gates Avenue. This soil boring was advanced to a depth 5 feet bgs where groundwater was encountered. No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the laboratory method detection limits. Several PP Metals were detected; however, these concentrations were below the 6 NYCRR Part 375 Commercial Soil Cleanup Objectives (SCO).

1,000-gallon “Solvesso” UST Three soil borings were advanced within the vicinity of the anomaly that was consistent with the reportedly abandoned 1,000-gallon “Solvesso” UST, located partially beneath the floor of the former auto body repair shop on the northern portion of the Site. Laboratory analytical results indicate that no VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the laboratory method detection limits in two of the soil samples. However, VOCs above the Commercial SCO levels were measured in a soil sample retrieved directly adjacent the former tank. Several PP Metals were detected; however, these concentrations were below the Commercial SCOs. 1,000-gallon Xylene UST Two soil borings were advanced within the vicinity of the anomaly that was consistent with the location of a reportedly abandoned 1,000-gallon xylene UST. No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the laboratory method detection limits. Several PP Metals were measured; however, these concentrations were detected below the Commercial SCO levels. 5,000-gallon Fuel Oil UST Three soil borings were advanced within the vicinity of the anomaly that is consistent with the location of a reportedly abandoned 5,000-gallon fuel oil UST, located beneath a concrete slab adjacent west of the former auto body repair shop. No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the laboratory detection limits, with the exception of acetone that was measured below the Commercial SCO. No PP Metals were detected above the Commercial SCO levels. Drum Storage Area Approximately 235-240 55-gallon deteriorated and leaking drums were previously stored along the northwestern exterior wall of the building. The 55-gallon drums were used to store hazardous materials that were associated with historic site operations. Four soil borings were advanced in this area. No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the Commercial SCO levels. No PP Metals were detected above their applicable Commercial SCOs in these borings.


10

EM/GPR Anomalies The EM/GPR survey detected three circular anomalies on the northern portion of the Site. Three soil borings were advanced within the vicinity of these anomalies and no subsurface structures or buried drums were encountered. No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the Commercial SCO levels. Several PP Metals were measured; however, these concentrations were detected below the Commercial SCO levels. Remaining Portions of the Site Five additional soil borings were advanced throughout the Site to evaluate overall soil quality. No VOCs, SVOCs or PP Metals were detected above the Commercial SCO levels in any of the soil samples collected.

Nine (9) drywells (DW-1 through DW-9) are located throughout the northwest portion of the Site (Figure 2). ATC collected nine sludge samples from the bottom of each drywell from depths ranging from 5 to 8 feet bgs. Additionally, one soil boring was installed adjacent to eight of the nine drywells (DW-1 through DW-8) to assess if these drywells have impacted soil quality beneath the Site. Soil borings were advanced to depths of approximately 4.5-5 feet bgs. Sediment and soil samples were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), VOCs, SVOCs and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Metals.

Drywell Sludge No VOCs or SVOCs were detected above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs in samples collected from DW-1, DW-2, and DW-4 through DW-9. In drywell DW-3, VOCs n-propylbenzene and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene were detected above their respective Protection of Groundwater SCO levels. No SVOCs were measure above the Protection of Groundwater SCO levels in the sample collected from DW-3. RCRA Metals were measured in all the drywell sediment samples. However, only arsenic, cadmium and mercury were detected above Protection of Groundwater SCO levels in the samples retrieved from drywells DW-2, DW-3 and DW-9. Soil Borings Adjacent to Drywells No VOCs, SVOCs or RCRA Metals were detected above the Commercial SCO levels in any of the soil samples collected.

Five existing 2-inch PVC monitoring wells (MW-11 through MW-15) were located on the northern portion of the Site (Figure 4). On May 18, 2005 ATC gauged and surveyed those monitoring wells. Depth to groundwater ranged from 4.58 to 5.65 feet bgs and the groundwater gradient indicated south-southeasterly flow direction. Fifteen groundwater samples were collected, from five existing monitoring wells and ten installed monitoring wells, to evaluate groundwater quality throughout the Site. Groundwater analytical results suggested that chlorinated solvents including cis-1,2-dichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene and vinyl chloride are present above the NYSDEC Division of Water Technical and


11

Operational Guidance Series Memo 1.1.1 (TOGS) Groundwater Quality Standards and Guidance Values in the groundwater samples collected from the area of the abandoned USTs and at the southeast corner of the Site. Additional VOCs including ethylbenzene, n-propylbenzene, toluene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene and xylenes were detected above NYSDEC TOGS Groundwater Quality Standards in the area of the abandoned USTs and near the south property line. SVOCs including 2-methylnaphthalene, 2-methylphenol, and naphthalene were detected above NYSDEC TOGS Groundwater Quality Standards in the area of the abandoned USTs. PP Metals were detected above NYSDEC TOGS Groundwater Quality Standards throughout the Site. 2.2 BCP Remedial Investigation In July/August 2007 and May/June 2008, the Site RI was completed in accordance with the NYSDEC and NYSDOH approved BCP Remedial Investigation Workplan (RIWP) dated April 20, 2007 and the RIWP Addendum dated April 30, 2008. The final RI report was issued on August 15, 2009. Comments from the NYSDEC regarding the RI report were received via correspondence dated April 11, 2008 and May 12, 2008. ATC’s response to the NYSDEC comments was incorporated in the revised RI report that was conditionally approved by the NYSDEC on October 31, 2008 and fully approved on September 24, 2009. The following subsections summarize the information provided in the RI report that was prepared under a separate cover. 2.2.1 Remedial Investigation Scope of Work The objectives of the RI were to: (1) further characterize previously documented soil and groundwater contamination; (2) delineate the vertical and horizontal extent of petroleum and chlorinated solvent groundwater plumes; (3) assess groundwater flow direction and tidal influence; (4) collect additional site characterization data to evaluate potential remedial options; and (5) evaluate soil vapor intrusion. The scope of this remedial investigation included the following tasks: • A site reconnaissance of the building interior to locate potential areas of concern. • An assessment of the construction details of nine exterior drywells and five existing monitoring wells. • Verification of the presence of a suspect gasoline underground storage tank (UST) in the southwestern portion of the Site. • A survey of existing monitoring wells for location and elevation. • A synoptic round of groundwater level measurements to assess local groundwater flow direction and the influence of tidal conditions on the groundwater levels. • The installation of nine (9) additional monitoring wells and the collection of groundwater samples from the nine new wells, twelve (12) existing monitoring wells and eleven (11) direct push locations to further delineate the horizontal extent of the petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbon groundwater plumes. • Installation of sixteen (16) direct push deep borings to investigate the vertical extent of a potential chlorinated hydrocarbon plume. At each boring location, soil samples were collected at 5 to 10-foot intervals to characterize soil lithology and for laboratory analyses.


12

Following soil characterization, groundwater samples were collected at increasing depths every 5 to 10 feet until confining clay was encountered at approximately 35-feet below grade. • The performance of slug tests to estimate the hydraulic conductivity and transmissivity of the hydrogeologic units intersecting the monitoring well network. • Collection and analysis of groundwater samples for dissolved iron and manganese, nitrate, sulfate, methane, alkalinity and total organic carbon to evaluate monitored natural attenuation during the remedy selection. In addition, field parameters measured included dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential, pH, temperature and conductivity. • Installation of seventeen (17) soil borings and the collection of soil samples to verify soil sampling results from the 2005 Phase II investigation. • The collection and analysis of one sediment sample from Drywell 3 to verify drywell sampling results from the 2005 Phase II investigation. • The collection and analysis of five (5) soil vapor samples near the perimeter of the Site, five (5) sub-slab vapor samples from beneath the on-Site building, and two indoor air and one outdoor air samples to evaluate potential on-Site soil vapor intrusion issues. • The collection and analysis of four (4) soil vapor samples, three southeast of the Site and one north, across Roger Avenue, to evaluate potential off-Site vapor intrusion issues. • Evaluation of the data and preparation of this Remedial Investigation Report (RIR). 2.2.2 Remedial Investigation Results Summary Data obtained during the RI was used to evaluate areas of Site-related impact above the 6 NYCRR Part 375 Soil Cleanup Objectives (SCOs) and the NYSDEC TOGS groundwater standards and guidance values. The Commercial and Protection of Groundwater SCOs were chosen for direct comparison since they are the most relevant from a risk evaluation and for the planned development and restricted use for the Site. Relevant Site features and RI results are summarized in Figures 1 through 13 and Tables 1 through 13. 2.2.2.1 Suspect Gasoline UST Test pits were excavated to verify the presence of suspect gasoline UST(s) in the southwestern area of the Site (Figure 5). Each test pit was excavated to a depth of approximately 4 to 5 feet bgs. No visual evidence of the UST(s) was found in this area of the Site. The soils consisted of brown, fine to medium sand with no visual evidence of petroleum. Soil gas was field screened for volatile organic compounds using a portable photoionization detector (PID) and no instrument response was found within the area of the test pits. A yellow, plastic coated, steel pipe was uncovered near two surface bollards within Test Pit #2 that appeared to be a former natural gas line. This pipe was traced towards the Site building and found to terminate underground at Test Pit #1. 2.2.2.2 Drywell Sediment In order to verify previous sediment results, an additional bottom sediment sample was collected from drywell DW-3 (Figure 2). The results are consistent with the previous sediment sampling results in June 2005. Several VOCs, including benzene and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, were measured at


13

concentrations that exceeded the Protection of Groundwater SCOs (Table 1.1). Metals, such as cadmium, chromium, lead and mercury, were detected at concentrations that exceeded the Protection of Groundwater SCOs (Table 1.2). Although metals were found at levels that exceeded the Protection of Groundwater SCOs, these substances were not measured at elevated concentrations throughout the Site. 2.2.2.3 Subsurface Soil Soil impact appears to be limited to the area immediately surrounding the abandoned USTs, a result that is consistent with the Phase II results obtained in 2005. Shallow soil samples (i.e., samples collected at or above the saturated zone) were found to contain concentrations of VOCs above the Commercial SCOs at exterior boring location SB-05 and at boring locations SB-14 and SB-15 located beneath the floor of the former auto repair shop and adjacent warehouse (Figure 6, Tables 2.1 & 3). Throughout the Site, no SVOCs or metals were measured in shallow soil samples above the Commercial SCOs (Tables 4 & 5). Within the saturated zone, only acetone was measured above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs at boring location DW-06; however, the acetone was also detected in the method blank and is a likely laboratory contaminant and not indicative of Site conditions. Potential sources of soil impact to the shallow aquifer were identified at the following locations:

Drywells – potential source of hydrocarbons and metals; each drywell is approximately 9 feet in diameter with an estimated sediment depth of 2 to 4 feet, which results in an estimated volume of 5 to 8 cubic yards of impacted sediment per drywell.

Abandoned USTs – potential source of hydrocarbons; the approximate surface area of impact

surrounding the USTs is 11,100 ft2 and a depth to groundwater of 6 feet, which results in an approximate volume of 2,500 cubic yards of impacted soil.

These source areas were identified by the presence of elevated concentrations of hydrocarbons in the subsurface soils that was also identified in the groundwater. The approximate volumes of impacted soils are based on the distances to soil sampling locations that did not exhibit hydrocarbon concentrations in excess of the Commercial SCOs. 2.2.2.4 Site Groundwater A petroleum hydrocarbon plume appears to be centered along the northeast section of the Site and extends off-site to the northeast and southwest at depths greater than 20 feet bgs. The plume appears to be concentrated in the shallow (< 20 feet bgs) aquifer in the area of the abandoned USTs. This is evident from the elevated concentrations measured at monitoring well locations MW-02, MW-03, MW-04, MW-06, MW-15 and MW-19 ; as well as, concentrations measured at probe location DW-01 (Figures 7 and 8; Tables 6, 7, 8 & 10). As the distance from the former USTs increases, the overall groundwater hydrocarbon concentrations decreases, but the ratio of the concentrations at depths > 20 feet bgs compared to shallower depths increases. This suggests a diving petroleum hydrocarbon plume with groundwater flow towards the northwest and southeast (Figure 8; Table 9).


14

A chlorinated hydrocarbon plume is widespread throughout the Site, with elevated concentrations of vinyl chloride, methylene chloride, cis-1,2-dichloroethylene, trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene found in the groundwater near the abandoned USTs and former paint spraying booth (Figures 9 and 10; Tables 6, 7 and 8). The chlorinated hydrocarbon concentrations increases with depth throughout the Site and appear to be concentrated just above a clay confining layer at 35 feet bgs (Figure 10 and Table 9). The plume appears to extend off-Site to the southeast and northwest. No separate phase chlorinated solvent was found above the clay confining layer from two deep monitoring wells (MW-24D and MW-19D) installed near the location of the abandoned USTs and former paint spraying booth. Although no separate phase chlorinated solvent was found, a source of the chlorinated hydrocarbon plume appears to be centered in the area of the abandoned USTs and paint spraying booth; however, the precise location of the source is unknown. Priority pollutant metals, arsenic, thallium and lead, were identified in the Site groundwater at concentrations above the NYSDEC TOGS standards (Table 11). Elevated metal concentrations were found throughout the northeast section of the Site and may be consistent with background levels present within the shallow aquifer. There is a general pattern of electron acceptor depletion (dissolved oxygen and nitrate) and metabolic by-product concentration (dissolved iron and methane) within the aquifer in the areas of high VOCs concentrations (Figure 11). In addition, as the distance downgradient of the suspected source of chlorinated hydrocarbons increases, the dissolved concentrations of perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene decrease while those of dichoroethylene, which is greater than 80 percent cis- 1,2-dichoroethylene, and vinyl chloride increases, suggesting that bioremediation via reductive dechlorination is occurring in that area of the Site (Figure 12). Also, as shown in Figure 12, the concentrations of dissolved oxygen, nitrate and sulfate are depressed, while those of methane and ferrous iron are increased near the location of the suspected source, suggesting anaerobic conditions favorable to reductive dechlorination. These results suggest that natural attenuation is occurring on Site. 2.2.2.5 Soil Vapor Intrusion The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) has established Air Guidance Values (AGVs) for indoor air quality; however, New York State has not promulgated soil vapor and sub-slab vapor standards. To evaluate concentrations of contaminants in soil vapor and sub-slab vapor, the analytical results were compared to the NYSDOH AGVs. Detected concentrations of VOCs present in the soil vapor and sub-slab vapor samples were also compared to the background levels of VOCs in air (NYSDOH Fuel Oil 2003 Upper Limit, USEPA Building Assessment and Survey Evaluation [BASE] 90th Percentile Value, and Heath Effects Institute [HEI] Relationship of Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air [RIOPA] 95th Percentile Value) published in the NYSDOH Guidance for Evaluating Soil Vapor Intrusion in the State of New York Document, October 2006 (NYSDOH Background Levels). Detectable concentrations of VOCs were measured in the soil vapor samples collected both on and off-Site. In addition, VOC were measured in sub-slab vapor samples collected beneath the existing


15

Site building (Figure 13; Table 12). Perchloroethene (PCE) was detected in six of the nine soil vapor samples, including four samples collected off-Site in June 2008 and in all five sub-slab vapor samples. All but two samples had concentrations above the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) Air Guidance Value (AGV) of 100 ug/m3. Trichloroethene (TCE) was detected in three soil vapor samples and three sub-slab vapor samples at concentrations ranging from 0.91 to 170 ug/m3. All but one sample had concentrations of TCE above the NYSDOH AGV of 5 ug/m3. Additionally, acetone, 2-butanone (MEK), ethylbenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, toluene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, m- and p-xylene, and o-xylene were detected at concentrations in exceedence of their respective NYSDOH Background Levels. Indoor and outdoor air samples collected on-Site were found to contain VOCs. However, none of the concentrations exceed the NYSDOH AGVs or NYSDOH Background Levels (Table 13). 2.3 Qualitative Exposure and Health Risk Assessment Based on the results of the RI, the following complete or potentially complete exposure pathways currently exist or may exist with respect to the anticipated future development of the Site for certain Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC). SOIL – Direct exposure through dermal contact with impacted soil and ingestion or inhalation of particulates; potential receptors include construction workers, Site workers, trespassers and terrestrial biota. AIR – Inhalation of vapors due to volatilization of COPC from impacted soil and/or groundwater; potential receptors include construction workers, Site workers, trespassers and terrestrial biota. GROUNDWATER – Direct exposure through ingestion or dermal contact; potential receptors include construction workers, Site workers, trespassers and terrestrial biota. Given the anticipated development of the Site, there exists a future risk of exposure to COPC at the Site through dermal contact with impacted soils and/or ingestion of airborne soil particulates generated during excavation or construction activities. Remedial options to be evaluated in this AAR to address the soil direct contact pathway include soil removal and capping, and will utilize the Commercial SCOs for protection of direct contact. Management of soils at depth during future construction or property development will be addressed through the use of a soil management plan and/or deed restrictions. Exposure through Site groundwater is unlikely since groundwater at the Site and in the vicinity is not used as a potable source of drinking water. Therefore, there is no current exposure pathway for groundwater COPC, except for possible incidental ingestion and/or dermal contact of groundwater during construction activities. There exists a risk of exposure through the inhalation of accumulated vapors within Site buildings. This potential indoor air pathway will be addressed via the installation of a vapor mitigation system


16

as part of any new on-Site building construction intended for human occupancy. Should the existing building be renovated, a vapor mitigation system will be installed prior to occupancy.


17

3.0 REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND GOALS This section identifies the Remedial Action Objective (RAOs) for Site subsurface soil and groundwater. Site specific remedial objectives were developed based on the frequency and concentration of COPC; SCGs; environmental media impacted by the COPC; current and future development of the Site; existing or potential exposures pathways; and existing wildlife, habitats and other natural resources. 3.1 Remedial Action Objectives for Subsurface Soils The RI indicated the presence of petroleum-related hydrocarbons in the vadose zone at the Site that exceed the Commercial SCOs. However, this impact was limited to the area surrounding the abandoned USTs. Several VOCs and metals are present in the bottom sediment of one drywell, and potentially eight others, that exceeded the Commercial and Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Both of these areas are potential sources of groundwater impact that was identified on Site. Based on the potential exposure pathways discussed in Section 2.3, the following RAOs were identified for Site subsurface soils:

Prevent potential current and future construction workers, Site workers, trespassers and terrestrial biota at the Site from direct contact (via dermal contact, ingestion, or inhalation of particulates) with Site soils containing COPC exceeding the Commercial SCOs;

Reduce the potential migration of COPC from Site drywell sediments at concentrations

exceeding the Protection of Groundwater SCOs;

Prevent the potential exposure by future Site workers to inhalation of accumulated vapors within Site buildings from volatization of organic substances present in Site soils; and

Protect current or future construction workers from potential inhalation of particulates due to

the dispersion of COPC in Site soils at concentrations exceeding the Commercial SCOs. 3.2 Remedial Objectives for Groundwater Groundwater is not currently being used or planned for use at the Site for potable purposes. Therefore, no complete pathway exists or is anticipated to exist in the future for the ingestion of groundwater that exceeds the NYSDEC TOGS standards. However, Site groundwater is impacted by petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbons at concentrations that exceed the NYSDEC TOGS standards. The impact appears to be centered near the location of the abandoned USTs and a former paint spraying booth and encompasses the entire eastern portion of the Site. Based on the potential exposure pathways discussed in Section 2.3, the following RAOs were identified for Site groundwater:


18

Protect potential current and future construction workers, Site workers and trespassers at the Site from inhalation of vapors associated with organic substances present in the shallow Site groundwater;

Prevent potential current and future construction workers, Site workers, trespassers and

visitors at the Site from direct contact (via dermal contact, ingestion, or inhalation of particulates) with Site groundwater containing COPC exceeding the NYSDEC TOGS standards; and

Prevent further migration of impacted groundwater from on-Site to off-Site.


19

4.0 GENERAL RESPONSE ACTIONS AND EXTENT OF IMPACT REQUIRING REMEDIAL ACTION General response actions may include specific categories such as treatment, containment, excavation, extraction, disposal, institutional controls or a combination of these. Similar to the RAOs, general response actions are media-specific. The general response actions were developed based on the anticipated future development of the Site. Listed below are the potential general response actions consistent with the RAOs have been developed for Site soil and groundwater. 4.1. General Response Actions for Soil The following general response actions are appropriate for Site soils above the Commercial SCOs.

• No Action

• Institutional Controls

• Containment (capping/new development)

• Removal / Disposal

• Ex-Situ Treatment

• In-Situ Treatment 4.2 General Response Actions for Groundwater The following general response actions are appropriate for Site groundwater above TOGS

• No Action

• Institutional Controls

• Ex-situ Treatment

• In-situ Treatment


20

4.3 Extent of Impact Requiring Remediation This sub-section addresses the extent of impacted media to which the RAOs and general response actions identified above and remedial alternatives discussed in Section 6.0 will apply. The approximate location of the subsurface soil exceeding the Commercial SCOs is identified in Figure 14. The nine drywells that may exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs (exceedence to be determined with additional sampling) are shown in Figure 2. Figures 7 through 10 show the distribution of groundwater COPC concentrations that exceed the NYSDEC TOGS standards, with the highest concentrations located near the abandoned USTs.


21

5.0 IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING OF TECNOLOGIES This Section presents the initial screening of potential remedial technologies for 175 Roger Avenue. Candidate remedial technologies appropriate to Site-specific conditions and COPC-specific characteristics were identified for each of the general response actions established in Sections 4.1 and 4.2. The technologies and process options that are potentially applicable to the Site were then screened, on a media-specific basis, to identify those technologies that are technically implementable for the Site and can meet the Site RAOs identified in Section 3.0. 5.1 Technology Identification Potentially applicable remedial technologies and specific process options are identified based on a review of literature, vendor information and ATC’s experience. Based on this review, a comprehensive list of applicable technologies and associated process options was developed for each general response action presented in Table 14 (soil) and Table 15 (groundwater). 5.2 Technology Screening The list of technologies and associated process options were screened to identify a refined list of potential technologies that can be used to develop remedial alternatives for the Site. The remedial technologies were screened based on process-option effectiveness and implementability. Chemical and Site characteristics are incorporated into both the effectiveness and implementability criteria. Chemical-specific characteristic included solubility, density, volatility, adsorption and biodegradability. Site-specific characteristics included topography, geology, hydrogeology, chemical distribution, groundwater geochemistry, location of present building, plan redevelopment of Site and underground utilities. A summary of the technology screening results are presented in Table 14 for soil and Table 15 for groundwater. Remedial technologies or process options ascertained not to be effective or implementable based on the planned Site redevelopment were eliminated from further consideration. The retained technologies are considered the most appropriate for the remediation of Site soil and groundwater and may be used alone or in combination with other technologies. The remedial technologies retained for further evaluation are: Soil

No Action

Institutional Controls (deed restrictions)

Removal/Disposal (Excavation with off-Site disposal)

In-Situ Treatment (soil vapor extraction)


22

Groundwater

No Action

Monitored Natural Attenuation

Institutional Controls (deed restrictions)

Ex-Situ Treatment (groundwater extraction, discharge to surface water, air stripping, granular activated carbon)

In-Situ Treatment (air sparging, chemical oxidation, enhanced bioremediation)


23

6.0 DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES The retained remedial technologies represent distinct strategies to address the environmental concerns at the Site. The technologies were retained after initial screening based on their Site-specific effectiveness and implementability (Section 5.0). These technologies were assembled into potential remedial alternatives capable of achieving the RAOs. The remedial alternatives are separated based on the media requiring remediation at the Site. Subsurface soil is addressed in one set of alternatives, referred to as soil alternatives, described in Section 6.1. Groundwater is addressed in another set of alternatives, referred to as groundwater alternatives, and is discussed in Section 6.2. The potential alternatives are discussed and analyzed in the sections that follow. A detailed description of each alternative is presented. This is followed by an evaluation of the alternative with respect to the eight criteria noted in Section 4.1(e) of NYSDEC DER-10, December 2002 and Section 4.7 of the NYSDEC Brownfield Cleanup Program Guide, May 2004. These criteria include: overall protection of public health and the environment; compliance with standards, criteria and guidance (SCGs); long-term effectiveness and permanence; reduction of toxicity, mobility or volume with treatment; short-term effectiveness and impacts; implementability; cost; and land use. Compliance with SCGs are further evaluated as follows: New York State SCGs consistent with the RAOs selected for the Site are referred to as Chemical Specific SCGs; SCGs that are specific to the location of the Site are referred to a Location Specific SCGs; and SCGs that are specific to the proposed remedial actions are referred to as Action Specific SCGs. 6.1 Soil Alternatives The retained technologies were assembled into the following alternatives to address subsurface soil impact. Alternative S1: No Action Alternative S2: Cover System / Removal of Abandoned USTs / Closure of Site Drywells Alternative S3: Removal of Abandoned USTs / Excavation and Closure of Site Drywells/ Soil Vapor Extraction Alternative S4: Removal of Abandoned USTs / Excavation and Off-Site Disposal of Site Soils

Exceeding the Restricted Commercial Use SCOs / Excavation and Off-Site Disposal of Site Drywell Sediments Exceeding Protection of Groundwater SCOs

6.1.1 Alternative S1 – No Action No action will be conducted as part of this alternative and will serve as the baseline for comparison with other alternatives. Under this alternative, the Site remains as it presently exists. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously.


24

Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative would provide no additional protection to the public or environment. The Site would remain in its present condition. Compliance with SCGs. No actions will be taken to reduce COPC concentrations in Site soils. Therefore, this alternative would not be in compliance with chemical-specific SCGs. Since no action would be implemented, no location-specific or action-specific SCGs would be applicable. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. The Site RAOs would not be met; therefore, this alternative would not provide long-term effectiveness. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. No actions would be taken to treat the impacted soil; therefore, no reduction in the toxicity, mobility or volume of Site COPC would be achieved through treatment. Natural attenuation processes would continue to result in a reduction in COPC concentrations over time. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Since no construction activities will be implemented on Site, no short-term impacts or risks to workers, the environment or the community would occur. Implementability. Since no construction activities, materials or permits would be required to implement the No Action Alternative, implementability would be relatively easy. Cost. There are no costs associated with the No Action alternative. Therefore, the costs associated with this alternative would be considered “low”. Land Use. This alternative is not consistent with the proposed use of the Site since no actions would be undertaken to prevent exposure of Site workers and visitors to COPC present in Site soil or groundwater. 6.1.2 Alternative S2 - Cover System / Removal of Abandoned USTs / Closure of Site Drywells The abandoned USTs would be removed and the nine existing drywells closed. No soil would be removed and a cover system would be placed over the entire Site. The major components of this alternative are: Removal of the Abandoned USTs. The “solvesso”, xylene and fuel oil tanks reported to be abandoned will be removed. The top of each tank will be exposed and an access hole cut in each tank to determine if they were properly abandoned. If not, any remaining liquids will be removed and disposed of properly off-Site. The tanks will then be excavated, cut and cleaned. Once the tanks are cleaned and rendered vapor free they will be transported off-Site for proper disposal. All materials removed from the tank interior will be analyzed, properly classified and disposed of off-Site. The excavation will be backfilled with certified clean fill. Any concrete bottom slab or encasement will be left in place.


25

Drywell Closure. Each of the nine existing drywells used for surface runoff will be closed and, if necessary, replaced with new drainage structures at other locations on-Site. The surface grate and, if present, the dome will be excavated and removed from the drywell. The drywell will then be backfilled with certified clean fill and sealed with one foot of cement or asphalt. Construction of Cover System. The cover system would be properly designed and integrated into the redevelopment of the Site. The primary objective of the cover system is to prevent direct contact exposure with impacted soils. In addition, the cover would be designed to reduce infiltration of precipitation through impacted soil to groundwater. The cover system would extend over the entire 5 acres of the Site. As part of the redevelopment, a new 110,000 square foot warehouse building will be constructed that will cover over 70 percent of the current Site. The building will be constructed with a concrete foundation and floor. Approximately 20 to 25 percent of the Site will be covered with asphalt or concrete parking areas and loading docks. Less than 10 percent will be landscaped areas. Specifications for the pavement design will be based on the Site redevelopment plans and the anticipated surface loading and traffic rating. For landscaped areas, the cover system would be composed of a minimum of two foot of clean soil with a demarcation layer. All new structures will include a vapor mitigation system. New storm water drainage structures incorporated into the final redevelopment plans will be designed to reduce infiltration of precipitation through impacted soils. Institutional Controls. Since soil would remain on-Site above the Commercial SCOs, institutional controls would be put in place to prevent exposure. Land-use restrictions would prohibit or control subsurface activity in the areas of soil impact. All subsurface activity implemented on-Site would require the use of a Site Soil Management Plan. Any new structures would require vapor mitigation under a Vapor Management Plan. Site restrictions would be implemented through legal instruments such as deeds and/or environmental easements. Maintenance and Inspection. The cover system, including landscaped areas, pavement, and building floor slabs, would be inspected to identify and correct any damage or degradation that may reduce its effectiveness. In addition, the vapor mitigation system will be visually inspected for identification and repair of leaks. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative prevents direct exposure by installing a cover system over areas where the soil exceeds the Commercial SCOs. In addition, the cover system would reduce infiltration of water through impacted soils, thereby reducing the migration of COPC to the underlying groundwater. The soil vapor mitigation system would prevent exposure to accumulated vapors within Site buildings. Institutional controls would prevent the unauthorized disturbance of Site soil, create a management plan to address future soil excavation activities, and establish criteria for the vapor management of any new Site building. To ensure continued protection of public health and the environment, periodic inspections of the cover system and soil vapor mitigation system would be required.


26

Compliance with SCGs. This alternative does not include the removal of drywell sediments with COPC concentrations above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs, nor does it include the removal of soil surrounding the USTs with concentrations above the Commercial SCOs. Therefore, this alternative would not be in compliance with the chemical-specific SCGs for the drywell sediments or soil. The alternative includes land-use restrictions and a cover system to minimize direct exposure to COPC and to reduce the leaching of COPC to the underlying groundwater. The removal of the USTs, closure of the drywells and construction of the cover system would be in compliance with the applicable action-specific SCGs addressed in 6 NYCRR Part 612 – Registration of Petroleum Storage Facilities, 6 NYCRR Part 613- Handling and Storage of Petroleum, 6 NYCRR Part 371 – Identification and Listing of Hazardous Wastes, 6 NYCRR Part 372 – Hazardous Waste Manifest System and Related Standards for Generators, Transporters and Facilities, TAGM 4031 – Fugitive Dust Suppression and Particulate Monitoring at Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (NYSDEC 1989), and Nassau County Department of Health (NCDOH) Drywell Closure Procedures. All fill materials imported to the Site will be “certified clean” in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 375. Sediment and erosion control measures would be implemented in accordance with applicable regulations. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. The cover system, which includes a minimum two foot cover of clean soil, pavement and and/or new structures, will provide long-term effectiveness against direct exposure if properly maintained. The vapor mitigation system will provide long-term effectiveness in preventing the accumulation of vapors within Site buildings if properly maintained. The cover system will direct runoff to reduce the leaching of COPC to the underlying groundwater. Institutional controls will prevent unauthorized disturbance of impacted soil and maintain the permanence of the soil vapor mitigation system. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. This alternative does not include any actions to treat the impacted soil; therefore, no reduction in the toxicity, mobility or volume of Site COPC would be achieved through treatment. However, the alternative does include actions that would reduce the leaching of COPC concentrations to the underlying groundwater. Natural attenuation processes would continue to result in a reduction in COPC concentrations over time. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Remedial construction activities are not expected to adversely affect the local community. A significant portion of the construction activities will be part of the Site redevelopment. There will be a slight increase in truck traffic to bring in cover material. Trucks will be covered to limit material loss and generation of dust on the roadway. Noise from heavy equipment would impact nearby residences, but would be limited to normal working hours and will be below acceptable limits at the property line. Air dust monitoring will be implemented during remedial construction and engineering controls for dust suppression will be implemented if action levels are exceeded. Risk to Site workers will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outlined in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. No significant short-term impacts to the environment are expected to occur during the implementation of this alternative.


27

Implementability. Construction and long-term use of a cover system is a well established remedial technology. Excavation and removal of USTs is a common practice. Soil vapor mitigation technologies, including vapor barriers and sub-slab depressurization systems, are widely utilized in commercial buildings. Contractors to install the cover system and/or remove the USTs are available locally. Contractors with the expertise to install a vapor barrier and/or sub-slab depressurization system may not be available locally, but are likely present in the tri-state area. Therefore, construction and maintenance activities would not be difficult to implement. Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “moderate”. Land Use. This alternative would be consistent with the proposed land use. The redevelopment plans easily incorporate the pavement; new building floor and soil cover where necessary. The soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into any new building or retrofitted to the renovation of an existing building. 6.1.3 Alternative S3 - Removal of Abandoned USTs / Excavation and Closure of Site Drywells / Soil Vapor Extraction System This alternative is similar to Alternative S2 described above with the addition of a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system and excavation of drywell bottom sediment. The SVE system would be installed to remove VOCs from the unsaturated zone surrounding the abandoned USTs. Drywells would be excavated to remove sediment with COPC concentrations in excess of the Protection of Groundwater SCOs prior to closure. The major components of this alternative are identical to those described above for Alternative S2 with the addition of the following: Soil Vapor Extraction System. Following the removal of the USTs, an SVE system would be installed in the remaining area of the Site where soil COPC concentrations exceed the Commercial SCOs. The sizing of the extraction blower, need for off-gas treatment, configuration and layout of the extraction wells would be dependent upon the results of a pilot test. Given the soil texture and shallow depth to groundwater, it is anticipated that horizontal extraction wells would be installed at a depth of 2 to 3 feet bgs. The spacing between extraction wells is anticipated to be 15 to 20 feet. Drywell Excavation and Closure. Bottom sediment would be removed from drywells where the concentrations of COPCs in the sediment exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Visually impacted sediment would be excavated from the drywell bottom. A post excavation soil sample would be retrieved and analyzed for pertinent COPCs subsequent to sediment removal. Clean soil would then be placed in the bottom of the drywell to protect the integrity of the structure. All excavated sediment will be placed into water tight roll-off boxes from proper disposal off-Site. If post-excavation sediment samples continue to show COPCs concentrations above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs, additional sediment would be removed from the drywell and may require the removal of the structure. Waste characterization soil samples would be collected and analyzed in accordance with the disposal facility requirements. It is assumed that the excavated soil would be considered non-hazardous and suitable for thermal recycling or direct landfill disposal.


28

The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative provides protection to the public health and the environment through the removal of the abandoned USTs and an SVE system to reduce the VOC concentrations in the unsaturated zone to levels below the Commercial SCOs. In addition, bottom sediment would be removed from those Site drywells where COPC concentrations exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. The migration of VOCs to the underlying groundwater would be reduced or eliminated. The migration of vapors into Site buildings would be reduced. However, as a precaution, a soil vapor mitigation system would be installed to prevent exposure to the potential accumulated vapors within Site buildings. Institutional controls would establish criteria for the vapor management of any new Site building. To ensure continued protection of public health and the environment, periodic inspections of the soil vapor mitigation system would be required. Compliance with SCGs. This alternative includes an SVE system that would reduce the soil COPC concentrations below the Commercial SCOs, and includes removal of drywell sediments with COPC concentrations above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Therefore, this alternative would be in compliance with the chemical-specific SCGs. Removal of the USTs, drywell closure and the installation of the SVE system would be in compliance with the applicable action-specific SCGs addressed in 6 NYCRR Part 612 – Registration of Petroleum Storage Facilities, 6 NYCRR Part 613- Handling and Storage of Petroleum, 6 NYCRR Part 371 – Identification and Listing of Hazardous Wastes, TAGM 4031 – Fugitive Dust Suppression and Particulate Monitoring at Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (NYSDEC 1989), Nassau County Department of Health (NCDOH) Drywell Closure Procedures, and Air Guide 1 – Guidelines for the Control of Toxic Ambient Air Contaminants. All fill materials imported to the Site will be “certified clean” in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 375. Sediment and erosion control measures would be implemented in accordance with applicable regulations. Transportation and disposal of impacted sediment would be subject to applicable action-specific SCGs listed in 6 NYCRR Part 372 – Hazardous Waste Manifest System and Related Standards for Generators, Transporters and Facilities; 6 NYCRR Part 364 – Waste Transporter Permits; 6 NYCRR Part 373 – Hazardous Waste Management Facilities; and 6 NYCRR Part 360 – Solid Waste Management Facilities. Out of state disposal facilities would be subject to applicable laws and regulations specific to the state that the facility is located in. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. The removal of the USTs and the soil vapor extraction system will, given time, reduce the soil VOC concentrations and will reduce long-term impacts. However, the shallow depth to groundwater and relatively fine soil texture may limit the effectiveness of the SVE system to adequately treat the entire unsaturated zone. Site redevelopment, which includes pavement and/or new structures, will provide effectiveness against direct exposure until the SVE system reduces the soil concentrations below the Commercial SCOs. Any landscaping remaining in the area of the impacted soil will require a two-foot cover cap of clean soil. The vapor mitigation system will provide long-term effectiveness in preventing the accumulation of vapors within Site buildings if properly maintained.


29

The excavation of impacted drywell sediments will effectively reduce the leaching of COPC to the underlying groundwater. Institutional controls will maintain the permanence of the soil vapor mitigation system within Site buildings. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. This alternative includes actions to treat the impacted soil; thereby reducing the toxicity, mobility or volume of Site COPC. However, the SVE system will be ineffective in removing residual VOCs in soils near and below the groundwater. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Remedial construction activities are not expected to adversely affect the local community. A significant portion of the construction activities will be part of the Site redevelopment. Well drilling, limited excavation activities and construction of the remedial components will not cause significant release of organic vapors or particulates. Noise from heavy equipment would impact nearby residences, but would be limited to normal working hours and will be below acceptable limits at the property line. Air dust monitoring will be implemented during remedial construction and engineering controls for dust suppression will be implemented if action levels are exceeded. Risk to Site workers will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outline in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. Operation and maintenance of the SVE system is not expected to unfavorably affect the local community. If required, air discharges from the SVE system will be controlled by appropriate treatment processes. Implementability. Excavation and removal of USTs, as well as, drywell remediation is a common practice. Construction and operation of an SVE system is a well established remedial technology. Soil vapor mitigation technologies, including vapor barriers and sub-slab depressurization systems, are widely utilized in commercial buildings. Contractors to install the SVE system, remove the USTs and/or excavate the drywells are available locally. Contractors with the expertise to install a vapor barrier and/or sub-slab depressurization system may not be available locally, but are likely present in the tri-state area. Therefore, construction and maintenance activities would not be difficult to implement. The shallow depth to the groundwater, combined with the relatively fine soil texture, may result in significant short circuiting of the SVE system to the surface, reducing its effectiveness to treat the soil. Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “moderate”. Land Use. This alternative would be consistent with the proposed land use. The UST removal and installation of the SVE system can be performed after demolition and prior to new building construction. The soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into any new building or retrofitted to complete the renovation of an existing building.


30

6.1.4 Alternative S4: Removal of Abandoned USTs / Excavation and Off-Site Disposal of Site Soils Exceeding the Restricted Commercial Use SCOs / Excavation and Off-Site Disposal of Site Drywell Sediments Exceeding Protection of Groundwater SCOs

In this alternative, drywells would be excavated to remove sediment with COPC concentrations in excess of the Protection of Groundwater SCOs prior to closure. In addition, the abandoned UST would be removed and surrounding soil with COPC concentrations above the Commercial SCOs would be excavated and transported off-Site for disposal. The major components of this alternative are: Removal of the Abandoned USTs. The “solvesso”, xylene and fuel oil tanks reported to be abandoned would be removed. The top of each tank would be exposed and an access hole cut in each tank to determine if it was properly abandoned. If not, any remaining liquids would be removed and properly disposed of off-Site. The tanks would then be excavated, cut and cleaned. Once the tanks are cleaned and rendered vapor free they would be transported off-Site for proper disposal. All materials removed from the tank interior will be analyzed, properly classified and disposed of off-Site. Any concrete bottom slab or encasement would be removed. Excavation and Off-Site Disposal of Soil Exceeding the Commercial SCOs. Subsequent to the removal of the abandoned USTs, Site soils would be excavated to one foot beneath the water table (average depth to the water table is 5 feet bgs) where previous investigations indicated COPC concentrations in excess of the Commercial SCOs. This would require the excavation and removal of approximately 2,500 cubic yards of soil and the placement of a similar volume of backfill. Post excavation soil samples would be collected per NYSDEC DER-10, December 2002. If post-excavation soil samples exceed the Commercial SCOs, additional soil would be excavated and new post-excavation soil samples collected. After excavation, certified clean fill would be placed, compacted and leveled to match the existing grade. Waste characterization soil samples would be collected and analyzed in accordance with the disposal facility requirements. It is assumed that the excavated soil would be considered non-hazardous and suitable for thermal recycling or direct landfill disposal. Drywell Excavation and Closure. Bottom sediment would be removed from drywells where the concentrations of COPC in the sediment exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Visually impacted sediment would be excavated from the drywell bottom. A post excavation soil sample would be retrieved and analyzed for pertinent COPC subsequent to sediment removal. Clean soil would then be placed in the bottom of the drywell to protect the integrity of the drywell. All excavated sediment would be placed into water tight roll-off boxes from proper disposal off-Site. If post-excavation sediment samples continue to shown COPC concentrations above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs, additional sediment would be excavated from the drywell and may require removal of the structure. Waste characterization soil samples would be collected and analyzed in accordance with the disposal facility requirements. It is assumed that the excavated soil would be considered non-hazardous and suitable for thermal recycling or direct landfill disposal.


31

Institutional Controls. Any new structures would require vapor mitigation under a Vapor Management Plan. Site restrictions would be implemented through legal instruments such as deeds and/or environmental easements. Maintenance and Inspection. Under a Vapor Management Plan, the vapor mitigation system would require periodic inspection for identification and repair of leaks. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative provides protection to the public health and the environment through the removal of the abandoned USTs and surrounding soil with COPC concentrations that exceed the Commercial SCOs. In addition, bottom sediment would be removed from Site drywells where COPC concentrations exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. The leaching of COPC to the underlying groundwater would be reduced or eliminated. In addition, the migration of vapors into Site buildings would be reduced. However, as a precaution, a soil vapor mitigation system would be installed to prevent exposure to accumulated vapors within Site buildings. Institutional controls would establish criteria for the vapor management of any new Site building. To ensure continued protection of public health and the environment, periodic inspections of the soil vapor mitigation system would be required. Compliance with SCGs. This alternative includes the removal of Site soils with COPC concentrations above the Commercial SCOs and for the removal of drywell sediments with COPC concentrations above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Therefore, this alternative would be in compliance with the chemical-specific SCGs. Removal of the USTs, excavation of impacted soil and drywell closure would be in compliance with the applicable action-specific SCGs addressed in 6 NYCRR Part 612 – Registration of Petroleum Storage Facilities; 6 NYCRR Part 613- Handling and Storage of Petroleum; 6 NYCRR Part 371 – Identification and Listing of Hazardous Wastes; TAGM 4031 – Fugitive Dust Suppression and Particulate Monitoring at Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (NYSDEC 1989); Nassau County Department of Health (NCDOH) Drywell Closure Procedures; and NYSDEC DER-10 – Technical Guidance for Site Investigations and Remediation, December 2002. All fill materials imported to the Site will be “certified clean” in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 375. Sediment and erosion control measures would be implemented in accordance with applicable regulations. Transportation and disposal of impacted soil would be subject to applicable action-specific SCGs listed in 6 NYCRR Part 372 – Hazardous Waste Manifest System and Related Standards for Generators, Transporters and Facilities; 6 NYCRR Part 364 – Waste Transporter Permits; 6 NYCRR Part 373 – Hazardous Waste Management Facilities; and 6 NYCRR Part 360 – Solid Waste Management Facilities. Out of state disposal facilities would be subject to applicable laws and regulations specific to the state in which the facility is located. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. Since the abandoned USTs and impacted soil to one foot beneath the water table would be removed, this alternative would provide long-term effectiveness.


32

The vapor mitigation system will provide long-term effectiveness in preventing the accumulation of vapors within Site buildings if properly maintained. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. This alternative includes actions to remove impacted soil; thereby, reducing the toxicity, mobility or volume of Site COPC. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Remedial construction activities are not expected to adversely affect the local community. A significant portion of the construction activities will be part of the Site redevelopment. Due to the large volume of soil and debris transported from the Site, as well as the large volume of backfill material that would be transported to the Site, a significant increase in truck traffic would be expected during construction activities. Trucks will be covered to limit material loss and generation of dust on the roadway. Noise from heavy equipment would impact nearby residences, but would be limited to normal working hours and will be below acceptable limits at the property line. Excavation activities may produce odors, organic vapors and/or nuisance dust. Ambient air monitoring for organic vapors and dust would be implemented during remedial construction. Engineering controls for odor, vapors or dust suppression will be implemented if action levels are exceeded. Risk to Site workers will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outline in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. Implementability. Excavation and removal of USTs, as well as, drywell remediation is a common practice. Soil vapor mitigation technologies, including vapor barriers and sub-slab depressurization systems, are widely utilized in commercial buildings. Excavation of soil surrounding the USTs would require the demolition of a portion of the existing Site building and would likely encounter subsurface utilities and other subsurface structures. Delays may occur due to limited truck availability to transport impacted soil and backfill material. Excavation, tank removal and drywell remediation contractors are available locally. Contractors with the expertise to install a vapor barrier and/or sub-slab depressurization system may not be available locally, but are likely present in the tri-state area. Therefore, the construction and maintenance activities would not be difficult to implement. Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “high”. Land Use. This alternative would be consistent with the proposed land use. The UST removal and over excavation can be performed after demolition and prior to new building construction. The soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into any new building.


33

6.2 Groundwater Alternatives The retained technologies were assembled into the following alternatives to address groundwater impact. Alternative W1: No Action Alternative W2: Monitored Natural Attenuation / Institutional Controls Alternative W3: Groundwater Extraction / Discharge to Surface Water / Aquifer Air Sparging / Soil Vapor Extraction / Treatment / Institutional Controls Alternative W4: In-Situ Chemical Oxidation / Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation / Institutional Controls 6.2.1 Alternative W1 – No Action No action will be conducted as part of this alternative and will serve as the baseline for comparison with other alternatives. Under this alternative, the Site remains as it presently exists. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative would provide no additional protection to the public or environment. The Site would remain in its present condition. Compliance with SCGs. No actions will be taken to reduce COPC concentrations in groundwater. Therefore, this alternative would not be in compliance with the chemical-specific SCGs. Since no action would be implemented, no location-specific or action-specific SCGs would be applicable. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. Site RAOs would not be met; therefore, this alternative would not provide long-term effectiveness. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. No actions would be taken to treat the impacted groundwater; therefore, no reduction in the toxicity, mobility or volume of Site COPC would be achieved through treatment. Natural attenuation processes would continue to result in a reduction in COPC concentrations over time since anaerobic conditions favorable to reductive dechlorination presently exist to a limited extent on-Site. . Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Since no construction activities will be implemented on Site, no short-term impacts or risks to workers, the environment or the community would occur. Implementability. Since no construction activities, materials or permits would be required to implement the No Action Alternative, implementability would be relative easy.


34

Cost. There are no costs associated with the No Action alternative. Therefore, the costs associated with this alternative would be considered “low”. Land Use. This alternative is not consistent with the proposed use of the Site since no actions would be undertaken to prevent exposure of Site workers and visitors to COPC present in Site groundwater. 6.2.2 Alternative W2 – Monitored Natural Attenuation / Institutional Controls In this alternative groundwater monitoring would be implemented to verify that the plume is stable and the COPC groundwater concentrations are stable or decreasing. Institutional controls would be established to prevent contact and ingestion of impacted Site groundwater. The major components of this alternative are: Environmental Monitoring. Periodic sampling and analysis would be required to monitor COPC groundwater concentrations. Several existing monitoring wells would likely need to be replaced due to Site redevelopment activities, and new monitoring wells may be required to adequately monitor the plume. Institutional Controls. Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions and/or environmental easements would be established to restrict future Site use and limit potential exposure to COPC. Institutional controls would be implemented to prohibit groundwater use and require soil vapor mitigation measures for Site buildings. Operation and maintenance of the vapor mitigation system would be established under an approved Vapor Management Plan. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative would provide protection to the public health and the environment provided the institutional controls remain in effect. Compliance with SCGs. When combined with the remedial alternatives discussed in Section 6.1 for soil, this alternative, given enough time, would achieve the chemical-specific SCGs through natural attenuation processes since anaerobic conditions favorable to reductive dechlorination presently exist to a limited extent on-Site. The time required to achieve the SCGs is unknown. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. Site RAOs would be met by maintaining the institutional controls and, over time, by the natural attenuation of the COPC in the groundwater. However, impacted groundwater may continue to migrate off-Site. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. Natural attenuation processes would result in a reduction in COPC concentrations over time since anaerobic conditions favorable to reductive dechlorination presently exist to a limited extent on-Site. .


35

Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. This alternative would likely require installation of monitoring wells. Risk to the drill crew will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outline in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. No short-term impacts or risks to the environment or the community would be expected to occur if this alternative is selected. Implementability. Technologies for well installation and monitoring are well established. Therefore, implementability would be relative easy for this alternative. Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “low to moderate” based on the scope and length of the monitoring program. Land Use. This alternative is consistent with the proposed redevelopment of the Site. 6.2.3 Alternative W3 - Groundwater Extraction / Discharge to Surface Water / Aquifer Air Sparging / Soil Vapor Extraction / Treatment / Institutional Controls In this alternative, a groundwater extraction and treatment system would be utilized to prevent the migration of COPC off-Site. An air sparging system would be installed to strip the COPC from the groundwater to be captured by a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system within the vadose zone. The major components of this alternative are: Groundwater Extraction and Treatment. Groundwater would be intercepted along the north and south property lines via an intercept system comprised of multiple wells. The system would consist of three to four extraction wells, with submersible pumps, along each property line. Total pumping rate is anticipated to be in the range of 80 to 200 gallons per minute (gpm). The extracted water would be pumped to an on-Site treatment plant, where it would be treated via air stripping and/or activated carbon. Exhaust air may require treatment prior to discharge by catalytic oxidation or activated carbon. Treated water would be discharged to Negro Bar Channel. Operation and maintenance activities would include weekly system checks and maintenance. Monthly water and air samples would likely be required for compliance with discharge permits. Air Sparging and Soil Vapor Extraction System. This alternative involves the injection of clean air into the groundwater zone with elevated VOC concentrations, resulting in a phase transfer of the VOCs from a dissolved state to a vapor state. The air is then vented through the unsaturated zone and captured by the SVE system. The sparge system would consist of several air-injection wells space approximately 10 to 15 feet apart and screened from 35 to 33 feet bgs. Horizontal SVE extraction wells would be installed in the unsaturated zone at a depth of 2 to 3 feet bgs. The spacing between SVE extraction wells is anticipated to be 15 to 20 feet. The sparge wells would be piped to a control manifold located in an on-Site treatment building where the injection air is generated by a compressor. The SVE wells would be piped to a control manifold and vacuum blower in the same treatment building. Exhaust air may require treatment prior to discharge by catalytic oxidation or activated carbon.


36

Operation and maintenance activities would include weekly system checks and maintenance. Monthly air samples would likely be required for compliance with discharge permits. Institutional Controls. Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions and/or environmental easements would be established to restrict future Site use and limit potential exposure to COPC. Institutional controls would be implemented to prohibit groundwater use and require soil vapor mitigation measures for Site buildings. Operation and maintenance of the vapor mitigation system would be established under an approved Vapor Management Plan. Environmental Monitoring. This alternative would include long-term groundwater monitoring per an approved operation, maintenance and monitoring plan. The monitoring frequency and testing may be adjusted as Site conditions change and more data is available. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative would provide protection to the public health and the environment by preventing the migration of impacted groundwater and by reducing the mass of COPC in the groundwater. Extracted groundwater would be treated until VOC levels are reduced to concentrations that allow discharge to the channel. Off-gas from the SVE system would be treated, if necessary, to meet applicable air discharge levels. Institutional controls would be in place to prevent any other extraction or use of Site groundwater. Vapor intrusion concerns for new buildings would be addressed through a building specific vapor mitigation system and/or through the general operation of the SVE system. Compliance with SCGs. This alternative would capture impacted groundwater at the north and south property lines, preventing the off-Site migration, and provide treatment prior to discharging to Negro Bar Channel. The sparge/SVE system would remove VOCs from the groundwater, reducing the contaminant mass. When combined with the remedial alternatives discussed in Section 6.1 for soil, this alternative, given enough time, may achieve the chemical-specific SCGs. Applicable action-specific SCGs, including permits and effluent standards, that would be met are addressed in 6 NYCRR Part 700-706 Water Quality Standards (June 1998); 6 NYCRR Part 705 through 758 – Implementation of NPDES Program in NYS; NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 – Ambient Water Quality Standards & Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations; and Air Guide 1 – Guidelines for the Control of Ambient Air Concentrations Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. This alternative would meet Site RAOs through a reduction of COC mass in the groundwater, addressing the migration of impacted water off-Site, preventing the use of Site groundwater through institutional controls and by the use of vapor mitigation measures in any new Site building. However, the fine soil texture present within the aquifer will limit the effectiveness of the sparge wells to treat the groundwater and may result in significant channeling of the injected air within the aquifer. In addition, the shallow depth to the


37

groundwater and relatively fine soil texture may limit the effectiveness of the SVE system to capture vapors within the unsaturated zone. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. This alternative would, given enough time, reduce the COPC concentrations in the groundwater through a combination of groundwater pumping and aquifer air spraging, thereby providing a reduction in the toxicity, mobility and volume of contaminants. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Remedial construction activities are not expected to adversely affect the local community. Construction activities include installation of sparge and SVE wells, excavation and trenching, piping, and utilities. Noise from heavy equipment would impact nearby residences, but would be limited to normal working hours and will be below acceptable limits at the property line. Excavation activities may produce odors, organic vapors and/or nuisance dust. Ambient air monitoring for organic vapors and dust would be implemented during remedial construction. Engineering controls for odor, vapors or dust suppression will be implemented if action levels are exceeded. Risk to Site workers will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outlined in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. Implementability. The construction and technologies required for this alternative include vertical sparge wells, horizontal SVE wells, excavation and trenching, pumps, piping, blowers, compressors, emission control and control instrumentation. All of these items are readily available and easily constructed on-Site. The shallow depth to groundwater and relatively fine texture of the aquifer materials may reduce the effectiveness of this system to adequately treat the impacted groundwater. Installation of this alternative would occur after the demolition of the existing Site building and before the construction of any new Site building. Pilot testing would be required to properly size and lay out the system. Construction activities would likely encounter subsurface utilities and other subsurface structures and may delay Site redevelopment plans. Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “moderate to high”. The final cost would depend on the final size and layout of the system, and on the length of time the system must operate. Land Use. This alternative, with its infrastructure of pumping wells, air injection and vent wells, conveyance piping, and aboveground treatment and process control equipment may interfere with and delay the proposed redevelopment of the Site. 6.2.4 Alternative W4 - In-Situ Chemical Oxidation / Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation / Institutional Controls In this alternative, in-situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) would be applied to the aquifer in the suspected source area following the removal of the abandoned USTs. In addition, following the initial treatment, selected areas of elevated COPC concentrations may be further treated using ISCO. Subsequent to ISCO treatment, the remaining impacted aquifer will be treated using enhanced bioremediation via reductive dechlorination. The major components of this alternative are:


38

In-Situ Chemical Oxidation. A chemical oxidant will be injected in the suspected source area of the abandoned USTs following their removal. For cost estimating purposes the conceptual model includes either a modified Fenton’s Reagent or RegenOx, a proprietary product manufactured by Regenesis of San Clemente, California. The material determined to be most effective would be injected in a 100 ft. by 100 ft. area that encompasses the location of the abandoned tanks and a former paint spraying booth. Material would be injected from the water table to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, in a grid pattern, with an injection spacing of approximately 10 to 15 feet. Groundwater monitoring would be conducted prior to injections and approximately one month following injections to determine the reduction of COPC concentrations. Additional injections may be required. Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation. Approximately 8 weeks following the ISCO treatment, an electron donor would be injected in the suspected source area and in six barriers across the Site. Two of the six barriers would be placed near the north and south property lines to act as treatment zones with the objective of preventing the further migration of COPC off-Site. For cost estimating purposes the conceptual model includes the use of 3-D Microemulsion (3DME), a proprietary product manufactured by Regenesis. Final product selection will be determined pending a pilot test. Within each barrier, material would be injected from a depth of 10 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, with an injection spacing of approximately 15 feet. Within the source area the injection depth will be similar, but with an injection grid spacing of 20 ft. on center. Groundwater monitoring would be conducted prior to injections and approximately one month following injections to determine product effectiveness. Pilot Test. A pilot scale enhanced anaerobic bioremediation test would be performed in a selected area of the Site to confirm the injection rate, injection spacing, and treatment effectiveness. In addition, subsurface vapor generation would be investigated. Environmental Monitoring. Periodic groundwater sampling and analysis would be required to monitor COC groundwater concentrations, and confirm treatment effectiveness and parameters. Several existing monitoring wells would likely need to be replaced due to Site redevelopment activities, and new monitoring wells may be required to adequately monitor the plume. Institutional Controls. Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions and/or environmental easement would be established to restrict future Site use and limit potential exposure to COPC. Institutional controls would be implemented to prohibit groundwater use and require soil vapor mitigation measures for Site buildings. Operation and maintenance of the vapor mitigation system would be established under an approved Vapor Management Plan. The following paragraphs provide an analysis of this alternative with respect to the eight criteria identified previously. Overall Protection of Public Health and the Environment. This alternative would provide protection to the public health and the environment by preventing the migration of impacted groundwater and by reducing the mass of COPC in the groundwater. Institutional controls would be in place to prevent extraction or use of the groundwater. Vapor intrusion concerns for new buildings would be addressed through a building specific vapor mitigation system.


39

Compliance with SCGs. This alternative would minimize the off-Site migration of impacted groundwater. The enhanced anaerobic environment in the groundwater would accelerate the natural biodegradation of chlorinated VOCs, reducing the contaminant mass. When combined with the remedial alternatives discussed in Section 6.1 for soil, this alternative, given enough time, would achieve the chemical-specific SCGs. Implementation of ISCO and enhanced anaerobic bioremediation would be conducted in accordance with applicable action-specific regulations addressed in 40 CFR Par 144 – Underground Injection Control Program. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence. This alternative would meet Site RAOs through a reduction of COC mass in the groundwater, addressing the migration of impacted water off-Site, preventing the use of Site groundwater through institutional controls and by the use of vapor mitigation measures in any new Site building. The 3DME product provides a consistent and long-lasting source of electron donor for periods up to 3 to 5 years. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume. This alternative would provide a reduction in the toxicity, mobility and volume of contaminants through the combined effect of chemical oxidation and enhanced anaerobic bioremediation. Chemical oxidation would result in an immediate reduction in the COC mass by the chemical conversion of contaminants to non-toxic by products. Enhanced anaerobic bioremediation would accelerate the natural degradation of the chlorinated COPC already occurring on-Site. Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts. Remedial construction activities are not expected to adversely affect the local community. Construction activities include the storage of chemicals, chemical injection into the subsurface, and the installation of monitoring wells. When not in use, chemicals would be stored in a secure area. Noise from heavy equipment would impact nearby residences, but would be limited to normal working hours and will be below acceptable limits at the property line. Chemical injections may produce odors and organic vapors. Ambient air monitoring for organic vapors would be implemented during chemical injections. In addition, ISCO may generate heat and organic vapors in the subsurface; therefore, a monitoring network would be required to observe soil vapors. Engineering controls for odors and vapors would be implemented if action levels are exceeded. Risk to Site workers will be minimized through the proper selection of personal protective equipment as outline in a Site-specific Health and Safety Plan. Implementability. Technologies for the injection of chemical into the subsurface are well developed and readily available. The long-life of the electron donor reduces the need for multiple injections and repeated Site visits. This alternative is anticipated to be consistent with the future redevelopment of the Site. However, construction delays may occur to accommodate the chemical injection schedule, and provisions may be necessary to allow for re-injections along the property boundaries. Installation of this alternative would occur after the demolition of the existing Site building and before the construction of any new Site building. Pilot testing would be required to properly size and layout the process.


40

Cost. The costs associated with this alternative would be considered “high”. The final cost would depend on the number of injection points and volume of chemicals required Land Use. This alternative is consistent with the proposed redevelopment of the Site. However, the time required for the chemical injections may delay redevelopment of the Site.


41

7.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDED REMEDY Impacted soil and groundwater have been identified as the response areas of the Site. Remediation of the soil and groundwater to meet the chemical-specific and action-specific SCGs, to the extent technically feasible for this Site, will achieve the remedial action objectives for the Site. Several remedial technologies were initially screened and four soil and groundwater remedial alternatives were selected for detailed analysis and comparative analysis. The comparative analysis was conducted on a media specific basis and qualitatively evaluated the strengths and weakness of each alternative with respect to the eight criteria use in the detailed analysis. A summary of the comparative analysis is presented in Tables 16 and 17. 7.1 Recommended Soil Alternative The detailed and comparative analysis suggests that Alternative S4 (Removal of USTs / Excavation of Soil above Commercial SCOs / Drywell Cleanout) is best soil remediation alternative for the following reasons: 1. It provides greater long-term effectiveness with the preferred removal of potential source areas, including USTs and surrounding soil and drywell sediments; 2. It provides compliance with SCGs by the removal of all soil above the Commercial SCOs and all drywell sediments above Protection of Groundwater SCOs; 3. It eliminates direct contact and soil ingestion risk; 4. It addresses both unsaturated soil and saturated soil up to 1 foot beneath the water table; 5. It significantly reduces the migration of COPC into the underlying groundwater; and 6. It is readily implementable. Alternative S2 (removal of USTs and cover system) would prevent direct contact with impacted soil and is the most cost effective. However, it does not remove the potential source and does not meet Site SCGs. Alternative S3 (removal of USTs, drywell cleanout and soil vapor extraction) can be considered a technically feasible alternative. However, meeting the Site SCGs may take several years, and areas of the Site may remain untreated.


42

7.2 Recommended Groundwater Alternative The detailed and comparative analysis suggests that Alternative W4 (In-Situ Chemical Oxidation / Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation / Institutional Controls) is the recommended remediation alternative for the following reasons: 1. It provides greater long-term effectiveness by reducing COPC concentrations to the extent that is both technically feasible and practical; 2. It will reduce the COPC mass in the source area and accelerate natural degradation of COPC to meet groundwater standards; 3. It treats groundwater at downgradient locations, with the objective of preventing the migration of COPC off-Site: 4. It provides institutional controls to prevent the extraction and use of Site groundwater and for the continued operation of a soil vapor mitigation system within any new Site buildings; 5. It will eliminate the accumulation of vapors within Site buildings by reducing COPC concentrations in the underlying groundwater; 6. It is provides short-term effectiveness by minimizing disruption to the community associated with conducting the remediation; and 7. It is readily implementable. Based on the analysis presented, Alternative W2 (monitored natural attenuation and institutional controls) would prevent ingestion and contact with impacted water and is the most cost effective. However, it does not prevent further migration of impacted water off-Site and would likely required many years to achieve groundwater standards. Alternative W3 (groundwater extraction, aquifer air sparging, soil vapor extraction and institutional controls) would prevent ingestion and contact with impacted water, control migration of the impacted water off-Site and would result in a reduction of COPC groundwater concentrations. The effectiveness, however, of air sparging in the soil types present is limited and may result in large areas of the aquifer being untreated. This limitation of the sparge system may be overcome by placing a tighter pattern of air injection wells; however, this will significantly increase costs. In addition, the redevelopment of the Site will limit access to a significant portion the vent and sparge wells that may adversely impact the long term performance of the system. System infrastructure and required operation and maintenance of the treatment system may interfere with Site redevelopment plans.


43

8.0 REMEDIAL WORK PLAN This section presents the work plan for the preferred remedy that has been selected for the Site. The preferred remedy is consistent with New York’s Brownfield Cleanup Program and the Site’s proposed redevelopment (see Section 1.3) that:

• is protective of human health and the environment,

• provides for the demolition of the existing abandoned warehouse,

• eliminates the risks associated with the currently deteriorating structure, and

• allows redevelopment of the Site as a commercial facility that will help sustain the local economy.

8.1 Building Demolition Although not formally part of this work plan, demolition of the existing warehouse structure is preferred prior to the initiation of remedial construction. Demolition activities will be completed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and will include the following:

• Implementation of jobsite security to prevent unauthorized access;

• Obtaining all required permits, licenses and approvals;

• Preparation of demolition health and safety plan, including respiratory protection program, PPE, fire protection, Site and community air monitoring, and emergency procedures;

• Preparation of an asbestos abatement plan;

• Removal of friable asbestos, including pipe insulation;

• Removal of non-friable asbestos, including roofing materials;

• Off-Site disposal of asbestos containing materials at an approved disposal facility;

• Removal and proper disposal of regulated materials, including PCB electrical equipment,

universal wastes, etc;

• Demolition and removal of existing building, including concrete floor;

• Capping or plugging of drains and sewer lines exposed during demolition;


44

• Implementation of dust control measures;

• Implementation of erosion and sediment control measures; and

• Site restoration.

8.2 Selected Remedy The preferred remedy for the Site consists of the following media-specific components: Soil: Removal of abandoned USTs in the northeast section of the Site and over excavation of all soils with COPC concentrations above the Commercial SCOs. Confirmation of COC concentrations in drywell sediments in excess of Protection of Groundwater SCOs, and, if present, removal of all sediments above the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Groundwater: In-Situ Chemical Oxidation of the potential source in the area of the abandoned USTs. Subsequent to ISCO, treating remaining groundwater plume via enhanced anaerobic bioremediation. Implement institutional controls to prevent the extraction and use of Site groundwater. The following sections provide detailed descriptions of specific components of the preferred remedy. 8.2.1 Underground Storage Tank (UST) Removal and Soil Excavation The work scope includes the removal of the previously abandoned USTs located along the north side of the Site building, near the location of the former Auto Repair Shop. According to Nassau County Health Department records, three USTs were abandoned at this location in 1995 that included one 1,000-gallon xylene tank, one 1,000-gallon “solvesso” tank and one 5,000-gallon fuel oil tank. A portion of the “solvesso” tank is presently beneath the Auto Repair Shop. In addition, two electrical utility lines pass over the location of the abandoned xylene tank. Subsequent to the demolition of the Site building, the abandoned USTs shall be removed, along with the additional excavation of an area of approximately 11,100 square feet (Figure 14). The general work scope will be as follows:

• Notify all required agencies and obtain necessary permits/registrations to initiate excavation, including NYSDEC, Nassau County Department of Health and Town of Hempstead.

• Prior to any intrusive activities that could potentially generate impacted dust and/or vapors the Community Air Monitoring Plan described in Appendix A will be implemented.

• Mark all underground utilities and confirm that the electrical lines have been de-energized.


45

• Secure the work area to ensure all unauthorized personnel do not enter the work zone.

• Excavate the concrete tank mats, exposing the top of each UST and ascertaining the contents

of the tanks. Assume the USTs contain flammable vapors and take all necessary precautions to obtain access.

• If UST is found to contain residual fluids, pump all free liquids from the tank. Properly

classify the waste stream and dispose of in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations.

• If necessary, prior to removal, render the tanks vapor free or inert using dry ice.

• Excavate and remove the tanks including, all fill pipes, product lines, vent piping and other

tank fixtures.

• Cut, clean and properly dispose of USTs, including all tank contents, in a manner that conforms to all local, state and federal laws and regulations.

• If present, remove concrete encasement and/or bottom tank slab.

• Soil will be removed down to approximately 1-foot beneath the existing water table (expected

to be encountered at a depth of 5 to 6 feet bgs)

• Soil within the designated area that exhibits visual petroleum staining and/or sustained photoionization (PID) readings above 50 parts per million (vapor) will be removed.

• Post excavation soil samples will be collected along the excavation sidewalls, near the water

table interface, at a frequency of 1 sample per 30 linear feet. Since the bottom of the excavation is anticipated to be below the water table, no bottom soil samples will be retrieved. One groundwater sample will be collected from the excavation. All samples will be collected into the appropriate container, placed in a cooler at 4oC, and submitted to a New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) ELAP certified laboratory for analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260 and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) per EPA Method 8270. All sample analyses will be performed in accordance with a NYSDEC Category B deliverable package.

• Subsequent to confirmatory soil sampling, the excavation will be backfilled with “certified

clean fill”.

• If post excavation soil samples detect COPC concentrations above the Commercial SCOs, additional excavation of the specific area will be completed. However, the excavation will not extend beyond the property line. Additional post excavation soil samples will be collected as described above.


46

• Excavated soil shall be stockpiled on-Site pending waste classification and transportation off-

Site for proper disposal. The soil shall be placed onto and covered with polyethylene plastic sheeting. Straw bales or other suitable method will be employed to hold the sheeting in place and prevent runoff and erosion of stockpile.

8.2.2 Drywell Sampling and Cleanout Bottom sediment will be removed from drywell DW-3 (Figure 2) and from the remaining eight drywells where the concentrations of COPC in the sediment exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs. The general work scope will be as follows:

• Notify all required agencies and obtain necessary approvals to initiate drywell remediation, including NYSDEC and Nassau County Department of Health.

• Prior to any intrusive activities that could potentially generate impacted dust and/or vapors

the Community Air Monitoring Plan described in Appendix A will be implemented.

• Except for DW-3, collect a bottom sediment sample from each Site drywell. Collect samples into the appropriate containers, placed in a cooler at 4oC, and submit to a NYSDOH ELAP certified laboratory for analysis of VOCs by EPA Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270 and PP Metals by EPA Method 6010. All analyses to be performed in accordance with NYSDEC Category B deliverable package.

• If COPC concentrations in the bottom sediment exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCO,

the drywell will require remediation.

• Remove impacted sediment from the drywell using a “clam-shell” excavator or other suitable technique. Continue removing sediment until visibly clean soil is encountered or the excavation is determined to be unsafe.

• If necessary, power wash the interior sidewalls of the drywell to remove residual sediment

and excavate accumulated sediment.

• Once visibly clean soil is obtained, collect a post excavation sample as described above.

• If necessary, place certified clean fill in the bottom of the drywell to protect the integrity of the structure.

• Place excavated sludge into water-tight rolloff containers pending disposal off-Site.

• Collect appropriate waste characterization samples and analyze per the requirements of the

permitted disposal facility.


47

• If post excavation samples contain concentrations of COPC in excess of the Protection of Groundwater SCOs, the drywell may require additional remediation. This may require the complete excavation of the structure.

8.2.3 In-Situ Chemical Oxidation of the Suspected Source Area Subsequent to the removal of the USTs and over-excavation of soil above the Commercial SCOs, that area of the Site will be treated using In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) to reduce the remaining petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in the groundwater. In addition, ISCO will be implemented to depths up to 35 feet bgs to reduce groundwater chlorinated hydrocarbon concentrations. The treatment area will be approximately 100 ft by 100 ft (Figure 15) and will encompass the location of the former tankfield and paint spraying both. For planning purposes, the chemical oxidant to be injected into the subsurface will be RegenOx™ , a proprietary in-situ chemical oxidation process using a solid oxidant complex (sodium percarbonate/catalytic formulation) and an activator complex (a composition of ferrous salt embedded in a micro-scale catalyst gel). RegenOx™ with its catalytic system has very high activity, capable of treating a very broad range of soil and groundwater contaminants including both petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents. Additionally, RegenOx™ has significant longevity in the subsurface allowing for both the initial contaminant degradation and the continued treatment of contaminants desorbing from the matrix. Most importantly, RegenOx, when handled appropriately, is safe and easy to apply to the contaminated subsurface without the health and safety concerns and lingering environmental issues that that have become associated with other chemical oxidation technologies. The general injection procedure will be as follows.

• Prior to the injection of in-situ chemical oxidants into the subsurface, the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) will be notified and, if required, an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit will be obtained.

• The RegenOx will be placed into the subsurface following manufacture recommendations for

direct-push injection.

• The material will be injected in a grid pattern with injection points 15 feet on center. The RegenOx will be injected continuously from the water table to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, at an application rate of 20 pounds per foot.

• To monitor VOC off-gassing as a result of the ISCO application, three soil vapor probes will

be installed along Roger Avenue, within the treatment area (Figure 15). However, according to the manufacturer, RegenOx applications have not been found to generate significant VOC vapors in the subsurface. At each soil vapor sampling location, a 6-inch, 0.0057-inch pore diameter, stainless steel screen implant will be installed approximately 1-foot above the existing water table using direct push technology. The implant will be fitted with a 3/16-inch diameter, laboratory grade, polyethylene tubing that extended to the surface. The annular


48

space will be backfilled with glass beads to 1-foot above the screen, with the remainder of the borehole backfilled with bentonite slurry to grade. Each vapor probe will be completed at grade with a flush, bolt-down 6-inch, manhole set in concrete.

• Prior to ISCO application, a baseline soil vapor sample will be collected at each probe

location and a post treatment sample will be collected following oxidant injections. All vapor sampling will be performed in accordance with the NYSDOH guidance document. Each sample will be collected into a 6-liter SUMMA canister over a 2-hour sampling duration at a flow rate not to exceed 0.2 liters per minute. Vapor samples shall be analyzed for volatile organic compounds in accordance with EPA Method TO-15, with a detection limit of 1.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). All SUMMA canisters used in the investigation will be certified clean by the laboratory and submitted to NYSDOH ELAP certified laboratory for analysis. If there is a 150% increase in COPC vapor concentrations following treatment over the baseline concentrations and the measured vapor concentrations are above NYSDOH guidance values, additional soil vapor samples will be immediately collected to confirm the increase in COPC vapor concentrations. If the elevated COPC concentrations are confirmed, a vapor mitigation system will be installed as described in Appendix B.

• Tank removal and soil excavation activities, along with Site redevelopment, will result in the

loss of several existing monitoring wells. Therefore, three to four performance monitoring wells will be installed within the treatment area. The exact spacing and location of the wells will be determined based on the final Site redevelopment plan. Each monitoring well will be nested with screen intervals at 4 to 14 feet bgs, 20 to 25 feet bgs and at 30 to 35 feet bgs. The well shall be constructed of 2-inch Schedule 40 PVC. The annular space will be backfilled with Number 2 well gravel from 1-foot below to 1-foot above each screen interval. A 1-foot thick bentonite seal shall be placed above the well gravel and remaining annular space filled with bentonite-cement grout. Each well will be finished at grade with a flush, bolt-down manhole set in concrete.

• Performance monitoring will be performed as follows:

SAMPLING FREQUENCY ANALYTE METHOD Prior to

Injection After

Injection 24

hours 1

Week 2

Weeks 3

Weeks 1

Month 2

Months pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Oxidation/Reduction Potential (ORP), Conductivity, Temperature

Field Instrument w/flow through cell

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Chemical Oxidant Colorimetric Test for Hydrogen Peroxide

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

EPA Method 8260 X

X

Total Iron EPA Method 6010 X X Dissolved Iron EPA Method 6010

w/ field filtering

X

X Dissolved Manganese EPA Method 6010

w/ field filtering

X

X


49

SAMPLING FREQUENCY ANALYTE METHOD Prior to

Injection After

Injection 24

hours 1

Week 2

Weeks 3

Weeks 1

Month 2

Months Nitrate EPA Method 353.1

or 9056

X

X Sulfate EPA Method 353.1

or 9056

X

X Alkalinity, as CaCO3 EPA Method 310.1 X X 8.2.4 Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation Approximately 8 weeks following ISCO of the former UST area, injection of an electron donor will commence to enhance the natural biodegradation of the chlorinated hydrocarbons via reductive dechlorination. Prior to the full scale implementation of the treatment, a pilot test will be conducted to obtain information on injection performance and mobility of the substrate. For planning purposes, the chemical selected for injection is 3D Microemulsion (3DMe), a proprietary in-situ electron donor manufactured by Regenesis of San Clemente, California. 3DMe provides a controlled release of organic acids to the aquifer to stimulate reductive dechlorination that will continue to release acids for 12-36 months at most sites. Once injected, 3DMe forms a microemulsion that moves out into the subsurface pore spaces via micellar transport. Over time, the soluble components of 3DMe are distributed within the aquifer via advection and diffusion. The planned treatment scenario is the injection of the 3DMe in six barriers, perpendicular to the groundwater flow direction, across the Site. In addition, reagent will be injected in a grid pattern in the area of the former tankfield, overlaying the same area that was previously treated with ISCO (Figure 17). The general work scope will be as follows.

• Prior to the injection of in-situ electron donor into the subsurface, the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) will be notified and, if required, an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit will be obtained.

• The 3DMe will be placed into the subsurface following manufacturer’s recommendations for

direct-push injection. • Prior to full-scale implementation, a pilot test will be performed to confirm reagent

distribution and evaluate substrate performance. Specific objective include injection pressures, volumes and flow rates, extent and uniformity of reagent distribution, observed changes in Site geochemistry, and effective radius of influence. In addition, vapor probes will be installed to evaluate vapor generation in the vadose zone resulting from reagent injections.

1) Approximately 100-feet of the proposed linear injection barrier in the northeast section of the Site will be used in the pilot test (Figure 16).


50

2) The 3DMe will be injection at spacing of 15 feet on center. The 3DMe will be injected continuously from 10 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, at an application rate of 8 gallons (10:1 micoemulsion) per foot.

3) Four performance monitoring wells will be will be installed for the pilot test, one

within the injection zone, one placed 5-feet south of the injection zone and two place at 10 and 20 feet north of the injection zone. Each monitoring well will be nested with screened intervals at 10 to 20 feet bgs and at 25 to 35 feet bgs. The well shall be constructed of 2-inch Schedule 40 PVC. The annular space will be backfilled with Number 2 well gravel from 1-foot below to 1-foot above each screen interval. A 1-foot thick bentonite seal shall be placed above the well gravel and remaining annular space filled with bentonite-cement grout. Each well will be finished at grade with a flush, bolt-down manhole set in concrete.

4) To define full-scale design parameters and evaluate substrate performance,

groundwater samples will be collected and analyzed in accordance with the following schedule:

SAMPLING FREQUENCY ANALYTE METHOD

Prior to Injection

2 Days

1 Week

2 Weeks

4 Weeks

6 Weeks

8 Weeks

pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Oxidation/Reduction Potential (ORP), Conductivity, Temperature

Field Instrument w/flow through cell

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

EPA Method 8260 X

X

Total Iron EPA Method 6010 X X X X X X X Dissolved Iron EPA Method 6010

w/ field filtering

X

X

X

X

X

X

X Dissolved Manganese

EPA Method 6010 w/ field filtering

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Nitrate EPA Method 353.1 or 9056

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Sulfate EPA Method 353.1 or 9056

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Alkalinity, as CaCO3 EPA Method 310.1 X X X X X X X Methane EPA Method D1945

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

5) Eight soil vapor probes will be installed to monitor soil vapor VOC levels during the pilot test (Figure 16), two within the treatment zone, two approximately 25 feet north of the treatment zone, two approximately 25 feet south of the treatment zone, and two along the north property line. At each soil vapor sampling location, a 6-inch, 0.0057-inch pore diameter, stainless steel screen implant will be installed approximately 1-foot above the existing water table using direct push technology. The implant will be fitted with a 3/16-inch diameter, laboratory grade, polyethylene tubing that extends to the surface. The annular space will be backfilled with glass beads to 1-foot above


51

the screen, with the remainder of the borehole backfilled with bentonite slurry to grade. Each vapor probe will be completed at grade with a flush, bolt-down 6-inch, manhole set in concrete.

6) Two sampling rounds will be collected from all six soil vapor probes. A baseline

sample will be collected prior to 3DMe application and a final sampling round will be performed 2-days following completion of chemical injections. All vapor sampling will be performed in accordance with the NYSDOH guidance document. Each sample will be collected into a 6-liter SUMMA canister over a 2-hour sampling duration at a flow rate not to exceed 0.2 liters per minute. Vapor samples shall be analyzed for volatile organic compounds in accordance with EPA Method TO-15, with a detection limit of 1.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). All SUMMA canisters used in the investigation will be certified clean by the laboratory and submitted to NYSDOH ELAP certified laboratory for analysis.

7) If the pilot test results show a 150% increase in COPC vapor concentrations

following treatment over the baseline concentrations and the measured vapor concentrations are above NYSDOH guidance values, the contingency plan to install a vapor mitigation system will be implemented prior to full-scale treatment as described in Appendix B.

• Pending results of the pilot test, the reagent will be injected in six linear barriers across the

Site, perpendicular to the groundwater flow direction (Figure 17). Once injected the 3DMe will move out into the aquifer via advection and diffusion, creating a treatment zone to accelerate the natural biodegradation of the chlorinated hydrocarbons. Two barriers will be placed near the north and south property lines to prevent the continued migration of chlorinated hydrocarbons off-Site. The other four barriers will be injected in the Site interior to further treat the impacted groundwater.

• Within each barrier, 3DMe will be injection at a spacing of 15 feet on center. The 3DMe will

be injected continuously from 10 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, at an application rate of 8 gallons (10:1 micoemulsion) per foot.

• Pending the result of the pilot test, 3DMe will be injected in a grid pattern to match the 100 ft

by 100 ft ISCO injection area encompassing the former tank field, (Figure 15). The injections will be spaced 20 feet on center, with continuous injection from 10 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 35 feet bgs, at an application rate of 22 gallons (10:1 micoemulsion) per foot. In addition, HRC-primer will be injected at a rate of 3 pounds per foot. Once in the subsurface, HRC Primer will be metabolized quickly to "jump start" the reductive dechlorination process.

• Performance monitoring will be conducted using a network of monitoring wells that will

include eight wells spaced along the property boundary (3 along the north property line, 3 along the south property line and two along Gates Avenue). In addition, five to ten monitoring wells will be installed within the property, spaced within and between the


52

treatment barriers. The number, spacing and location of the wells will be determined based on the final Site redevelopment plan. Each monitoring well will be nested with screened intervals at 10 to 20 feet bgs and at 25 to 35 feet bgs. The well shall be constructed of 2-inch Schedule 40 PVC. The annular space will be backfilled with Number 2 well gravel from 1-foot below to 1-foot above each screen interval. A 1-foot thick bentonite seal shall be placed above the well gravel and remaining annular space filled with bentonite-cement grout. Each well will be finished at grade with a flush, bolt-down manhole set in concrete.

• Although the application of the electron donor is not anticipated to result in VOC off-gassing,

as a precaution, 17 soil vapor probes will be installed along the Site boundaries to monitor soil vapor VOC levels (Figure 17). At each soil vapor sampling location, a 6-inch, 0.0057-inch pore diameter, stainless steel screen implant will be installed approximately 1-foot above the existing water table using direct push technology. The implant will be fitted with a 3/16-inch diameter, laboratory grade, polyethylene tubing that extends to the surface. The annular space will be backfilled with glass beads to 1-foot above the screen, with the remainder of the borehole backfilled with bentonite slurry to grade. Each vapor probe will be completed at grade with a flush, bolt-down 6-inch, manhole set in concrete.

• Prior to 3DMe application, a baseline soil vapor sample will be collected at each probe

location. In addition, post-treatment soil vapor sampling will be completed following electron donor injections. All vapor sampling will be performed in accordance with the NYSDOH guidance document. Each sample will be collected into a 6-liter SUMMA canister over a 2-hour sampling duration at a flow rate not to exceed 0.2 liters per minute. Vapor samples shall be analyzed for volatile organic compounds in accordance with EPA Method TO-15, with a detection limit of 1.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). All SUMMA canisters used in the investigation will be certified clean by the laboratory and submitted to NYSDOH ELAP certified laboratory for analysis.

• If there is a 150% increase in COPC vapor concentrations following treatment over the

baseline concentrations and the measured vapor concentrations are above NYSDOH guidance values, additional soil vapor samples will be immediately collected to confirm the increase in COPC vapor concentrations. If the elevated COPC concentrations are confirmed, the contingency plan to install a vapor mitigation system will be implemented as described in Appendix B.

• To obtain baseline data, monitoring wells are to be installed and sampled prior to the reagent

injection. Following treatment, performance monitoring will be completed on a semi-annual schedule. Groundwater will be sampled and analyzed for the following field and laboratory parameters:

pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Oxidation/Reduction Potential and Temperature (Field

Instrument with Flow-Through Cell) Volatile Organic Compounds (EPA Method 8260) Total Organic Carbon (EPA Method 415.1 or EPA Method 9060) Nitrate (EPA Method 353.1 or EPA Method 9056) Sulfate (EPA Method 375.3 or EPA Method 9056)


53

Dissolved Iron and Manganese (EPA 6000 Series) Methane, Ethane, Ethene (ASTM Method D1945)

9.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS This section describes additional requirements that will be implemented as part of the preferred remedy for the Site. 9.1 Future Site Use Environmental easements/deed restrictions will be implemented to ensure that the Site can be used only for Commercial and/or Industrial purposes, as defined in 6 NYCRR Part 375-1. However, if the Site is subsequently remediated to meet residential standards, other uses may be allowed. The environmental easements and deed notices will be described as part of the Site Management Plan. 9.2 Groundwater Use Potable use of Site groundwater will be prohibited through implementation of an environmental easement/deed notice. 9.3 Vapor Intrusion An environmental easement will be implemented to ensure that the vapor intrusion pathway is eliminated from all occupied buildings associated with the future development of the Site. A vapor mitigation system will be designed into any new structures that will consist of a sub-slab vapor barrier and passive sub-grade vapor collection system. The passive vapor collection system will have provisions for upgrading to an active system if required. 9.4 Site Management Plan A Site Management Plan will be prepared consistent with 6 NYCRR Part 375 and the BCP Program Guide, May 2004. The plan will include the following elements:

• Introduction, Site Description and Site Remedial Action; • Groundwater Performance Monitoring and Sampling Plan; • Vapor Mitigation Performance Monitoring Plan • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan; • Institutional and Engineering and Control Plan; • Site Inspections and Maintenance; • Notification and Reporting Requirements; • Health and Safety Plan for Construction Personnel.

The Site Management plan will be provided as a separate document per the project schedule provided in Section 10.


54

10.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE The anticipated project schedule for the remedy implementation and Site redevelopment is summarized below.

• Start Timeline – Approval of the Remedial Work Plan. 175 Roger Avenue LLC acquires the title free and clear of liens and encumbrances to the Site.

• Planning / Preparation (Months 1 through 3)

Prepare for Asbestos Abatement and Building Demolition

Prepare Site Management Plan

Prepare Detailed Project Schedule

• Building Demolition (Months 3 through 12)

Complete Asbestos Abatement

Complete Building Demolition

• Implement Remedial Action Plan (Months 12 through 20)

Remove Abandoned USTs

Excavate Soil above Commercial SCOs

Sample and Remediate Drywells

In-Situ Chemical Oxidation Treatment of Source Area

Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation of Chlorinate Hydrocarbon Plume

Implement Environment Easements/Deed Restrictions

• Complete Initial Build-out and Site Redevelopment (Months 20 through 36)

Operation, Maintenance and Monitoring activities, including groundwater monitoring and maintenance of the vapor mitigation system, will be performed in accordance the approved Site Management Plan and will be continued as necessary.


FIGURES

SITE: 175 Roger AvenueInwood, NY

CLIENT: 175 Roger Avenue LLCATC PROJECT #: 15.75316.0006SCALE: Not to Scale

FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION

N104 East 25th Street, 8th FloorNew York, NY 10010-2917

Phone (212) 353-8280 * Fax (212) 979-8447

LEGEND:

Site Boundary

Bayview Avenue

Gat

es A

venu

e

Roger Avenue

Cer

ro S

t.

Che

rry

Stre

et

FIGURE 11

TOTAL ORGANIC VOLATILES (VOCs) MEASURED IN SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS (MW) AND PROBE LOCATIONS (BW) AND MEASURED CONCENTRATION OF ELECTRON ACCEPTORS AND

METABOLIC BY-PRODUCTS

Total Organic Volatile Compounds (VOCs) Concentrations

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

MW-01

MW-02

MW-03

MW-04

MW-05

MW-06

MW-07

MW-08

MW-09

MW-13

MW-14

MW-15

MW-16

BW-01

BW-02

BW-03

BW-04

BW-05

Monitoring Well and Probe Location

Con

cent

ratio

n (u

g/L)

Total VOCs

Electron Acceptors and Metabolic By-Products

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

MW- 01

MW- 02

MW- 03

MW- 04

MW- 05

MW- 06

MW- 07

MW- 08

MW- 09

MW- 13

MW- 14

MW- 15

MW- 16

BW -01

BW -02

BW -03

BW -04

BW -05

BW -06


Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

NitrateDissolved IronDissolved Oxygen

Sulfate and Methane Concentration

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

MW -01

MW -02

MW -03

MW -04

MW -05

MW -06

MW -07

MW -08

MW -09

MW -13

MW -14

MW -15

MW -16

BW -01

BW -02

BW -03

BW -04

BW -05

BW -06


Con

cent

ratio

n (S

ulfa

te-m

g/L)

(Met

hane

-ug/

L) SulfateMethane

FIGURE 12. CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON COMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS AND ELECTON ACCEPTORS AND METABOLIC BY-PRODUCTS WTH DISTANCE FROM MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW-19

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons with Distance from MW-19 at 30 feet below surface grade

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Distance from MW-19 (feet)

Con

cent

ratio

n (u

g/L)

Perchloroethylene

Trichloroethylene

Dichloroethylene (Total)

Vinyl Chloride

Electron Acceptors and Metabolic By-Products with Distance from MW-19 at 30 Feet Below

Surface Grade

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 50 100 150 200 250 300


Oxy

gen

& N

itrat

e C

once

ntra

tion

(mg/

l)

0.0

5.0

10.0

Iron

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/l)

Dissolved Oxygen

Nitrate

Dissolved Iron

Sulfate and Methane Concentrations with Distance from MW-19 at 30 Feet

Below Surface Grade

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 50 100 150 200 250 300


Sulfa

te C

once

ntra

tion

(mg/

l)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Met

hane

Con

cent

ratio

n (u

g/l)

SulfateMethane


TABLES

TABLE 1.1 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLE COLLECTED ON JULY 10, 2007

Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

Sample ID. DW-3 Protection of Groundwater Sample ID. DW-3 Protection of Groundwater Lab Sample Number 017 Soil Cleanup Objectives Lab Sample Number 017 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 0.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 Sample Depth (ft)* 0.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/10/2007 Table 375-6.8(b) Date Collected 7/10/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg Units µg/kg µg/kgDichlorodifluoromethane <590 1,000,000 (c) Dibromomethane <590 1,000,000Vinyl Chloride <590 20 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <590 1,000,000Chloromethane <590 1,000,000 1,2-Dibromoethane <590 1,000,000Bromomethane <590 1,000,000 2-Hexanone <3,000 1,000,000Chloroethane <590 1,000,000 1,3-Dichloropropane <590 1,000,000Trichlorofluoromethane <590 1,000,000 Tetrachloroethylene <590 1,300Acrolein <5,900 1,000,000 Dibromochloromethane <590 1,000,000Acetone 1,900 J,B 50 Chlorobenzene <590 1,1001,1-Dichloroethylene <590 330 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <590 1,000,000Iodomethane <590 1,000,000 Ethylbenzene 170 J 1,000Carbon Disulfide <590 1,000,000 XYLENE (mixed) 930 J 1,600Methylene Chloride <2,400 50 Styrene <590 1,000,000Acrylonitrile <3,000 1,000,000 Bromoform <590 1,000,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <590 930 Isopropylbenzene 1,300 1,000,000trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <590 190 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <590 1,000,0001,1-Dichloroethane <590 270 1,2,3-Trichloropropane <590 1,000,0002-Butanone-(MEK) <3,000 120 n-Propylbenzene 3,100 3,900Vinyl Acetate <3,000 1,000,000 trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <590 1,000,0002,2-Dichloropropane <590 1,000,000 Bromobenzene <590 1,000,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <590 250 2-Chlorotoluene <590 1,000,000Chloroform <590 370 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 200 J 8,400Bromochloromethane <590 1,000,000 4-Chlorotoluene <590 1,000,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <590 680 tert-Butylbenzene <590 5,9001,1-Dichloropropene <590 1,000,000 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 13,000 3,600Carbon Tetrachloride <590 760 sec-Butylbenzene 400 J 11,000Benzene 240 J 60 4-Isopropyltoluene 640 1,000,0001,2-Dichloroethane <590 20 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <590 2,400Trichloroethylene <590 470 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <590 1,8001,2-Dichloropropane <590 1,000,000 n-Butylbenzene 500 J 12,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <3,000 1,000,000 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <590 1,1002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <3,000 1,000,000 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <590 1,000,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <590 1,000,000 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <590 1,000,000Toluene <590 700 Hexachlorobutadiene <590 1,000,000trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <590 1,000,000 Naphthalene <590 12,000Bromodichloromethane <590 1,000,000 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <590 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for protection of groundwater capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) ATC Associates1 of 1

TABLE 1.2 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLES COLLECTED JULY 17, 2007


Sample ID. DW-3 Protection of Groundwater Sample ID. DW-3 Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 17 Soil Cleanup Objectives Lab Sample Number 17 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 0.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 Sample Depth (ft)* 0.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b) Date Collected 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg Units ug/Kg ug/Kgbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <1,000 1,000,000 (c) 2,4-Dinitrophenol <1,000 1,000,000N-Nitrosodimethylamine <1,000 1,000,000 2,4-Dinitrotoluene <1,000 1,000,000Phenol <1,000 330 Dibenzofuran <1,000 1,000,0002-Chlorophenol <1,000 1,000,000 4-Nitrophenol <1,000 1,000,0002,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <1,000 1,000,000 Fluorene <1,000 386,0002-Methyl Phenol <1,000 1,000,000 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <1,000 1,000,000Hexachloroethane <1,000 1,000,000 Diethyl Phthalate <1,000 1,000,000N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <1,000 1,000,000 4-Nitroaniline <1,000 1,000,0003&4-Methyl Phenol <2,000 1,000,000 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <1,000 1,000,000Nitrobenzene <1,000 1,000,000 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <1,000 1,000,000Isophorone <1,000 1,000,000 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <1,000 1,000,0002-Nitrophenol <1,000 1,000,000 Hexachlorobenzene <1,000 1,000,0002,4-Dimethylphenol <1,000 1,000,000 Pentachlorophenol <1,000 800bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <1,000 1,000,000 Phenanthrene 3,800 1,000,0002,4-Dichlorophenol <1,000 1,000,000 Anthracene <1,000 1,000,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <1,000 1,000,000 Carbazole <1,000 1,000,000Naphthalene <1,000 12,000 Di-n-butylphthalate <1,000 1,000,0004-Chloroanaline <1,000 1,000,000 Fluoranthene <1,000 1,000,000Hexachlorobutadiene <1,000 1,000,000 Benzidine <1,000 1,000,0004-Chloro-3-methylphenol <1,000 1,000,000 Pyrene 2,200 1,000,0002-Methyl Naphthalene 4,900 1,000,000 Butyl Benzyl Phthalate 14,000 1,000,000Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <1,000 1,000,000 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <1,000 1,000,0002,4,6-Trichlorophenol <1,000 1,000,000 Benzo(a)anthracene <1,000 1,0002,4,5-Trichlorophenol <1,000 1,000,000 Chrysene <1,000 1,0002-Chloronaphthalene <1,000 1,000,000 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 14,000 1,000,0002-Nitroaniline <1,000 1,000,000 Di-n-octyl phthalate <1,000 1,000,000Acenaphthylene <1,000 107,000 Indeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <1,000 8,200Dimethyl Phthalate <1,000 1,000,000 Benzo(b)fluoranthene <1,000 1,7002,6-Dinitrotoluene <1,000 1,000,000 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <1,000 1,700Acenaphthene 750 J 98,000 Benzo(a)pyrene <1,000 22,0003-Nitroaniline <1,000 1,000,000 Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <1,000 1,000,000

Benzo (g,h,i) perylene <1,000 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <190: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 190 ug/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for protection of groundwater capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) I: Internal Standard recovery was outside of method limits. Matrix interferernce was confirmed by reanalysis.

Analyte above Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) ATC Associates Inc.

1 of 1

TABLE 1.3 PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS MEASURED IN BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLE COLLECTED ON JULY 17, 2007


Sample ID. DW-3 Protection of Groundwater Lab Sample Number 017 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 0.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units mg/Kg mg/KgArsenic <7.4 16Antimony <7.4 10,000 (c)Beryllium <1.1 47Cadmium 15 7.5Chromium 61 19Copper 370 1,720Lead 840 450Mercury 4.1 0.73Nickel 37 130Selenium <7.4 4Silver 3.0 8.3Zinc 520 2,480Thallium <7.4 10,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.8: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.8 mg/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for metals capped at 10,000 mg/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006

Analyte above Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))

ATC Associates Inc1 of 1

TABLE 2.1 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-01 SB-02 SB-03 SB-04 SB-05 SB-06 SB-07 SB-08 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kgDichlorodifluoromethane <10 (a) <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000 (c)Vinyl Chloride <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 13,000Chloromethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Bromomethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Chloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Trichlorofluoromethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Acrolein <95 <81 <82 <95 <30,000 <5,700 <98 <95 500,000Acetone 58 B 18 J,B 34 J,B 55 B 9,500 J,B 2,300 J,B 39 J,B 95 B 500,0001,1-Dichloroethylene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Iodomethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Carbon Disulfide <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Methylene Chloride 27 J,B 21 J,B 20 J,B 28 J,B <12,000 <2,300 7.0 J,B 20 J,B 500,000Acrylonitrile <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,1-Dichloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 240,0002-Butanone-(MEK) <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,000Vinyl Acetate <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,0002,2-Dichloropropane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Chloroform <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 350,000Bromochloromethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,1-Dichloropropene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Carbon Tetrachloride <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 22,000Benzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 4,100 260 J <10 <10 44,0001,2-Dichloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 30,000Trichloroethylene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 200,0001,2-Dichloropropane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Toluene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 11,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Bromodichloromethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Dibromomethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000

ATC Associates Inc.1 of 2



Sample ID. SB-01 SB-02 SB-03 SB-04 SB-05 SB-06 SB-07 SB-08 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg1,2-Dibromoethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0002-Hexanone <47 <41 <41 <47 <15,000 <2,900 <49 <48 500,0001,3-Dichloropropane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Tetrachloroethylene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 150,000Dibromochloromethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Chlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Ethylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 63,000 1,500 <10 3.0 J 390,000XYLENE (mixed) 4.0 J 5.0 J 4.0 J 4.0 J 740,000 7,500 <20 15 J 500,000Styrene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Bromoform <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Isopropylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 83,000 2,000 <10 <10 500,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000n-Propylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 170,000 5,400 <10 <10 500,000trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Bromobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0002-Chlorotoluene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 390,000 7,000 <10 <10 190,0004-Chlorotoluene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000tert-Butylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2.0 J 2.0 J 2.0 J <10 870,000 28,000 <10 4.0 J 190,000sec-Butylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 8,400 390 J <10 <10 500,0004-Isopropyltoluene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 4,700 210 J <10 <10 500,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 280,0001,4-Dichlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 130,000n-Butylbenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 5,000 510 J <10 <10 500,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Hexachlorobutadiene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000Naphthalene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 8,800 660 <10 <10 500,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <10 <8.0 <8.0 <10 <3,000 <570 <10 <10 500,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for commercial use capped at 500,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) ATC Associates Inc.

2 of 2



Sample ID. SB-09 SB-10 SB-11 SB-12 SB-13 SB-14 SB-15 SB-16 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.5 7.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kgDichlorodifluoromethane <9.0 (a) <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000 (c)Vinyl Chloride <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 13,000Chloromethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Bromomethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Chloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Trichlorofluoromethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Acrolein <91 <94 <95 <5,600 <150 <5,800 <5,600 <90 500,000Acetone 43 J,B 37 J,B 21 J,B 1,900 J,B 110 B 1,500 J,B 1,600 J,B 110 B 500,0001,1-Dichloroethylene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Iodomethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Carbon Disulfide <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Methylene Chloride 17 J,B 20 J,B 8.0 J,B 310 J 9.0 J,B <2,300 <2,200 7.0 J,B 500,000Acrylonitrile <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 <45 500,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,1-Dichloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 240,0002-Butanone-(MEK) <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 12 J 500,000Vinyl Acetate <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 <45 500,0002,2-Dichloropropane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Chloroform <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 350,000Bromochloromethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,1-Dichloropropene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Carbon Tetrachloride <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 22,000Benzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 150 J <15 130 J <560 <9.0 44,0001,2-Dichloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 30,000Trichloroethylene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 200,0001,2-Dichloropropane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 <45 500,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 <45 500,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Toluene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 2,100 610 3.0 J 500,000trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Bromodichloromethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Dibromomethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000




Sample ID. SB-09 SB-10 SB-11 SB-12 SB-13 SB-14 SB-15 SB-16 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.5 7.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg1,2-Dibromoethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0002-Hexanone <45 <47 <48 <2,800 <77 <2,900 <2,800 <45 500,0001,3-Dichloropropane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Tetrachloroethylene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 190 J <560 <9.0 150,000Dibromochloromethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Chlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Ethylbenzene <9.0 2.0 J <10 <560 <15 47,000 14,000 5.0 J 390,000XYLENE (mixed) 6.0 J 11 J <19 1,360 18 326,000 117,000 74 500,000Styrene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Bromoform <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Isopropylbenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 710 <15 49,000 20,000 <9.0 500,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000n-Propylbenzene <9.0 3.0 J <10 3,400 <15 120,000 60,000 3.0 J 500,000trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Bromobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0002-Chlorotoluene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 2.0 J 10 <10 11,000 19 160,000 68,000 17 190,0004-Chlorotoluene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000tert-Butylbenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 4.0 J 23 <10 44,000 61 430,000 190,000 100 190,000sec-Butylbenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 530 J <15 4,300 1,500 <9.0 500,0004-Isopropyltoluene <9.0 <9.0 <10 340 J <15 1,900 590 <9.0 500,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 280,0001,4-Dichlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 130,000n-Butylbenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 600 <15 2,200 490 J <9.0 500,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Hexachlorobutadiene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000Naphthalene <9.0 <9.0 <10 1,200 30 2,200 860 350 500,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <9.0 <9.0 <10 <560 <15 <580 <560 <9.0 500,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for commercial use capped at 500,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))


TABLE 2.2 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES WITH DEPTH JULY, 2009


Sample ID. DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW -01 DUP Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 011 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 8 - 8.5 15 - 15.5 22 - 22.5 27.5 - 28 34 - 34.5 34 - 34.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/KgDichlorodifluoromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000 (c)Vinyl Chloride <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 20Chloromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Bromomethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Chloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Trichlorofluoromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Acrolein <100 <91 <91 <96 <97 <92 1,000,000Acetone 90 B 67 B 50 B 69 B 420 B 400 B 501,1-Dichloroethylene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 330Iodomethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Carbon Disulfide <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Methylene Chloride 6 J,B <37 <36 <38 <39 10 B,J 50Acrylonitrile <50 <46 <45 <48 <49 <46 1,000,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 930trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1901,1-Dichloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 2702-Butanone-(MEK) <50 <46 <45 <48 60 48 120Vinyl Acetate <50 <46 <45 <48 <49 <46 1,000,0002,2-Dichloropropane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 250Chloroform <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 370Bromochloromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 6801,1-Dichloropropene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Carbon Tetrachloride <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 760Benzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 601,2-Dichloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 20Trichloroethylene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 19 16 4701,2-Dichloropropane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <50 <46 <45 <48 <49 <46 1,000,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <50 <46 <45 <48 <49 <46 1,000,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Toluene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 700trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Bromodichloromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Dibromomethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000


TABLE 2.2 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES WITH DEPTH JULY, 2009


Sample ID. DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW -01 DUP Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 011 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 8 - 8.5 15 - 15.5 22 - 22.5 27.5 - 28 34 - 34.5 34 - 34.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg1,2-Dibromoethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0002-Hexanone <50 <46 <45 <48 <49 <46 1,000,0001,3-Dichloropropane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Tetrachloroethylene 3 J <9.0 <9.0 25 41 39 1,300Dibromochloromethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Chlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,1001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Ethylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000XYLENE (mixed) <30 <27 <27 <29 <29 <27 1,600Styrene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Bromoform <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Isopropylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000n-Propylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 3,900trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Bromobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0002-Chlorotoluene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 8,4004-Chlorotoluene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000tert-Butylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 5,9001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 3,600sec-Butylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 11,0004-Isopropyltoluene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 2,4001,4-Dichlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,800n-Butylbenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 12,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,1001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Hexachlorobutadiene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000Naphthalene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 12,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <10 <9.0 <9.0 <10 <10 <9.0 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for protection of groundwaer capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)



TABLE 2.2 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL WITH DEPTH JULY, 2007


Sample ID. DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 Trip Blank Equipment Blank Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 006 007 008 009 010 012 013 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 - 8 12.5 - 13 17 -17.5 22.5 - 23 34 -34.5 NA NA 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/KgDichlorodifluoromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000 (c)Vinyl Chloride <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 20Chloromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Bromomethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Chloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Trichlorofluoromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Acrolein <83 <100 <80 <86 <100 <25 <25 1,000,000Acetone 53 B 68 B 43 B 43 B,J 280 B <25 44 501,1-Dichloroethylene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 330Iodomethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Carbon Disulfide <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 9 J <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Methylene Chloride <33 29 J,B 20 J,B 23 J,B 12 J,B 3 J <5.0 50Acrylonitrile <42 <51 <8.0 <43 <52 <25 <25 1,000,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 930trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1901,1-Dichloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 2702-Butanone-(MEK) <42 <51 <40 <43 37 J <25 <25 120Vinyl Acetate <42 <51 <40 <43 <52 <25 <25 1,000,0002,2-Dichloropropane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <8.0 <10 <8.0 3 J B <10 <5.0 <5.0 250Chloroform <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 370Bromochloromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 6801,1-Dichloropropene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Carbon Tetrachloride <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 760Benzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 601,2-Dichloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 20Trichloroethylene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 4701,2-Dichloropropane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <42 <51 <40 <43 <52 <25 <25 1,000,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <42 <51 <40 <43 <52 <25 <25 1,000,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Toluene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 700trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Bromodichloromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Dibromomethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000


TABLE 2.2 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL WITH DEPTH JULY, 2007


Sample ID. DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 Trip Blank Equipment Blank Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 006 007 008 009 010 012 013 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 - 8 12.5 - 13 17 -17.5 22.5 - 23 34 -34.5 NA NA 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 7/30/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg1,2-Dibromoethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0002-Hexanone <42 <51 <40 <43 <52 <25 <25 1,000,0001,3-Dichloropropane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Tetrachloroethylene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,300Dibromochloromethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Chlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,1001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Ethylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000XYLENE (mixed) <25 <31 <24 <26 <31 <15 <15 1,600Styrene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Bromoform <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Isopropylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000n-Propylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 3,900trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Bromobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0002-Chlorotoluene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 8,4004-Chlorotoluene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000tert-Butylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 5,9001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 3,600sec-Butylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 11,0004-Isopropyltoluene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 2,4001,4-Dichlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,800n-Butylbenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 12,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,1001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Hexachlorobutadiene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000Naphthalene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 12,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <8.0 <10 <8.0 <9.0 <10 <5.0 <5.0 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for Protection of Groundwater capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)



TABLE 3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN MAY - JUNE 2008


Sample ID. BD-3 BD-4 BD-5 BD-6 BD-7 MW-10R MW-12R Commercial Use Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 006 003 006 002 004 005 007 Soil Cleanup Objectives Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 30.0 18.0 7.0 40.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 6/3/2008 5/30/2008 5/27/2008 5/22/2008 6/2/2008 6/3/2008 6/4/2008 Table 375-6.8(b) Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kgDichlorodifluoromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 (c) 1,000,000 (d)Vinyl Chloride <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 13,000 20Chloromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Bromomethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Chloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Trichlorofluoromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Acrolein <95 <86 <96 <140 <94 <87 <93 500,000 1,000,000Acetone <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 501,1-Dichloroethylene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 330Iodomethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Carbon Disulfide <19 <17 <19 <28 <19 <17 <19 500,000 1,000,000Methylene Chloride <38 <34 <38 <55 <38 <35 <37 500,000 50Acrylonitrile <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 1,000,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 930trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1901,1-Dichloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 240,000 2702-Butanone-(MEK) <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 120Vinyl Acetate <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 1,000,0002,2-Dichloropropane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 27.9 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 250Chloroform <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 350,000 370Bromochloromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 6801,1-Dichloropropene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Carbon Tetrachloride <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 22,000 760Benzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 44,000 601,2-Dichloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 30,000 20Trichloroethylene 39.8 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 200,000 4701,2-Dichloropropane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 1,000,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 1,000,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Toluene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 700trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Bromodichloromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Dibromomethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000

ATC Associates1 of 2

TABLE 3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN MAY - JUNE 2008


Sample ID. BD-3 BD-4 BD-5 BD-6 BD-7 MW-10R MW-12R Commercial Use Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 006 003 006 002 004 005 007 Soil Cleanup Objectives Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 30.0 18.0 7.0 40.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 6/3/2008 5/30/2008 5/27/2008 5/22/2008 6/2/2008 6/3/2008 6/4/2008 Table 375-6.8(b) Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg1,2-Dibromoethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0002-Hexanone <48 <43 <48 <69 <47 <43 <46 500,000 1,000,0001,3-Dichloropropane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Tetrachloroethylene 97.4 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 150,000 1,300Dibromochloromethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Chlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,1001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Ethylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 390,000 1,000Xylene (mixed) <29 <26 <29 <42 <29 <26 <28 500,000 1,600Styrene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Bromoform <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Isopropylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000n-Propylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 3,900trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Bromobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0002-Chlorotoluene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 190,000 8,4004-Chlorotoluene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000tert-Butylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 5,9001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 190,000 3,600sec-Butylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 11,0004-Isopropyltoluene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 280,000 2,4001,4-Dichlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 130,000 1,800n-Butylbenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 12,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,1001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Hexachlorobutadiene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000Naphthalene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 12,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <9.5 <8.6 <9.6 <14 <9.4 <8.7 <9.3 500,000 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for Commercial use capped at 500,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006(d) Soil Cleanup Objective for Protection of Groundwater capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) Analyte above Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))


TABLE 3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN MAY-JUNE 2008


Sample ID. MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-21 MW-22 MW-23 Commercial Use Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 002 001 005 003 007 001 004 Soil Cleanup Objectives Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 6.5 7.0 12.0 7.0 7.5 7.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 5/29/2008 5/29/2008 5/23/2008 5/22/2008 5/28/2008 5/20/2008 5/23/2008 Table 375-6.8(b) Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kgDichlorodifluoromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 (c) 1,000,000 (d)Vinyl Chloride <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 13,000 20Chloromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Bromomethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Chloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Trichlorofluoromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Acrolein <86 <95 <100 <70 <110 <94 <92 500,000 1,000,000Acetone <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 501,1-Dichloroethylene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 330Iodomethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Carbon Disulfide <17 <19 <20 <14 <21 <19 <18 500,000 1,000,000Methylene Chloride <35 <38 <40 <28 <42 <38 <37 500,000 50Acrylonitrile <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 1,000,000Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 930trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1901,1-Dichloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 240,000 2702-Butanone-(MEK) <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 120Vinyl Acetate <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 1,000,0002,2-Dichloropropane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 250Chloroform <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 350,000 370Bromochloromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,1,1-Trichloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 6801,1-Dichloropropene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Carbon Tetrachloride <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 22,000 760Benzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 44,000 601,2-Dichloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 30,000 20Trichloroethylene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 200,000 4701,2-Dichloropropane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0004-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 1,000,0002-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 1,000,000cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Toluene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 700trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Bromodichloromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Dibromomethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,1,2-Trichloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000


TABLE 3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN MAY-JUNE 2008


Sample ID. MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-21 MW-22 MW-23 Commercial Use Protection of GroundwaterLab Sample Number 002 001 005 003 007 001 004 Soil Cleanup Objectives Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 6.5 7.0 12.0 7.0 7.5 7.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 5/29/2008 5/29/2008 5/23/2008 5/22/2008 5/28/2008 5/20/2008 5/23/2008 Table 375-6.8(b) Table 375-6.8(b)Units µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg1,2-Dibromoethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0002-Hexanone <43 <47 <50 <35 <53 <47 <46 500,000 1,000,0001,3-Dichloropropane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Tetrachloroethylene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 150,000 1,300Dibromochloromethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Chlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,1001,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Ethylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 390,000 1,000Xylene (mixed) <26 <29 <30 <21 <32 <28 <27 500,000 1,600Styrene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Bromoform <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Isopropylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,2,3-Trichloropropane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000n-Propylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 3,900trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Bromobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0002-Chlorotoluene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 47.4 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 190,000 8,4004-Chlorotoluene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000tert-Butylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 5,9001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 230 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 190,000 3,600sec-Butylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 11,0004-Isopropyltoluene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 280,000 2,4001,4-Dichlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 130,000 1,800n-Butylbenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 12,0001,2-Dichlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,1001,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Hexachlorobutadiene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000Naphthalene <8.6 <9.5 212 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 12,0001,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <8.6 <9.5 <10 <7.0 <11 <9.4 <9.2 500,000 1,000,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <10: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 10 ug/Kg (c) Soil Cleanup Objective for commercial use capped at 100,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006(d) Soil Cleanup Objective for Protection of Groundwater capped at 1,000,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) Analyte above Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))


TABLE 4. SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-01 SB-02 SB-03 SB-04 SB-05 SB-06 SB-07 SB-08 Commercial UseLab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kgbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <190 (a) <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000 (c)N-Nitrosodimethylamine <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Phenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Chlorophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Methyl Phenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Hexachloroethane <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0003&4-Methyl Phenol <390 <380 <390 <390 <4,000 <400 <390 <400 500,000Nitrobenzene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Isophorone <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Nitrophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,4-Dimethylphenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,4-Dichlorophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Naphthalene <190 <190 <200 <190 9,200 6,200 <200 <200 500,0004-Chloroanaline <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Hexachlorobutadiene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0004-Chloro-3-methylphenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Methyl Naphthalene <190 <190 <200 <190 1,300 J 500 <200 <200 500,000Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,4,6-Trichlorophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,4,5-Trichlorophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Chloronaphthalene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Nitroaniline <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Acenaphthylene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Dimethyl Phthalate <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,6-Dinitrotoluene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Acenaphthene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0003-Nitroaniline <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000


TABLE 4. SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-01 SB-02 SB-03 SB-04 SB-05 SB-06 SB-07 SB-08 Commercial UseLab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg2,4-Dinitrophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002,4-Dinitrotoluene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Dibenzofuran <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0004-Nitrophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Fluorene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0004-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Diethyl Phthalate <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0004-Nitroaniline <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0002-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,0004-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Hexachlorobenzene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Pentachlorophenol <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 6,700Phenanthrene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 86 J <200 <200 500,000Anthracene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Carbazole <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000Di-n-butylphthalate <190 <190 <200 <190 1,600 J 480 <200 <200 500,000Fluoranthene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 44 J <200 <200 500,000Benzidine <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 500,000Pyrene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I 100 J <200 <200 500,000Butyl Benzyl Phthalate <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 500,0003,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 500,000Benzo(a)anthracene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 5,600Chrysene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 56,000bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <190 <190 46 J <190 970 J, I 660 <200 <200 500,000Di-n-octyl phthalate <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 500,000Indeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 5,600Benzo(b)fluoranthene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 5,600Benzo(k)fluoranthene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 56,000Benzo(a)pyrene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 1,000Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 I <200 <200 <200 560Benzo (g,h,i) perylene <190 <190 <200 <190 <2,000 <200 <200 <200 500,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <190: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 190 ug/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for commercial use capped at 500,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) I: Internal Standard recovery was outside of method limits. Matrix interferernce was confirmed by reanalysis.

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) ATC Associates Inc.2 of 2

TABLE 4. SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-09 SB-10 SB-11 SB-12 SB-13 SB-14 SB-15 SB-16 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.5 7.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kgbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000 (c)N-Nitrosodimethylamine <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Phenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Chlorophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Methyl Phenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Hexachloroethane <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0003&4-Methyl Phenol <380 <400 <390 <370 <380 <4,100 <380 <390 500,000Nitrobenzene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Isophorone <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Nitrophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,4-Dimethylphenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,4-Dichlorophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Naphthalene <190 <200 <200 96 J 620 7,100 1,400 <190 500,0004-Chloroanaline <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Hexachlorobutadiene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0004-Chloro-3-methylphenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Methyl Naphthalene <190 <200 <200 <190 130 J 820 J 310 <190 500,000Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,4,6-Trichlorophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,4,5-Trichlorophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Chloronaphthalene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Nitroaniline <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Acenaphthylene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Dimethyl Phthalate <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,6-Dinitrotoluene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Acenaphthene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0003-Nitroaniline <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000


TABLE 4. SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-09 SB-10 SB-11 SB-12 SB-13 SB-14 SB-15 SB-16 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.5 7.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg ug/Kg2,4-Dinitrophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002,4-Dinitrotoluene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Dibenzofuran <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0004-Nitrophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Fluorene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0004-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Diethyl Phthalate <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0004-Nitroaniline <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0002-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0004-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Hexachlorobenzene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Pentachlorophenol <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 6,700Phenanthrene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 59 J <190 500,000Anthracene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Carbazole <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Di-n-butylphthalate <190 <200 <200 45 J 120 J <2,000 80 J <190 500,000Fluoranthene <190 <200 <200 44 J <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Benzidine <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Pyrene <190 <200 <200 65 J, I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Butyl Benzyl Phthalate <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,0003,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Benzo(a)anthracene <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 5,600Chrysene <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 56,000bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <190 <200 40 J 430 I 100 J <2,000 190 J 48 J 500,000Di-n-octyl phthalate <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000Indeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <190 <200 <200 <190 I <190 <2,000 <190 <190 5,600Benzo(b)fluoranthene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 5,600Benzo(k)fluoranthene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 56,000Benzo(a)pyrene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 1,000Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 560Benzo (g,h,i) perylene <190 <200 <200 <190 <190 <2,000 <190 <190 500,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <190: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 190 ug/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for commercial use capped at 500,000 ug/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) I: Internal Standard recovery was outside of method limits. Matrix interferernce was confirmed by reanalysis.

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b)) ATC Associates Inc.

2 of 2

TABLE 5. PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-01 SB-02 SB-03 SB-04 SB-05 SB-06 SB-07 SB-08 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.5 7.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 7/16/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/KgArsenic 4.5 <2.1 <2.2 <2.2 <2.4 <2.3 <2.2 <2.3 16Antimony <5.8 (a) <3.7 <5.7 <5.6 <6.1 <6.0 <5.8 <6.0 10,000 (c)Beryllium <0.34 <0.32 <0.33 <0.32 <0.35 <0.34 <0.33 <0.35 590Cadmium <0.34 <0.32 <0.33 <0.32 <0.35 <0.34 <0.33 <0.35 9.3Chromium 2.5 4.3 4.1 3.3 8.2 10 5.7 4.4 400Copper <5.6 10 <5.4 <5.4 <5.9 <5.7 <5.5 <5.8 270Lead <3.4 7.3 <3.3 <3.2 7.9 7.8 3.6 <3.5 1,000Mercury <0.040 <0.038 <0.041 <0.036 <0.038 <0.035 <0.038 <0.035 2.8Nickel <4.5 <4.2 <4.4 <4.3 <4.7 5.0 <4.4 <4.6 310Selenium <3.9 <5.5 <3.8 <3.8 <4.1 <2.3 <3.9 <4.0 1,500Silver <0.56 <0.53 <0.54 <0.54 <0.59 <0.57 <0.55 <0.58 1,500Zinc <5.6 80 <5.4 <5.4 11 11 6.0 <5.8 10,000Thallium <2.2 <2.1 <2.2 <2.2 <2.4 <2.3 <2.2 <2.3 10,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.8: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.8 mg/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for metals capped at 10,000 mg/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006

Analyte above Comercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))


TABLE 5. PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS MEASURED IN SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN JULY 2007


Sample ID. SB-09 SB-10 SB-11 SB-12 SB-13 SB-14 SB-15 SB-16 Commercial Use Lab Sample Number 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 Soil Cleanup ObjectivesSample Depth (ft)* 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.5 7.5 6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6Date Collected 7/16/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Table 375-6.8(b)Units mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/KgArsenic <2.1 <2.2 <2.1 <2.1 4.3 3.2 <2.3 <2.3 (a) 16Antimony <5.5 <5.8 <5.6 <5.3 <6.1 <6.0 <5.8 <5.9 10,000 (c)Beryllium <0.31 <0.34 <0.32 <0.31 <0.35 <0.34 <0.34 <0.34 590Cadmium <0.31 <0.34 <0.32 <0.31 <0.35 <0.34 <0.34 <0.34 9.3Chromium 10 3.8 4.5 7.5 7.6 7.6 2.9 6.2 400Copper <5.2 <5.6 <5.4 10 <5.9 <5.7 <5.6 6.3 270Lead 17 <3.4 3.2 20 5.2 4.1 <3.4 3.4 1,000Mercury <0.036 <0.039 <0.040 <0.039 <0.038 <0.040 <0.037 <0.039 2.8Nickel 5.9 <4.5 <4.3 4.2 <4.7 <4.6 <4.5 <4.5 310Selenium <3.7 <3.9 <3.7 <3.6 <4.1 <4.0 <3.9 <4.0 1,500Silver <0.52 <0.56 <0.53 <0.51 <0.59 <0.57 <0.56 <0.57 1,500Zinc 17 32 12 31 34 23 8.9 6.9 10,000Thallium <2.1 <2.2 <2.1 <2.1 <2.4 <2.3 <2.3 <2.3 10,000*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.8: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.8 mg/Kg (c) - Soil Cleanup Objective for metals capped at 10,000 mg/Kg per NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program Technical Support Document, Section 9.3, September 2006

Analyte above Commercial Use Soil Cleanup Objective (6 NYCRR Subpart 375-6, Table 375-6.8(b))


TABLE 6. HORIZONTAL GROUNDWATER DELINEATION ASSESSMENT, JULY 2007 - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs)


Sample ID. BW - 01 BW - 02 BW - 03 BW - 04 BW - 05 BW - 06 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 GROUNDWATERSample Depth (ft)* 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEDate Collected 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 (a) <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 2 J 9 8 1 J 8 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD


TABLE 6. HORIZONTAL GROUNDWATER DELINEATION ASSESSMENT, JULY 2007 - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs)

Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New YorkSample ID. BW - 01 BW - 02 BW - 03 BW - 04 BW - 05 BW - 06 NY STATE CLASS GA

Lab Sample Number 001 002 003 004 005 006 GROUNDWATERSample Depth (ft)* 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 20 - 20.5 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEDate Collected 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 10 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method Blankt: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance Value ATC Associates Inc.2 of 2

TABLE 7. MONITORING WELLS - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN GROUNDWATER, AUGUST 2007


Sample ID. MW - 01 MW - 02 MW - 03 MW - 04 MW - 05 MW - 06 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 001 001 002 004 002 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/7/2007 8/14/2007 8/6/2007 8/14/2007 8/7/2007 8/6/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCETotal Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 290 310 350 130 510 470 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDVinyl Chloride 34 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 --Bromomethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDAcrolein <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 5 STDAcetone <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 89 J <250 4 J <5.0 <250 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 2 J <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 2 J <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 310 280 120 J <5.0 <5.0 570 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 22 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 2,500 6,900 13 <5.0 42,000 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 1 STD



Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New YorkSample ID. MW - 01 MW - 02 MW - 03 MW - 04 MW - 05 MW - 06 NY STATE CLASS GA

Lab Sample Number 001 001 001 002 004 002 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/7/2007 8/14/2007 8/6/2007 8/14/2007 8/7/2007 8/6/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCETotal Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 290 310 350 130 510 470 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 --2-Hexanone <25 <500 <1,200 <25 <25 <1,200 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 27 <100 <250 1 J 3 J <250 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 1,300 5,500 59 <5.0 16,000 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 11,000 13,000 170 <10 47,000 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 9,800 5,300 78 <5.0 11,000 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 690 510 15 <5.0 350 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 790 760 24 <5.0 540 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 3,600 590 22 <5.0 620 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 8,100 3,600 75 <5.0 2,600 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 60 59 J 1 J <5.0 110 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <100 <250 <5.0 <5.0 <250 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method Blankt: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)




Sample ID. MW - 07 MW - 08 MW - 09 MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 003 001 002 004 005 004 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/14/2007 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 8/6/2007 8/6/2007 8/14/2007 8/6/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCETotal Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 190 160 140 220 240 490 570 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD



Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New YorkSample ID. MW - 07 MW - 08 MW - 09 MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 NY STATE CLASS GA

Lab Sample Number 003 001 002 004 005 004 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/14/2007 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 8/6/2007 8/6/2007 8/14/2007 8/6/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCETotal Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 190 160 140 220 240 490 570 VALUESUnits ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 I <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1,600 <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 I 2 J 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 I <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 160 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 170 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 110 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method Blankt: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance ValueATC Associates Inc.

2 of 2

TABLE 8. MONITORING WELLS - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) MEASURED IN GROUNDWATER, JUNE 2008


Sample ID. MW - 1 MW - 2 MW - 3 MW - 4 MW - 5 MW - 6 MW - 7 MW - 8 MW - 9 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 017 011 027 021 019 023 009 005 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride 76 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 7 J,B <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 240 89 8 <5.0 <5.0 39 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 4 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 19 <5.0 21 <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene 4 J 8,600 270 8 2 J 5,500 <5.0 <5.0 1 J 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD




Sample ID. MW - 1 MW - 2 MW - 3 MW - 4 MW - 5 MW - 6 MW - 7 MW - 8 MW - 9 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 017 011 027 021 019 023 009 005 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 22 12 20 10 6 16 9 9 9 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene 7 9,000 1,600 150 4 J 3,500 1 J 1 J 1 J 5 STDM&P-Xylene 43 57,000 1,800 540 30 6,800 6 J 8 J 6 J 5 STDO-Xylene 14 50,000 370 140 8 1,900 2 J 3 J 2 J 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 4,700 170 40 <5.0 95 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 7,300 300 65 <5.0 170 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 2 J 3,800 91 80 1 J 100 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 13 94,000 1,000 210 11 750 1 J 2 J 1 J 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 12 1 J 2 J <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 20 11 3 J <5.0 14 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)


2 of 2



Sample ID. MW - 10R MW - 12R MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 MW - 17 MW - 18 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 019 017 007 013 015 003 005 007 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J,B <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 20 J 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene 2 J 2 J 3 J <5.0 16 8 <5.0 <5.0 7,200 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD




Sample ID. MW - 10R MW - 12R MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 MW - 17 MW - 18 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 019 017 007 013 015 003 005 007 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 9 1 J <5.0 9 10 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 89 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene 2 J 3 J 5 J 1 J 1,400 14 <5.0 <5.0 7,900 5 STDM&P-Xylene 9 J 28 32 7 J 170 58 <10 <10 40,000 5 STDO-Xylene 3 J 11 17 3 J 130 41 <5.0 <5.0 17,000 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 84 3 J <5.0 <5.0 390 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 86 3 J <5.0 <5.0 590 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 3 J 5 J <5.0 54 13 <5.0 <5.0 4,700 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2 J 14 17 1 J 160 30 <5.0 <5.0 13,000 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 19 J 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 11 J 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 18 J 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 100 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method Blank


2 of 2



Sample ID. MW - 19D MW - 20 MW - 21 MW - 22 MW - 23 MW - 24D NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 009 011 013 001 015 025 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride 68 <5.0 15 1 J <5.0 67 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene 19 <5.0 3 J <5.0 <5.0 17 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 7 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 9 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 3 J <5.0 5 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1,400 <5.0 520 8 3 J 990 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 3,800 12 910 <5.0 6 3,600 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene 25 4 J 7 <5.0 2 J 19 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD




Sample ID. MW - 19D MW - 20 MW - 21 MW - 22 MW - 23 MW - 24D NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 009 011 013 001 015 025 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 4,200 74 1,100 6 21 6,200 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene 58 8 13 <5.0 4 J 22 5 STDM&P-Xylene 270 46 64 <10 31 59 5 STDO-Xylene 130 16 26 <5.0 9 21 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene 5 J <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 2 J 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene 9 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 2 J 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 24 2 J 4 J <5.0 <5.0 5 J 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 61 13 16 <5.0 12 17 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance Value


TABLE 9. VERTICAL GROUNDWATER DELINEATION ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 2007 - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCS)


Sample ID. DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 002 004 005 006 007 008 009 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 35' 30' 20' 12' 35' 30' 20' 12' VALUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride 70 180 13 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 34 4 J 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene 19 11 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 11 33 5 J 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 6 30 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1,300 6,400 300 10 12 11 470 83 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 3,000 5,400 140 30 35 8 45 15 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD *Toluene 8 4 J 1 J 18 11 2 J 2 J 3 J 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD *Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD


TABLE 9. VERTICAL GROUNDWATER DELINEATION ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 2007 - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCS)


Sample ID. DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 01 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 DW - 02 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 002 004 005 006 007 008 009 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 8/1/2007 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 35' 30' 20' 12' 35' 30' 20' 12' VALUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 1,600 9,800 280 110 37 7 43 16 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene 2 J 5 19 2,600 18 3 J 3 J 6 5 STDM&P-Xylene 7 J 9 J 7 J 4,300 37 6 J 7 J 15 5 STDO-Xylene 4 J 3 J 1 J 47 7 1 J 1 J 3 J 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 14 59 190 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 1 J 2 J 310 4 J <5.0 1 J 1 J 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 2 J 350 4 J <5.0 1 J 2 J 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 5 J 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1 J 3 J 4 J 1,200 18 2 J 5 8 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 1 J 2 J 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 2 J <5.0 <5.0 1 J 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method BlankJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropene

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance Value


TABLE 9. VERTICAL GROUNDWATER DELINEATION ASSESSMENT, JUNE 2008 - VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs)


Sample ID. BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 4 BD - 4 BD - 4 BD - 4 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 (a) <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 1 J 18 2 J <5.0 3 J <500 120 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 14 27 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 5 J 16 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 24 7 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 31 2 J 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 7 26 620 4 J 39 58 5,400 1,400 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 3 J 5 J 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 8 22 520 <5.0 43 84 5,800 2,400 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J 3 J 5 J 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t

Bromodichloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDibromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD




Sample ID. BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 3 BD - 4 BD - 4 BD - 4 BD - 4 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 10 26 1,100 13 70 230 11,000 400 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene 2 J 1 J <5.0 <5.0 27 2,900 4 J <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 25 19 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 290 12 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J 360 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 4 J <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 18 1,200 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 4 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 8 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)




Sample ID. BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 6 BD - 6 BD - 6 BD - 6 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 008 007 006 005 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J 5 STDVinyl Chloride 52 340 92 30 1 J 190 24 1 J 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 34 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene 2 J 12 6 3 J <5.0 1 J 1 J <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 7 2 J 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 4 J 36 21 11 <5.0 7 4 J <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 460 4,100 2,400 1,600 8 460 1,200 24 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 270 2,400 2,900 93 <5.0 28 8 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t

Toluene <5.0 3 J 3 J 5 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 4 J 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t


ATC Associates, Inc.1 of 2



Sample ID. BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 5 BD - 6 BD - 6 BD - 6 BD - 6 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 008 007 006 005 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 190 1,800 13,000 250 5 21 9 6 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 7 13 9 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 37 64 41 <10 <10 <10 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 15 78 17 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 4 J 15 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 6 <5.0 <5.0 6 <5.0 4 J 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 6 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 11 16 11 <5.0 19 <5.0 16 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance Value ATC Associates, Inc.2 of 2



Sample ID. BD - 7 BD - 7 BD - 7 BD - 7 MW - 10R MW - 10R MW - 10R MW - 10R NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 012 011 010 009 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 6 18 170 900 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 4 J 7 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 1 J 4 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 9 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 52 150 2,200 5,400 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 78 17 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD t





Sample ID. BD - 7 BD - 7 BD - 7 BD - 7 MW - 10R MW - 10R MW - 10R MW - 10R NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 012 011 010 009 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 6/12/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 3 J 8 1 J 2 J 2 J 7 100 2 J 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)



Browfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

Sample ID. MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 17 MW - 17 MW - 17 MW - 17 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 008 007 006 005 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride 2 J 6 180 611 9 32 110 670 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 5 17 <5.0 <5.0 3 J 5 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 4 J 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 23 21 <5.0 <5.0 9 26 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 43 62 2,800 6,900 67 220 1,400 5,800 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 32 30 1,600 2,000 4 J 17 83 130 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt




Browfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

Sample ID. MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 12R MW - 17 MW - 17 MW - 17 MW - 17 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 008 007 006 005 008 007 006 005 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 88 100 4,400 3,900 3 J 25 120 140 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 1 J 21 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 20 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 1 J 5 J <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 6 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 23 <5.0 <5.0 10 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)


2 of 2



Sample ID. MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 19 MW - 19 MW - 19 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 004 003 002 001 017 016 015 014 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride 14 38 290 840 <5.0 120 94 69 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 25 J 16 J <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 2 J 6 <5.0 4 J 10 18 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 20 <5.0 <5.0 25 8 8 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 3 J 22 29 <5.0 4 J 13 4 J 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 95 262 2,600 9,300 18 620 2,400 980 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 14 170 25 9 250 6,100 2,800 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 1 J <5.0 1 J 400 2 J 1 J 4 J 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt





Sample ID. MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 18 MW - 19 MW - 19 MW - 19 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 004 003 002 001 017 016 015 014 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 3 J 11 140 3 J 13 430 15,000 2,100 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 430 7 14 10 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 <10 1,700 37 31 46 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 2 J 2 J 3 J 970 12 5 J 21 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 29 2 J 3 J 2 J 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 40 3 J 1 J 4 J 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 73 <5.0 2 J 5 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 200 16 12 19 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)


2 of 2



Sample ID. MW - 20 MW - 20 MW - 20 MW - 20 MW -21 MW - 21 MW -21 MW - 21 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 013 012 011 010 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 39 22 260 42 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone 9 J <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 3 J <5.0 5 J <5.0 5 1 J 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 2 J 3 J <5.0 4 J 1 J 4 J <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 15 <5.0 33 4 J 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 6 120 <5.0 610 96 3,300 1,300 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene 7 19 700 <5.0 1,300 13 810 9 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 3 J 2 J 6 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt





Sample ID. MW - 20 MW - 20 MW - 20 MW - 20 MW -21 MW - 21 MW -21 MW - 21 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 013 012 011 010 004 003 002 001 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 6/10/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 58 100 2,100 2 J 540 5 37 8 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 3 J 4 J 3 J 8 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 29 <10 24 28 23 38 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 22 <5.0 5 8 4 J 14 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 J 1 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 11 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)



Brownfield Remedial Assessment175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

Sample ID. MW - 22 MW - 22 MW - 22 MW -22 MW - 23 MW - 23 MW - 23 MW - 23 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 004 003 002 001 012 011 010 009 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LDichlorodifluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Chloride <5.0 64 15 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 STDChloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Bromomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTrichlorofluoromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrolein <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDAcetone <25 <25 <25 <25 17 J 9 J 11 J <25 50 GV1,1-Dichloroethylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIodomethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Carbon Disulfide <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Methylene Chloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcrylonitrile <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5 STDMethyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J 2 J <5.0 10 GVtrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <5.0 4 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDVinyl Acetate <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Butanone-(MEK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 GV2,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDcis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 J 690 100 <5.0 6 43 140 2 J 5 STDChloroform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1-Trichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDCarbon Tetrachloride <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD1,2-Dichloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDTrichloroethylene <5.0 120 15 <5.0 <5.0 9 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 --cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt

Toluene <5.0 1 J 2 J 10 <5.0 1 J 1 J <5.0 5 STtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STDt




Brownfield Remedial Assessment175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

Sample ID. MW - 22 MW - 22 MW - 22 MW -22 MW - 23 MW - 23 MW - 23 MW - 23 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 004 003 002 001 012 011 010 009 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/9/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCESample Depth (ft)* 10 20 30 35 10 20 30 35 VLAUESUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L1,2-Dibromoethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Hexanone <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 50 STD1,3-Dichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDTetrachloroethylene 2 J 480 33 6 8 18 <5.0 2 J 5 STDDibromochloromethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVChlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDEthylbenzene <5.0 1 J <5.0 3 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDM&P-Xylene <10 <10 <10 18 <10 <10 <10 <10 5 STDO-Xylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDStyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromoform <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIsopropylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,3-Trichloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDn-Propylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBromobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chlorotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDtert-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDsec-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Isopropyltoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDn-Butylbenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 10 GV1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*-Sample depth is in feet below ground surface(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1t: Applies to sum of cis- and trans-1,3 dichloropropeneJ: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)


TABLE 10. MONITORING WELLS - SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (SVOCs) MEASURED IN GROUNDWATER, JUNE 2008


Sample ID. MW - 1 MW - 2 MW - 3 MW - 4 MW - 5 MW - 6 MW - 7 MW - 8 MW - 9 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 017 011 027 021 019 023 009 005 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LN-Nitrosodimethylamine <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---Aniline <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1.0 STDPhenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1 STD*2-Chlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 3 STD2,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzyl Alcohol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---2-Methyl Phenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1 STD*Hexachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDN-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---3&4-Methyl Phenol <10 23 <10 <10 <10 <10 NS <10 <10 1 STD*Nitrobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 GVIsophorone <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 STD2-Nitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 GV2,4-Dimethylphenol <5.0 43 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVbis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4-Dichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1 GV1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzoic Acid <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---Naphthalene <5.0 29 13 <5.0 <5.0 15 NS <5.0 <5.0 10 GV4-Chloroaniline <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STD4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 GV2-Methylnaphthalene <5.0 1 J <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 J NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVHexachlorocyclopentadiene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4,5-Trichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chloronaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 10 GV2-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcenaphthylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 20 GVDimethyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV2,6-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAcenaphthene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 20 GV3-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD




Sample ID. MW - 1 MW - 2 MW - 3 MW - 4 MW - 5 MW - 6 MW - 7 MW - 8 MW - 9 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 017 011 027 021 019 023 009 005 003 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L2,4-Dinitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 GVDibenzofuran <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---2,4-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Nitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 GVFluorene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---Diethyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV4-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1 STD*N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---Hexachlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.35 GVPentachlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 1 STD*Phenanthrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVAnthracene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVCarbazole <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 ---Di-n-butylphthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 STDFluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVBenzidine <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDPyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVButyl Benzyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GV3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzo(a)anthracene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002 GVChrysene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002 GVbis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVDi-n-octyl phthalate <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVIndeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(b)fluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(k)fluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(a)pyrene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 0.002(ND) STDDibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 50 GVBenzo (g,h,i) perylene <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 5 STD*- Total Phenols(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyte above NYS Groundwater Standard or Guidance ValueNS: Not Sampled




Sample ID. MW - 10R MW - 12R MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 MW - 17 MW - 18 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 019 017 007 013 015 003 005 007 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LN-Nitrosodimethylamine <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---Aniline <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1.0 STDPhenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1 STD*2-Chlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 3 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 3 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 3 STD2,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDBenzyl Alcohol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---2-Methyl Phenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1 STD*Hexachloroethane <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDN-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---3&4-Methyl Phenol <10 <10 NS <10 <10 NS <10 NS <10 1 STD*Nitrobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 GVIsophorone <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 STD2-Nitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 GV2,4-Dimethylphenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVbis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD2,4-Dichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1 GV1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDBenzoic Acid <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---Naphthalene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 3 J NS <5.0 NS 84 10 GV4-Chloroaniline <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.5 STD4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 GV2-Methylnaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS 11 50 GVHexachlorocyclopentadiene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD2,4,5-Trichlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD2-Chloronaphthalene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 10 GV2-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDAcenaphthylene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 20 GVDimethyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV2,6-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDAcenaphthene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 20 GV3-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD




Sample ID. MW - 10R MW - 12R MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 MW - 17 MW - 18 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001 019 017 007 013 015 003 005 007 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L2,4-Dinitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 GVDibenzofuran <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---2,4-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD4-Nitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 GVFluorene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---Diethyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV4-Nitroaniline <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1 STD*N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---Hexachlorobenzene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.35 GVPentachlorophenol <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 1 STD*Phenanthrene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVAnthracene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVCarbazole <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 ---Di-n-butylphthalate <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS 2 J 50 STDFluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVBenzidine <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDPyrene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVButyl Benzyl Phthalate <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GV3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STDBenzo(a)anthracene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002 GVChrysene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002 GVbis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 1 J <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVDi-n-octyl phthalate <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVIndeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(b)fluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(k)fluoranthene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002 GVBenzo(a)pyrene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 0.002(ND) STDDibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 50 GVBenzo (g,h,i) perylene <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 NS <5.0 NS <5.0 5 STD*- Total Phenols(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) B: Analyte was detected in the associated Method Blank





Sample ID. MW - 19D MW - 20 MW - 21 MW - 22 MW - 23 MW - 24D NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 009 011 013 001 015 025 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/LN-Nitrosodimethylamine <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAniline <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 2 STDbis(2-Chloroethyl)ether <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Phenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Chlorophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,4-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GV2,2'-oxybis(1-Chloropropane <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzyl Alcohol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Methyl Phenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Hexachloroethane <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDN-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD3&4-Methyl Phenol <10 NS <10 <10 <10 <10 10 GVNitrobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIsophorone <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Nitrophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2,4-Dimethylphenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVbis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4-Dichlorophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7 STDBenzoic Acid <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDNaphthalene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chloroaniline <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobutadiene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD2-Methylnaphthalene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.6 STDHexachlorocyclopentadiene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2,4,5-Trichlorophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Chloronaphthalene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --2-Nitroaniline <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD *Acenaphthylene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDimethyl Phthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.4 STD *2,6-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVAcenaphthene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD3-Nitroaniline <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 STD




Sample ID. MW - 19D MW - 20 MW - 21 MW - 22 MW - 23 MW - 24D NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 009 011 013 001 015 025 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L2,4-Dinitrophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 --Dibenzofuran <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 STD2,4-Dinitrotoluene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Nitrophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDFluorene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GV4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDDiethyl Phthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Nitroaniline <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDN-Nitrosodiphenylamine <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDHexachlorobenzene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 50 GVPentachlorophenol <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDPhenanthrene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDAnthracene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDCarbazole <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDDi-n-butylphthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDFluoranthene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzidine <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDPyrene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDButyl Benzyl Phthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STD3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzo(a)anthracene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDChrysene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDbis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDDi-n-octyl phthalate <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDIndeno (1,2,3-cd)Pyrene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzo(b)fluoranthene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzo(k)fluoranthene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 3 STDBenzo(a)pyrene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.04 STDDibenzo(a,h)Anthracene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 STDBenzo (g,h,i) perylene <5.0 NS <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 0.5 STD*- Total Phenols(a) <5.0: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit of 5.0 ug/Kg STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)



TABLE 11. MONITORING WELLS - PRIORITY POLLUTANT METALS MEASURED IN GROUNDWATER, JUNE 2008


Sample ID. MW - 1 MW - 2 MW - 3 MW - 4 MW - 5 MW - 6 MW - 7 MW - 8 MW - 9 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 017/018 011/012 027/028 021/022 019/020 023/024 009/010 005/006 003/004 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LPriority Pollutant Metals - Total Arsenic ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium 0.00645 ND ND ND 0.00932 ND ND ND 0.0173 0.05 STD Copper ND 0.00640 ND ND 0.00921 ND ND ND 0.00784 0.2 STD Lead ND 0.0226 0.0193 ND ND ND ND ND 0.0200 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium ND ND 0.0284 ND ND 0.0341 ND ND ND 0.0005 GV Zinc ND 0.0543 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0569 2 GV

Arsenic 0.0115 0.0186 0.0226 ND 0.0111 0.0282 ND 0.0130 ND 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Copper ND ND ND ND 0.00575 ND ND 0.0197 0.0251 0.2 STD Lead ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND ND 0.0208 ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium ND 0.0299 0.0270 ND ND 0.0328 ND ND ND 0.0005 GV Zinc ND 0.0776 0.0545 0.0524 ND 0.0602 0.0569 0.0765 0.0626 2 GVND: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Analyate above NYS Ground Water Standard or Guidance Value

Priority Pollutant Metals - Dissolved




Sample ID. MW - 10R MW - 12R MW - 13 MW - 14 MW - 15 MW - 16 MW - 17 MW - 18 MW - 19 NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 001/002 019/020 017/018 007/008 013/014 015/016 003/004 005/006 007 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/19/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LPriority Pollutant Metals - Total Arsenic ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND 0.00264 ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND 0.00212 ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium ND ND 0.0127 ND ND 0.0391 0.00948 M 0.00620 0.0144 M 0.05 STD Copper ND ND 0.00721 ND 0.0103 0.0301 0.00593 L 0.00818 0.0148 L 0.2 STD Lead ND ND 0.0142 ND 0.0424 0.0690 ND ND 0.0168 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND ND ND ND 0.0429 ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND ND 0.0213 ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium ND 0.0214 ND 0.0275 0.0405 0.0524 ND ND ND 0.0005 GV Zinc ND ND ND ND 0.0738 0.142 ND ND ND 2 GV

Arsenic ND ND ND 0.0163 0.0158 0.0227 ND ND 0.0270 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Copper ND ND ND ND ND 0.0225 ND ND ND 0.2 STD Lead ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND 0.0242 0.0280 ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium ND 0.0256 ND 0.0304 0.0467 0.0550 ND ND 0.0228 0.0005 GV Zinc ND ND 0.0712 0.0564 0.0578 0.130 ND 0.0617 0.0605 2 GVND: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) M: Matrix Spike Recovery was Outside the Method Control LimitsL: Laboratory Control Sample Recovery was Above Method Control Limits






Sample ID. MW - 19D MW - 20 MW - 21 MW - 22 MW - 23 MW - 24D NY STATE CLASS GALab Sample Number 009/010 011/012 013/014 001/002 015/016 025/026 GROUNDWATERDate Collected 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/18/2008 6/19/2008 STANDARDS/GUIDANCEUnits mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LPriority Pollutant Metals - Total Arsenic ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium ND ND 0.0102 0.0121 M ND ND 0.05 STD Copper ND 0.00659 L 0.00556 0.00859 L ND ND 0.2 STD Lead ND ND 0.0135 ND ND 0.0105 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND 0.0492 ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium ND ND 0.0279 ND 0.0311 ND 0.0005 GV Zinc ND ND 0.0773 ND ND ND 2 GV

Arsenic 0.0146 0.0121 0.0204 0.0179 0.0142 0.0123 0.025 STD Antimony ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 STD Beryllium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.003 GV Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.005 STD Chromium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Copper ND ND 0.00802 ND ND ND 0.2 STD Lead ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.025 STD Mercury ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0007 STD Nickel ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.1 STD Silver ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 STD Selenium ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 STD Thallium 0.0200 0.0219 0.0311 0.0291 0.0316 0.0229 0.0005 GV Zinc 0.0560 0.0624 0.0824 0.0683 0.0754 ND 2 GVND: Compound not detected above the Practical Quantitation Limit STD: New York State Ambient Groundwater Quality Standard; NYCRR Title 6, Chapter X, Part 700-705GV: New York State Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations, TOGS 1.1.1J: Estimated value. Analyte detected at a level less than the Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) and greater than or equal to the Method Detection Limit (MDL) M: Matrix Spike Recovery was Outside the Method Control LimitsL: Laboratory Control Sample Recovery was Above Method Control Limits




TABLE 12 SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) DETECTED IN SOIL VAPOR AND SUB-SLAB VAPOR SAMPLES

Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger Avenue

Inwood, New York

Sample ID Sub Slab Vapor 1 Sub Slab Vapor 2 Sub Slab Vapor 3 Sub Slab Vapor 4 Sub Slab Vapor 5Lab ID 722395 722396 722397 722398 722399Sampling Date 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007Matrix Air Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor OutdoorVOCs - Compound NameAcetone ND 360 ND 55 ND NA 115 30 98.9 43.7 45.8 19.6Benzene ND 4.2 2.1 ND ND NA 13 4.8 9.4 6.6 10 5.16Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoethene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoform ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromomethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 1.7 1.6 NA NA1, 3 - Butadiene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3 3.4 NA NA2 - Butanone (MEK) ND 240 ND 18 120 NA 16 0.5 12 11.3 NA NACarbon Disulfide ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 4.2 3.7 NA NACarbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.3 1.2 <1.3 0.7 1.1 1Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.9 <0.8 NA NAChloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.1 <1.2 NA NAChloroform ND ND ND 1.5 ND NA 1.2 0.5 1.1 0.6 6.34 0.76Chloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 4.2 4.3 3.7 3.7 NA NA3-Chloropropene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NACyclohexane ND ND ND ND ND NA 6.3 0.9 NA NA NA NADibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dibromoethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <1.3 <1.2 NA NA1,3 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <2.4 <2.2 NA NA1,4 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.2 344 3.66Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 16.5 8.1 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.7 <0.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <0.9 <0.8 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.4 <1.4 NA NA1,2-Dicholoroethene (total) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAcis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.2 NA NAtrans- 1, 2 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.6 <1.6 NA NACis-1,3-Dichloropropene (total) ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.2 NA NA

1,2 - Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (Freon 114) ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.5 NA NA NA NA1,4-Dioxane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene 370 20 15 3.5 29 NA 6.4 1 5.7 3.5 7.62 3.044- Ethyltoluene 1,100 210 150 59 460 NA NA NA 3.6 3 NA NAn-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND NA 18 4.5 NA NA NA NAHexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 6.8 6.4 NA NAn-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND NA 14 2.2 10.2 6.4 NA NAIsopropyl Alcohol ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethylene Chloride ND ND ND ND ND 60 16 1.6 10 6.1 7.5 2.46

NYSDOH Air Guideline

Values (ug/m3)

NYSDOH Fuel Oil 2003 Upper Fence Limit (ug/m3) (1)

USEPA BASE Data 90% Percentile

Value (ug/m3) (1)

HEI RIOPA 2005 95% Percentile

Value (ug/m3) (1)


TABLE 12 SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) DETECTED IN SOIL VAPOR AND SUB-SLAB VAPOR SAMPLES

Brownfield Remedial Investigation175 Roger Avenue

Inwood, New York

Sample ID Sub Slab Vapor 1 Sub Slab Vapor 2 Sub Slab Vapor 3 Sub Slab Vapor 4 Sub Slab Vapor 5Lab ID 722395 722396 722397 722398 722399Sampling Date 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 8/30/2007Matrix Air Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)

Methyl Butyl Ketone ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethyl Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) ND 17 ND 2.6 ND NA 1.9 0.5 NA NA NA NAMethyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) ND 9.4 ND ND ND NA 14 NA 11.5 6.2 36 22.1Styrene 27 ND ND ND ND NA 1.4 0.5 1.9 1.3 5.13 1.29Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA NATetrachloroethylene (PCE) 4,300 1,200 420 8.8 4,100 100 2.5 0.7 15.9 6.5 6.01 3.17Tetrahydrofuran ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.8 0.4 NA NA NA NAToluene 100 34 26 4.5 41 NA 57 5.1 43 33.7 39 NATrans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 1.3 1.4 NA NA1,2,4 -Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 6.8 6.4 NA NA1,1,1 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 2.5 0.6 20.6 2.6 NA NA1,1,2 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.6 NA NA1, 1, 2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113, Freon TF) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3.5 1.6 NA NATrichloroethene (TCE) 54 ND 9.1 ND 44 5 0.5 0.4 4.2 1.3 1.36 0.79Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 18.1 4.3 NA NA1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 1,300 450 270 140 1,200 NA 9.8 1.9 9.5 5.8 NA NA1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 590 170 120 54 470 NA 3.9 0.7 3.7 2.7 NA NA2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAVinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.8 NA NAXylene (m,p) 1,700 100 78 20 150 NA 11 1 22.2 12.8 22.2 10Xylene (o) 870 33 23 6.5 61 NA 7.1 1.5 7.9 4.6 7.24 3.23

Note:ug/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter of airND - Analyte not detected at reporting limitNA - Not Available(1) - As per Appendix C of the Final NYSDOH Guidance document.Shading - Concentration Exceeds NYSDOH Air Guideline Value (AGV)Bold - Concentration Detected Above Reporting LimitUnderline - Concentration Exceeds NYSDOH Background Levels. BASE - building assessment and survey evaluationHEI RIOPA - Health Effect Institute: Relationship of Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air (personal exposure)NYSDOH Fuel Oil - Data collected from homes heated by fuel oil


TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) DETECTED IN SOIL VAPOR AND SUB-SLAB VAPOR SAMPLES


Sample ID Soil Vapor 1 Soil Vapor 2 Soil Vapor 3 Soil Vapor 4 Soil Vapor 5

Lab ID 722390 722391 722392 722393 722394Sampling Date 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007Matrix Air Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor OutdoorVOCs - Compound NameAcetone ND ND 1300 1400 16 NA 115 30 98.9 43.7 45.8 19.6Benzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 13 4.8 9.4 6.6 10 5.16Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoethene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoform ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromomethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 1.7 1.6 NA NA1, 3 - Butadiene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3 3.4 NA NA2 - Butanone (MEK) ND ND ND 59 2.1 NA 16 0.5 12 11.3 NA NACarbon Disulfide ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 4.2 3.7 NA NACarbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.3 1.2 <1.3 0.7 1.1 1Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.9 <0.8 NA NAChloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.1 <1.2 NA NAChloroform ND ND ND ND 1.1 NA 1.2 0.5 1.1 0.6 6.34 0.76Chloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 4.2 4.3 3.7 3.7 NA NA3-Chloropropene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NACyclohexane ND ND ND ND ND NA 6.3 0.9 NA NA NA NADibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dibromoethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <1.3 <1.2 NA NA1,3 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <2.4 <2.2 NA NA1,4 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.2 344 3.66Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 16.5 8.1 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.7 <0.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <0.9 <0.8 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.4 <1.4 NA NA1,2-Dicholoroethene (total) ND ND ND ND 3.6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NAcis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND 3.6 NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.2 NA NAtrans- 1, 2 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.6 <1.6 NA NACis-1,3-Dichloropropene (total) ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.2 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (Freon 114)

ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.5 NA NA NA NA1,4-Dioxane ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene ND ND ND ND 2.7 NA 6.4 1 5.7 3.5 7.62 3.044- Ethyltoluene 23 ND ND ND 9.3 NA NA NA 3.6 3 NA NAn-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND NA 18 4.5 NA NA NA NAHexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 6.8 6.4 NA NAn-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND NA 14 2.2 10.2 6.4 NA NAIsopropyl Alcohol ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethylene Chloride ND ND ND ND ND 60 16 1.6 10 6.1 7.5 2.46


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)




Sample ID Soil Vapor 1 Soil Vapor 2 Soil Vapor 3 Soil Vapor 4 Soil Vapor 5

Lab ID 722390 722391 722392 722393 722394Sampling Date 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007Matrix Air Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)

Methyl Butyl Ketone ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethyl Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.9 0.5 NA NA NA NAMethyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) ND ND ND ND ND NA 14 NA 11.5 6.2 36 22.1Styrene ND ND ND ND ND NA 1.4 0.5 1.9 1.3 5.13 1.29Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) ND ND 610 330 ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA NATetrachloroethylene (PCE) 2,600 8,100 ND ND 18 100 2.5 0.7 15.9 6.5 6.01 3.17Tetrahydrofuran ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.8 0.4 NA NA NA NAToluene ND ND ND ND 4.9 NA 57 5.1 43 33.7 39 NATrans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 1.3 1.4 NA NA1,2,4 -Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 6.8 6.4 NA NA1,1,1 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 2.5 0.6 20.6 2.6 NA NA1,1,2 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.6 NA NA1, 1, 2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113, Freon TF) ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3.5 1.6 NA NATrichloroethene (TCE) 59 170 ND ND 0.91 5 0.5 0.4 4.2 1.3 1.36 0.79Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) ND ND ND 21 2.6 NA NA NA 18.1 4.3 NA NA1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 79 ND ND ND 14 NA 9.8 1.9 9.5 5.8 NA NA1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 25 ND ND ND 3.3 NA 3.9 0.7 3.7 2.7 NA NA2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ND ND ND ND 3.3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NAVinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.8 NA NAXylene (m,p) ND ND ND ND 11 NA 11 1 22.2 12.8 22.2 10Xylene (o) ND ND ND ND 4 NA 7.1 1.5 7.9 4.6 7.24 3.23





Sample ID Soil Vapor 6 Soil Vapor 7 Soil Vapor 8 Soil Vapor 9Lab ID 757581 757582 757583 757584Sampling Date 6/24/2008 6/24/2008 6/24/2008 6/24/2008Matrix Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor OutdoorVOCs - Compound NameAcetone 69 ND 24 150 NA 115 30 98.9 43.7 45.8 19.6Benzene 3.5 ND 2.1 ND NA 13 4.8 9.4 6.6 10 5.16Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoethene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoform ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromomethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 1.7 1.6 NA NA1, 3 - Butadiene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3 3.4 NA NA2 - Butanone (MEK) 8.6 ND 3.5 12 NA 16 0.5 12 11.3 NA NACarbon Disulfide ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 4.2 3.7 NA NACarbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND NA 1.3 1.2 <1.3 0.7 1.1 1Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.9 <0.8 NA NAChloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.1 <1.2 NA NAChloroform ND 5.4 1.3 46 NA 1.2 0.5 1.1 0.6 6.34 0.76Chloromethane ND ND 1.6 ND NA 4.2 4.3 3.7 3.7 NA NA3-Chloropropene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NACyclohexane ND ND 1.4 ND NA 6.3 0.9 NA NA NA NADibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dibromoethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <1.3 <1.2 NA NA1,3 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <2.4 <2.2 NA NA1,4 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.2 344 3.66Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 16.5 8.1 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.7 <0.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <0.9 <0.8 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.4 <1.4 NA NA1,2-Dicholoroethene (total) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAcis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.2 NA NAtrans- 1, 2 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.6 <1.6 NA NACis-1,3-Dichloropropene (total) ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.2 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (Freon 114)

ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.5 NA NA NA NA1,4-Dioxane ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene 30 28 24 ND NA 6.4 1 5.7 3.5 7.62 3.044- Ethyltoluene 98 130 88 ND NA NA NA 3.6 3 NA NAn-Heptane 9.8 3.8 5.3 ND NA 18 4.5 NA NA NA NAHexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 6.8 6.4 NA NA


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)




Sample ID Soil Vapor 6 Soil Vapor 7 Soil Vapor 8 Soil Vapor 9Lab ID 757581 757582 757583 757584Sampling Date 6/24/2008 6/24/2008 6/24/2008 6/24/2008Matrix Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)

n-Hexane 11 ND 4.9 ND NA 14 2.2 10.2 6.4 NA NAIsopropyl Alcohol ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethylene Chloride ND ND ND ND 60 16 1.6 10 6.1 7.5 2.46Methyl Butyl Ketone ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethyl Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) ND ND ND ND NA 1.9 0.5 NA NA NA NAMethyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) ND ND ND ND NA 14 NA 11.5 6.2 36 22.1Styrene ND 3.4 2.7 ND NA 1.4 0.5 1.9 1.3 5.13 1.29Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA NATetrachloroethylene (PCE) 1,100 600 260 1,200 100 2.5 0.7 15.9 6.5 6.01 3.17Tetrahydrofuran ND ND ND ND NA 0.8 0.4 NA NA NA NAToluene 75 53 57 4.5 NA 57 5.1 43 33.7 39 NATrans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 1.3 1.4 NA NA1,2,4 -Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 6.8 6.4 NA NA1,1,1 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND 490 NA 2.5 0.6 20.6 2.6 NA NA1,1,2 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.6 NA NA1, 1, 2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113, Freon TF) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3.5 1.6 NA NATrichloroethene (TCE) ND ND ND ND 5 0.5 0.4 4.2 1.3 1.36 0.79Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) ND 3.3 1.3 ND NA NA NA 18.1 4.3 NA NA1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 140 180 120 9.8 NA 9.8 1.9 9.5 5.8 NA NA1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 37 38 35 ND NA 3.9 0.7 3.7 2.7 NA NA2,2,4-Trimethylpentane 8.9 2.8 4.7 ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAVinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.8 NA NAXylene (m,p) 130 140 110 ND NA 11 1 22.2 12.8 22.2 10Xylene (o) 43 42 33 4.8 NA 7.1 1.5 7.9 4.6 7.24 3.23



TABLE 13SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) DETECTED IN INDOOR AIR AND OUTDOOR AIR SAMPLES


Sample ID Inside Air 1 Inside Air 2 Outside Air 1 Trip Blank 1

Lab ID 722387 722388 722389 722400Sampling Date 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007Matrix Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor OutdoorVOCs - Compound NameAcetone ND ND ND ND NA 115 30 98.9 43.7 45.8 19.6Benzene 0.89 0.80 0.48 ND NA 13 4.8 9.4 6.6 10 5.16Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoethene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromoform ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NABromomethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 1.7 1.6 NA NA1, 3 - Butadiene 0.24 0.18 ND ND NA NA NA 3 3.4 NA NA2 - Butanone (MEK) ND ND ND ND NA 16 0.5 12 11.3 NA NACarbon Disulfide ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 4.2 3.7 NA NACarbon tetrachloride 0.45 0.43 0.39 ND NA 1.3 1.2 <1.3 0.7 1.1 1Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.9 <0.8 NA NAChloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.1 <1.2 NA NAChloroform 0.25 0.24 ND ND NA 1.2 0.5 1.1 0.6 6.34 0.76Chloromethane ND ND ND ND NA 4.2 4.3 3.7 3.7 NA NA3-Chloropropene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NACyclohexane 0.38 0.31 0.21 ND NA 6.3 0.9 NA NA NA NADibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dibromoethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <1.3 <1.2 NA NA1,3 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 <2.4 <2.2 NA NA1,4 - Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.2 344 3.66Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 2.3 2.3 2.2 ND NA NA NA 16.5 8.1 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 NA <0.7 <0.6 NA NA1,2 - Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <0.9 <0.8 NA NA1,1 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.4 <1.4 NA NA1,2-Dicholoroethene (total) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAcis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.2 NA NAtrans- 1, 2 - Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,2 - Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.6 <1.6 NA NACis-1,3-Dichloropropene (total) ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.2 NA NA1,2 - Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (Freon 114) ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.5 NA NA NA NA1,4-Dioxane ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene 1.1 0.83 0.36 ND NA 6.4 1 5.7 3.5 7.62 3.044- Ethyltoluene 1.2 0.59 0.26 ND NA NA NA 3.6 3 NA NAn-Heptane 1.3 0.86 0.57 ND NA 18 4.5 NA NA NA NAHexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.5 6.8 6.4 NA NAn-Hexane 3.1 1.7 0.81 ND NA 14 2.2 10.2 6.4 NA NAIsopropyl Alcohol ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)


TABLE 13SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCs) DETECTED IN INDOOR AIR AND OUTDOOR AIR SAMPLES


Sample ID Inside Air 1 Inside Air 2 Outside Air 1 Trip Blank 1

Lab ID 722387 722388 722389 722400Sampling Date 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007 8/29/2007Matrix Air Air Air AirUnit ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor


Values (ug/m3)



Value (ug/m3) (1)


Value (ug/m3) (1)

Methylene Chloride 6.6 3.8 ND ND 60 16 1.6 10 6.1 7.5 2.46Methyl Butyl Ketone ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMethyl Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) ND ND ND ND NA 1.9 0.5 NA NA NA NAMethyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) ND ND ND ND NA 14 NA 11.5 6.2 36 22.1Styrene ND ND ND ND NA 1.4 0.5 1.9 1.3 5.13 1.29Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 NA NA NA NATetrachloroethylene (PCE) 5.4 ND ND ND 100 2.5 0.7 15.9 6.5 6.01 3.17Tetrahydrofuran ND ND ND ND NA 0.8 0.4 NA NA NA NAToluene 4.9 3.8 1.7 ND NA 57 5.1 43 33.7 39 NATrans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 1.3 1.4 NA NA1,2,4 -Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND NA 0.5 0.4 6.8 6.4 NA NA1,1,1 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 2.5 0.6 20.6 2.6 NA NA1,1,2 - Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.6 NA NA1, 1, 2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113, Freon TF) ND ND ND ND NA NA NA 3.5 1.6 NA NATrichloroethene (TCE) 0.43 ND ND ND 5 0.5 0.4 4.2 1.3 1.36 0.79Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) 1.3 1.2 1.1 ND NA NA NA 18.1 4.3 NA NA1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND NA 9.8 1.9 9.5 5.8 NA NA1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 0.59 0.25 ND ND NA 3.9 0.7 3.7 2.7 NA NA2,2,4-Trimethylpentane 1.4 1.2 0.79 ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NAVinyl Chloride ND ND ND ND NA 0.4 0.4 <1.9 <1.8 NA NAXylene (m,p) 3.6 2.3 0.91 ND NA 11 1 22.2 12.8 22.2 10Xylene (o) 1.3 0.78 0.36 ND NA 7.1 1.5 7.9 4.6 7.24 3.23

Note:ug/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter of airND - Analyte not detected at reporting limitNA - Not Available(1) - As per Appendix C of the Final NYSDOH Guidance document.Bold - Concentration Detected Above Reporting LimitBASE - building assessment and survey evaluationHEI RIOPA - Health Effect Institute: Relationship of Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air (personal exposure)NYSDOH Fuel Oil - Data collected from homes heated by fuel oil


TABLE 14. SCREENING OF SOIL REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES

175 Roger AvenueInwood, New York

GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY

TYPE PROCESS OPTIONS DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVENESS IMPLEMENTABILITYSELECTION

STATUSNo Action None Not Applicable No Action Does not meet applicable regulatory

standards, guidance and criteria (SCGs). Potential for continued release of COCs

into groundwater

No implementation requirements Retain for Comparison


Soil COCs are allowed to naturally decrease through volatilization, biodegradation,

adsorption, and chemical reactions.

Long time frames may be required to achieve remediation objectives. Potential

for continued release of COCs into groundwater. COCs may migrate before

they are degraded Limited effectiveness if free product exists.

Relatively easy implementation. Will require installation of

monitoring wells

Eliminated

Institutional Controls

Covenants Deed Restrictions Restrictions and notifications placed on Site Deed

Does not meet applicable regulatory standards, guidance and criteria (SCGs) by

itself. May be used in combination with other options.

No implementation requirements Retained

Access Restrictions Fencing Physical barriers to prevent access to impacted soil

Does not meet applicable regulatory standards, guidance and criteria (SCGs) by

itself. May be used in combination with other options.

Relatively easy implementation. Will require installation fencing to

control Site access

Retained

Containment Capping Clay, soil, concrete, multimedia or asphalt

cap

Clay/soil, multimedia (soil and synthetic liner), concrete slab or asphalt cap to cover

impacted soil

Significately reduces potential for direct contact and surface water infiltration.

Most effective where contaminate is above the water table. It does not lessen the

toxicity or volume of source material. Thisoption does not prevent the horizontal flow

of ground water through the source zone and must be used in conjunction with

vertical walls to minimize horizontal flow and migration. Deep rooted vgetation must

be eliminated from the cap area. Precautions must be taken to assume that

the integrity of the cap is not compromised

Relatively easy implementation. Will require installation of new pavement and clean soil cap in

landscape areas.

Retained

Removal / Disposal

Excavation Conventional excavation

Contaminated material is removed and transported to permitted off-site treatment

and/or disposal facilities.

Complete soil removal above Commercial SCOs can be achieved. Depth limited by

shallow groundwater. Requires dust/vapor control

Moderately easy to implement for soil above the water table

Retained

On-Site Disposal Soil Reuse Excavated soil is reused on-Site Soil must be treated to meet SCGs prior to resuse. Suitable reuse option must be

available

Difficult to implement given redevelopment plans and timeline

for the Site

Eliminated

ATC Associates Inc.Page 1 of 4



GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSRemoval / Disposal

Off-Site Disposal Solid waste landfill or thermal destruction

Transportation to approved solid waste landfill or thermal treatment and reuse in

Asphalt Plant

Must meet applicable regulatory standards for disposal as non-hazardous waste and must be acceptable to disposal/recycling

facility

Moderately easy to implement. Nearest facility within 50 miles of

site.

Retained

Ex-Situ Treatment

Physicochemical Treatment (above

ground)

Chemical Treatment Mix impacted soil with water, organic solvents, surfactants, acids and/or bases to extract COCs. Soils return to the Site after

having met applicable standards

Effective for all COCs. Excavated soil and generated waste must be separated. Higher

clay content may reduce extraction efficiency and require longer contact times. Requires on-Site utilities. Capital costs can

be relatively high.


for the Site

Eliminated

Chemical Oxidation Oxidation (Redox) reactions chemically convert hazardous contaminants to

nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile, and/or inert. The

oxidizing agents most commonly used for treatment of hazardous contaminants are

ozone, hydrogen peroxide, permanganate and persulfate.

Effective for organic COCs, but pilot testing necessary to determine appropriate chemical application rates and retention

times. Incomplete oxidation/reduction mayresult in undesirable intermediates. Soil must be processed and handled above

ground.


for the Site

Eliminated

Stabilization / solidification

Contaminants are physically bound or enclosed within a stabilized mass

(solidification), or chemical reactions are induced between the stabilizing agent and

contaminants to reduce their mobility (stabilization). Common

solidification/stabilization agents include molten bitumen, asphalt emulsions,

polyethylene binders, portland cement and molten glass.

May increase waste volume and organics are generally not immobilized.

Environmental conditions may affect the long-term immobilization of contaminants


for the Site

Eliminated

Thermal Treatment Low Temperature Thermal Treatment

Low-temperature heating and agitation to volatilize COCs coupled with collection and

treatment of gases and condensate.

Generally effective for petroleum hydrocarbons. Requries large treatment volumes to be cost effective and on-Site

utilities. Soil must be processed and handled above ground


for the Site

Eliminated

Incineration Combustion at high temperatures in a rotary kiln incinerator or circulating bed combustor

Effective for petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbons. Requries large treatment volumes to be cost effective and on-Site

utilities. Soil must be processed and handled above ground


for the Site

Eliminated




GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSEx-Situ

TreatmentBiological Treatment Biopiles Excavated soils are mixed with soil

amendments and placed in aboveground enclosures. It is an aerated static pile

composting process in which compost is formed into piles and aerated with blowers or

vacuum pumps

Effective for petroleum hydrocarbons. Excavation of contaminated soils is

required. Potential long-term storage of soil piles on-Site. Questionable

effectiveness for halogenated compounds.


for the Site

Eliminated

In-Situ Treatment

Physicochemical Treatment

Soil Vapor Extraction Vacuum is applied through extraction wells to create a pressure/concentration gradient

that induces volatiles to be removed from soilthrough extraction wells.

Generally effective for volatile organic compounds. Fine textured soil generally require higher vacuums. Not effective in

the saturated zone. Not effective for heavy oils and metals. May require some type of

off-gas treatment. Requires on-Site utilitiesand infastructure

Moderately easy to implement if present site building demolished andinstalled prior to installation of any

new structure. Will require installation of extraction wells,

subsurface piping and above-ground structures. Electric utility required.

Retained

Soil Flushing An extraction fluid, usually containing a surfactant, is passed through in-place soils using an injection or infiltration process.

Extraction fluids are then recovered from the underlying aquifer.

Generally effective for all COCs. Requires installation of extraction wells.

Aboveground separation and treatment for recovered fluids increase the cost of the process. This technology should be used only where flushed contaminants and soil

flushing fluid can be contained and recaptured.


for the Site

Eliminated

Chemical Oxidation Oxidation (Redox) reactions chemically convert hazardous contaminants to

nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile, and/or inert. The

oxidizing agents most commonly used for treatment of hazardous contaminants are


Generally effective for organic COCs. Requires handling large quantities of

hazardous oxidizing chemicals. Some COCs are resistant to oxidation.

Undesirable by-products may be formed. May not be effective in the presence of free

product.

Moderate implmentability depending on final redevelopment

plans and timeline.

Eliminated

Stabilization / solidification

Contaminants are physically bound or enclosed within a stabilized mass

(solidification), or chemical reactions are induced between the stabilizing agent and

contaminants to reduce their mobility (stabilization). An auger with spray

attachment mixes common solidification/stabilization agents, such as, asphalt emulsions, polyethylene binders,

portland cement and fly ash, with the soil.

May increase waste volume and organics are generally not immobilized.

Environmental conditions may affect the long-term immobilization of contaminants


for the Site

Eliminated




GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSIn-Situ

TreatmentThermal Treatment In-Situ Thermal

TreatmentSteam/hot air injection or electrical

resistance/electromagnetic/fiber optic/radio frequency heating is used to increase the

volatilization rate of organics and facilitate extraction.

Effective for volatile and sem-volatile organic compounds. Must be coupled with

the installation of a soil vapor extraction system. Low soil permeability and high

moisture content limit effectiveness. May require off-gas treatement

Difficult to implement. Requries significant infastructure. Water and

electric utilities necessary.

Eliminated

Biological Treatment Bioventing Oxygen is delivered to contaminated unsaturated soils by forced air movement

(either extraction or injection of air) to increase oxygen concentrations and stimulate

biodegradation.

Effective for petroleum hydrocarbons and nonchlorinated solvents. Shallow water

table and/or low permeability soils reduce performance. Vapors can build up in

basements within the radius of influence of air injection wells. Not effective with

chlorinated solvents.

Moderately easy to implement if present site building demolished andinstalled prior to installation of any

new structure. Will require installation of extraction wells,

subsurface piping and above-ground structures. Electric utility required.

Eliminated

Enhanced Bioremediation

The activity of naturally occurring microbes is stimulated by circulating water-based solutions through contaminated soils to

enhance in situ biological degradation of organic contaminants or immobilization of

inorganic contaminants. Nutrients, oxygen, orother amendments may be used to enhance bioremediation and contaminant desorption

from subsurface materials

Potentially effective for the removal of petroleum hydrocarbons. The circulation of water-based solutions through the soil may increase contaminant mobility and

necessitate treatment of underlying ground water. Preferential flow paths may develop

that decreases contact between injected fluids and contaminants. A treatment

system, such as air stripping or carbon adsorption, may be required to treat

extracted groundwater prior to re-injection or disposal.


for the Site

Eliminated

Phytoremediation Trees/vegetation is used to remove, transfer, stabilize, and destroy contaminants in soil

and sediment.

Potentially effective for all COCs. Requires the planting, growth and

maintenance of vegetation. The depth of the treatment zone is ususally limited to shallow soils. Effectiveness is limited at

night and during fall/winter season. Presence of free product may be toxic to

plants.


for the Site

Eliminated

(a) COC: Chemicals of Concern


TABLE 15. SCREENING OF GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES


GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSNo Action None Not Applicable No Action Does not meet applicable regulatory standards,

guidance and criteria (SCGs). Use as baseline for comparison with other alternatives

No implementation requirements

Retain for Comparison


Groundwater COCs are allowed to naturally decrease through dispersion, diffusion,

adsorption and/or biodegradation.

Long time frames may be required to achieve remediation objectives. May be used in

combination with other alternatives for low COC concentrations following active

remediation of 'hot spots".

Relatively easy implementation. Will require installation of

monitoring wells

Retained

Institutional Controls

Covenants Deed Restrictions Restrictions placed on Deed for on-Site groundwater use.

Does not meet applicable regulatory standards, guidance and criteria (SCGs) by itself. May be

used in combination with other options.

No implementation requirements

Retained

Ex-Situ Treatment

Extraction Groundwater Extraction

A series of vertical wellpoints to extract impacted groundwater. For low permeability

soils may apply high vaccum enhanced recovery of groundwater. May be used for

plume containment.

Effective for COCs that are miscible and move readily with water in aquifer. Long time may be necessary to achieve remedial goals. Not

applicable to contaminants with high sorption capabilities, and homogeneous aquifers with hydraulic conductivity less than 10-5 cm/sec.

Cost of installing and operating extraction systems is high. Biofouling of the extraction wells and associated treatment stream can

severely affect system performance.

Moderate implmentability depending on final redevelop plans

and timeline. Will require installation of extraction wells, underground piping and above-

ground structures. Electric utility required

Retained

Disposal Discharge to surface water

Extracted water discharged to Jamaica Bay with treatment

Common method to dispose of treated water. Must meet surface water discharge

requirements

Depends on SPDES permit requirements

Retained

Reinjection on-Site Extracted water is reinjected into the shallow aquifer after treatment

Requires permeable soil for reinjection. Requries reinjection gallery upgradient of

contaminant plume

Depends on SPDES permit requirements

Eliminated

POTW Extracted water discharged to the local POTW

Requires acceptance of treated water by POTW. Discharge rate generally limited

Depends on permit requirements Eliminated

Treatment Air Stripping Volatile organics are partitioned from extracted ground water by increasing the surface area of the contaminated water

exposed to air. Aeration methods include packed towers, diffused aeration, tray

aeration, and spray aeration.

Effective in removing VOCs from water (Henry's law constant > 0.01 m3/mol). Not

applicable for inorganic contaminants.

Relatively easy implementation. Will require above-ground

structure and may require off-gas treatment. Electric utility required.

Retained




GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSEx-Situ

TreatmentTreatment Granulated Activated

CarbonGround water is pumped through one or morevessels containing activated carbon to which dissolved organic contaminants adsorb. Can be used as a polishing treatment when used in

combination with other technologies.

Effective in removing VOCs and SVOCs. Limited effectiveness may be achieved on

halogenated VOCs. Presence of suspended solids may cause fouling of the carbon and requires proper preteatment. Spent carbon

must be regenerated or disposed of in accordance with regulations. High

contaminant concentration significantly increases treatment costs. Highly Water-

soluble compounds and small molecules are not adsorbed well.

Relatively easy implementation. Will require above-ground

structure.

Retained

UV/Chemical Oxidation

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation, ozone, and/or hydrogen peroxide are used to destroy

organic contaminants as water flows into a treatment tank.

Effective in removing petroleum hydrocarbonsand chlorinated hydrocarbons. High turbidity

in the water will reduce the effectiveness of theprocess. Oxidation may not be complete,

generating more toxic compounds. Need to handle and store hazardous chemicals. High

operation and maintenance costs.

Moderately difficult to implement. Requires installation of above-ground structure and electric

utility.

Eliminated

Bioreactor Bioreactors degrade contaminants in water with microorganisms through attached or

suspended biological systems. In suspended growth systems, such as activated sludge or fluidized beds, ground water is circulated in

an aeration basin where a microbial population aerobically degrades the

contaminant. In attached growth systems, such as fixed film bioreactors or trickling

filters, microorganisms are established on an inert support matrix to aerobically degrade

water contaminants.

Effective in removing aerobically degradable organic compounds. Not applicable for

anaerobically degradable compounds. Low contaminant concentrations may require nutrient additions. High operation and

maintenace costs.

Moderately difficult to implement. Requires installation of above-ground structure and electric

utility.

Eliminated




GENERAL RESPONSE

ACTION

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY


STATUSIn-Situ Treatment Physicochemical

Treatment Chemical Oxidation Oxidation (Redox) reactions chemically

convert hazardous contaminants to nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that

are more stable, less mobile, and/or inert. Theoxidizing agents most commonly used for treatment of hazardous contaminants are


Effective with a wide range of Organic compounds. Requires handling large

quantities of hazardous oxidizing chemicals. Some COCs are resistant to oxidation.

Undesirable by-products may be formed. May not be effective in the presence of free product.

May result in colloid genesis leading to reduced permeability; mobilization of redox-

sensitive metals and evolution of heat and gas.

Relatively easy to implement depending on final redevelop plans

and timeline.

Retained

Air Sparging Air is injected into the groundwater to enhance the volatilization of contaminants. Ususally coupled with a vapor extraction

system to collect and treat vapors.

Effective in removing VOCs. Limited application in low permeable soils. Air flow

not uniform within the aquifer resulting in some areas being untreated.

Moderate implmentability depending on final redevelop plans

and timeline. Will require installation of extraction wells, underground piping and above-

ground structures. Electric utility required

Retained

Phytoremediation Trees/vegetation is used to remove, transfer, stabilize, and destroy contaminants in soil

and sediment.

Potentially effective for all COCs. Requires the planting, growth and maintenance of

vegetation. The depth of the treatment zone is ususally limited to shallow soils. Effectiveness

is limited at night and during fall/winter season. Presence of free product may be toxic

to plants.

Difficult to omplement given the redevelop plans and timeline for

the Site.

Eliminated

Enhanced Bioremediation

Enhanced reductive dechlorination involves the injection of biodegradable organic carbon into the groundwater. This creates anaerobic zones within the aquifer directing the natural

microorganisms to reduce chlorinated solvents to ethene and ethane.

Effective in reducing chlorinated organic compound concentrations. Requires injection of carbon source directly into the groundwater. Low aquifer permeability limits distribution of

carbon source. May take several months to years for significant contaminant reductions.

May result in the solubilization of metals. Incomplete reduction to ethene may occur.

Relatively easy to implement depending on final redevelop plans

and timeline.

Retained

(a) COC: Chemicals of Concern


TABLE 16. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOIL REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

ALTERNATIVE S1 No Action

ALTERNATIVE S2 Cover System / Remvoval of USTs / Drywell Closure

ALTERNATIVE S3 Removal of USTs / Drywell Cleanout /

Soil Vapor Extraction

ALTERNATIVE S4 Removal of USTs / Excavation

of Soil above Commercial SCOs / Drywell Cleanout

Overall ProtectivenessHuman Health Protection-

Direct Contact/Soil IngestionNo significant reduction in risk. RAOs would not be met

Reduces direct contact / soil ingestion risk; Soil vapor mitigation system will prevent vapor accumulation within buildings; RAOs may be met.

Reduces direct contact / soil ingestion risk; Soil vapor mitigation system will prevent vapor accumulation within buildings; RAOs may be met

Eliminates direct contact / soil ingestion risk; Soil vapor mitigation system will prevent vapor accumulation within buildings; RAOs would be met.

Environmental Protection Elevated COC levels will continue to leach into the groundwater

Reduces migration of COCs to the underlying groundwater.



Compliance with SCGsChemical Specific SCGs Will not meet

Commercial SCOs for soil or Protection of Groundwater SCOs for drywell sediment

Will not meet Commercial SCOs for soil or Protection of Groundwater SCOs for drywell sediment

Will meet Protection of Groundwater SCOs for drywell sediment. May not meet goals for Commercial SCOs in soil.

Will meet Commercial SCOs for soil and Protection of Groundwater SCOs for drywell sediment

Action Specific SCGs Not Applicable Will meet standards Will meet standards Will meet standards

Magnitude of Risk for Direct Contact / Soil Ingestion

Site RAOs would not be met. COCs would remain in the soil above standards

Risk is reduced Risk is reduced to eliminated Risk is eliminated

Effectiveness & Reliability of Controls

None Reliability is moderate since COCs remain above standards

Reliability is high to moderate since COCs may remain above standards in some areas of subsurface soil

Reliability is high since COCs above standards are removed

CRITERIA REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

Long-Term Effectiveness & Permanence

ATC Associates Inc.Page1 of 3









No action would be taken to reduce COC concentrations

No action would be taken to reduce COC concentrations. Cover system would reduce migration of COCs to the underlying groundwater.

Provides overall reduction of COCs in soil and sediment. Possible low level COCs remian in soil. SVE system not effective in removing COCs from near or below the water table.

Provides overall reduction of COCs in soil and sediment.

Community Protection No additional impact Low risk to community due to a slight increase in truck traffic and noise. Excavation may release dust and organic vapor to surrounding community. Engineering controls would be implement, if necessary, to minmize dust and vapors.

Low risk to community due to an increase in noise and release of dust and organic vapor to surrounding community. Engineering controls would be implement, if necessary, to minmize dust and vapors.

Low risk to community due to an increase in truck traffic and noise. Excavation activities may release dust and organic vapor to surrounding community. Engineering controls would be implement, if necessary, to minmize dust and vapors.

Worker ProtectionNo significant risk Compliance with Health &

Safety Plan requiredCompliance with Health & Safety Plan required

Compliance with Health & Safety Plan required

Ability to Construct and Operate

No action to implement Relatively easy to implement Relatively easy to implement and operate

Relatively easy to implement

Availability of Technologies None required Readily available Readily available Readily available

Availability of Equipment and Contractors

No action to implement Available locally. Installers of soil mitigation system available in tri-state area.

Available locally. Installers of soil mitigation system available in tri-state area.

Available locally. Installers of soil mitigation system available in tri-state area.

Ability to Obtain Approvals & Coordinate with other

Agencies

No approval necessary Readily available Readily available Readily available

Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume

Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts

Implementability










Relative cost considered "Low"

Relative cost considered "Moderate"

Relative cost considered "Moderate to High"

Relative cost considered "High"

Not consistent with future Site redevelopment

Consistent with future Site redevelopment. Cover system can easily be incorporated into Site redevelopment. Soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into new buildings

Consistent with future Site redevelopment. UST removal and SVE installation after building demolition and prior to new building construction. Soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into new buildings

Consistent with future Site redevelopment. UST removal and over excavation can be performed after building demolition and prior to new building construction. Soil vapor mitigation system can be readily designed into new buildings

COC - Chemical of ConcernRAO - Remedial Action ObjectiveSCGs - Standards, Criteria and Guidance

Cost

Land Use


TABLE 17. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GROUNDWATER REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

ALTERNATIVE W1 No Action

ALTERNATIVE W2 Monitored Natural

Attenuation / Institutional Controls

ALTERNATIVE W3 Groundwater Extraction /

Discharge to Surface Water / Aquifer Air Sparging / Soil

Vapor Extraction / Treatment / Institutional

Controls

ALTERNATIVE W4 In-Situ Chemical Oxidation /

Enhanced Aanaerobic Bioremediation / Institutional

Controls

Overall ProtectivenessHuman Health Protection-

Direct Contact/IngestionNo significant reduction in risk. Elevated levels of COCs will continue to threaten human health and migrate off-Site.

Reduces direct contact / ingestion risk; Maintance of institutional controls required to prevent contact and ingestion of impacted water; RAOs may be met.

Reduces COCs concentrations in the groundwater. Extracted groundwater and vapors would be treated prior to discharge. Institutional controls in place to prevent any other extraction and use of groundwater. RAOs would be met

Reduces COCs concentrations in the groundwater. Institutional controls in place to prevent extraction and use of groundwater. RAOs would be met

Environmental Protection Elevated COCs may continue to migrate off-Site

Elevated COCs may continue to migrate off-Site

Prevents migration of impacted groundwater off-Site.

Prevents migration of impacted groundwater off-Site.

Compliance with SCGsChemical Specific SCGs Will not meet groundwater

standards or guidance values in short-term. Will eventually meet standards, but length of time unknown.

Will not meet groundwater standards or guidance values in short-term. Will eventually meet standards, but length of time unknown.

Will reduce COC concentrations, but may not meet groundwater standards in a reasonable time-frame.

Will reduce COC mass in the suspected source area and will acclerated natural degradation of COCs to groundwater standards.

Action Specific SCGs Not Applicable Will meet standards Will meet standards Will meet standards

Magnitude of Risk for Direct Contact / Groundwater

IngestionSite RAOs would not be met. COCs would remain in the groundwater above standards and guidance values.

Site RAOs may be met by maintaining institutional controls. Over time groundwater standards would be met via natural attenuation.

Site RAOs would be met by maintaining institutional controls. Removal of COCs from the groundwater will help restore the aquifer to its "pre-disposal" condition.

Site RAOs would be met by maintaining institutional controls. Removal of COCs from the groundwater will help restore the aquifer to its "pre-disposal" condition.











Controls



Controls


Effectiveness & Reliability of Controls

None Reliability is moderate since COCs remain above standards

Reliability is high to moderate since COCs may remain above standards in the groundwater

Reliability is high to moderate since COCs may remain above standards in the groundwater

No action would be taken to reduce COC concentrations

Over time natural attenuation processes would result in a reduction in COC concentrations.

Provides overall reduction of COCs through treatment. Prevents migration of COCs off-Site.

Provides overall reduction of COCs through treatment. Prevents migration of COCs off-Site.

Community Protection No additional impact Minimal risk to community due to additional monitoring well installation and periodic sampling.

Low risk to community due to an increase in noise and release of dust and organic vapor to surrounding community. Engineering controls would be implement, if necessary, to minmize dust and vapors.

Low risk to community due to an increase in noise. Chemicals to be stored in an isolated secure area. Area of chemical oxidation is limited and potential organic vapor generation will be monitored. Engineering controls would be implement, if necessary, to minmize noise and vapors.

Worker ProtectionNo significant risk




Short-Term Effectiveness and Impacts

Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility and Volume










Controls



Controls


Ability to Construct and Operate

No action to implement Relatively easy to implement Relatively easy to implement and operate. Would likely occur after demolition of existing Site building and prior to any new building. Weekly Site visits requried for maintenance and system monitoring.

Relatively easy to implement and operate. Would likely occur after demolition of existing Site building and prior to any new building. Long life of electron donor reduces need for multiple injections and repeated Site visits. Pilot test would be required to properly size and layout the process. Periodic performance monitoring required.

Availability of Technologies None required Readily available Readily available Readily available

Availability of Equipment and Contractors

No action to implement Readily available Readily available Readily available

Ability to Obtain Approvals & Coordinate with other

Agencies

No approval necessary Readily available Readily available Readily available

Relative cost considered "Low"

Relative cost considered "Low - Moderate" depending on the length of time required for continued monitoring.

Relative cost considered "Moderate to High"

Relative cost considered "High"

Implementability

Cost

Implementability









Controls



Controls


Not consistent with future Site redevelopment

Consistent with future Site redevelopment. Long-term monitoring would be required.

May interfere with future Site redevelopment. Remedial construction likely to occur after building demolition and prior to new building construction and may delay Site redevelopment activity. Aboveground treatment buildings and/or provision within future Site buildings for groundwater and air treatment equipment and controls will be required.

Consistent with future Site redevelopment. Remedial construction likely to occur after building demolition and prior to new building construction and may delay Site redevelopment activity. Development delays may occur to accomidate chemical injections and provisions may be necessary to allow for re-injections along property line.

COC - Chemical of ConcernRAO - Remedial Action ObjectiveSCGs - Standards, Criteria and Guidance

Land Use



APPENDIX A

COMMUNITY AIR MONTORING PLAN


COMMUNITY AIR MONITORING PLAN

A Community Air Monitoring Plan (CAMP) requires real time monitoring for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulates (i.e. dust) at the downwind perimeter of each designated work area when certain activities are in progress at a contaminated Site. The CAMP is not intended for use in establishing action levels for worker respiratory protection. Rather, its intent is to provide a measure of protection for downwind receptors from airborne contaminant releases as a direct result of investigator and remedial work. The action levels specified herein require increased monitoring, corrective actions to abate emissions, and/or work shut down. Additionally, the CAMP helps to confirm that work activities do not spread contamination off-site through the air. All readings will be recorded and be available for NYSDEC and NYSDOH personnel to review. Real time air monitoring for VOCs and particulate levels will be required at the perimeter of the exclusion zone. Continuous monitoring will be required for all ground intrusive activities and during the demolition of contaminated or potentially contaminated structures. Ground intrusive activities include, but are not limited to, soil/waste excavation and handling, test pitting or trenching, and the installation of soil borings or monitoring wells. Periodic monitoring for VOCs will be required during non-intrusive activities such as the collection of soil and sediment samples or the collection of groundwater samples from existing monitoring wells. Periodic monitoring during sample collection might reasonably consist of taking a reading upon arrival at the Site, monitoring while collecting the samples, and taking a reading upon leaving the Site. In some instances depending on the location of the sample point to sensitive receptors continuous monitoring may be required. Examples of such situations include groundwater sampling on curbs of a busy urban street, in the midst of a public park, or adjacent to a school or residence. VOCs must be monitored with at the downwind perimeter of the immediate work area on a continuous basis and recorded on a 15 minute increment electronically or in a field book. Upwind concentrations should be measured at the start of each work day and periodically thereafter to establish background conditions. The monitoring work will be conducted using a photoionization detector. The equipment will be calibrated daily. The equipment will be capable of calculating 15 minute running average concentrations, which will be compared to levels specified below:

• If the ambient air concentration of total VOCs at the downwind perimeter of the work area or 20 foot exclusion zone exceeds 5 parts per million (ppm) above background for the 15-minute average, work activities must be temporarily halted and monitoring continued. If the total VOC level readily decreases (per instantaneous readings) below 5 ppm over background, work activities can resume with continued monitoring.

• If total VOC levels at the downwind perimeter of the work area or exclusion zone persist at levels in excess of 5 ppm over background but less than 25 ppm, work activities must be halted, the source of the vapor identifies, corrective actions taken to abate emissions, and monitoring continued. After these steps, work activities can resume, provided that the total VOC level at the exclusion zone or half the distance to the nearest potential receptor, which ever is less, is below 25 ppm over background for the 15-minute average.

• If the VOC level is above 25 ppm at the perimeter of the work area, activities must be shut down.

• The Nassau County Department of Health and NYSDOH shall be notified within 24 hours of any discontinued work action as a result of VOC exceedances.


All 15-minute readings must be recorded and be available for State (DEC or DOH) personnel to review. Instantaneous readings, if any, used for decision purposes should also are recorded.

Particulate Monitoring, Response Levels and Actions

Particulate concentrations should be monitored continuously at the downwind perimeter of the 20 foot exclusion zone at a temporary particulate monitoring station. The particulate monitoring should be performed using real-time monitoring equipment capable of monitoring particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in size (PM-10) and capable of integrating over a period of 15 minutes (or less). Particulate measurements shall be recorded on a 15 minute increment electronically or in a field book. The equipment must be equipped with an audible alarm to indicate exceedance of the action level. In addition, fugitive dust migration should be visually assessed during all work activities.

• If the downwind PM-10 particulate level is 100 micrograms per cubic meter (mcg/m3) greater

than the background (upwind perimeter) for the 15-minute period or if airborne dust is observed leaving the work area or 20 foot exclusion zone, then dust suppression techniques must be employed. Work may continue with dust suppression techniques provided the downwind PM-10 particulate levels do not exceed 150 mcg/m3 above the upwind level and proved no visible dust is migrating from the work area.

• If, after implementation of dust suppression techniques, downwind PM-10 particulate levels are greater then 150 mcg/m3 above the upwind level, work must be stopped and a re-evaluation of activities initiated. Work can resume provided that dust suppression measures and other controls are successful in reducing the downwind PM-10 particulate concentrations to within 150 mcg/m3 of the upwind level and in preventing visible dust migration.

• The Nassau County Department of Health and NYSDOH shall be notified within 24 hours of any discontinued work action as a result of particulate exceedances.


APPENDIX B

SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM


1.0 SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM Elevated PCE and TCE concentrations were detected in previously collected sub-slab vapor samples beneath the existing Site building and in soil vapor samples collected near the Site boundaries and off-site to the south. Based on previous investigations at the Site, a chlorinated hydrocarbon groundwater plume is present beneath a large portion of the Site. The plume appears to extend beyond the Site boundaries towards the south-southeast and northwest. In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) of the potential source in the area and enhanced bioremediation of the chlorinated hydrocarbon groundwater plume via injection of electron donors is the selected remedy to treat impacted groundwater. Subsequent to the removal of USTs and over-excavation of soil above the Commercial SCOs, a 10,000 square foot area will be treated by injection of in-situ chemical oxidants to reduce remaining petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbon concentrations in the groundwater. Approximately 8 weeks following ISCO of the former UST area, injection of an electron donor will commence to enhance the natural biodegradation of the chlorinated hydrocarbons via reductive dechlorination. The electron donor will be injected in six linear barriers across the Site, perpendicular to the groundwater flow direction and in a grid pattern overlaying the ISCO area. Although the application of the selected in-situ chemical oxidant and electron donor is not anticipated to result in volatile organic compound (VOC) off-gassing, as a precaution, soil vapor samples will be collected prior to and after treatment. If there is a 150% increase in COPC vapor concentrations following treatment over the baseline concentrations and the measured vapor concentration are above NYSDOH guidance values, a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system will be installed. The SVE system will be installed along the Site boundaries, were appropriate, to prevent additional migration of VOC vapors off-site. 1.1 General System Components and Layout

The SVE system will include the following components: Horizontal Extraction Well - The extraction well will be placed within 3 feet of the Site boundary. The length of the extraction well will be dependent upon the extent of the area requiring mitigation. However, if the length of the extraction well is greater than 100 feet multiple screen intervals will be utilized, each connected to the blower via a separate run of blank pipe. The extraction well shall be constructed of 4-inch, 20-slot, Schedule 40 PVC well screen and will be placed approximately 3 feet below grade (approximately 2 feet above the existing water table). The well screen shall be backfilled with pea gravel or crushed stone from approximately 6-inches below the pipe invert to approximately 1-foot above the pipe. A 10-mil polyethylene vapor barrier will be placed on the backfill material to enhance lateral vacuum influence of the extraction well. The trench will be backfilled to grade with native material. Manifold Piping – The manifold piping connects the extraction well to the vacuum blower. The piping will be placed aboveground at the location of the equipment enclosure. The manifold will contain vacuum gauges, flow meter, sample port and control valves to regulate flow.


Vapor Pretreatment – To protect the vacuum blower, extracted vapors will be passed through a moisture separator and particulate filter prior to entering the blower. Vacuum Blower – A 2 to 3 HP vacuum blower is anticipated; however, the final blower design will be dependent upon a pilot test. Vapor Treatment – If pilot test results show chlorinated hydrocarbons above the New York State Department of Health air guidance values vapor treatment will be included in the system. Although dependent upon analyte concentrations measured in the extracted vapor, treatment is anticipated to be granular activated carbon. To prevent an air exceedance at least two carbon vessels will be utilized in series. 1.2 Operation, Maintenance and Monitoring The vacuum blower will operate continuously after start-up. All equipment will be operated in accordance with the manufactures recommendations. Any required repairs or maintenance of the system will be completed as per manufacturer’s recommendations and the system restarted. Monitoring will consist of flow-balancing, flow and vacuum measurements, and vapor concentration readings using a photoionization meter. Measurements will be taken at weekly intervals for the duration of the system operational period. Monthly effluent air samples will be collected for laboratory analysis. If air treatment is being provided, both pre- and post-treatment samples will be collected for analysis as well as an intermediate sample between carbon vessels to evaluate carbon usage. Each sample will be collected into a 1 to 6-liter SUMMA canister. Vapor samples shall be analyzed for volatile organic compounds in accordance with EPA Method TO-15, with a detection limit of 1.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). All SUMMA canisters used in the investigation will be certified clean by the laboratory and submitted to NYSDOH ELAP certified laboratory for analysis. Activated carbon will be replaced prior to breakthrough. Once the lead vessel shows breakthrough, the trailing carbon vessels will become the lead vessel and a new trailing carbon vessel will be installed. The used activated carbon will be recycled in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations. 1.3 System Shut Down The SVE system will be shut-down once the COPC soil vapor measurements return to pre-injection, baseline concentrations. The target, shut-down, concentrations will be defined as +/- 25% of the baseline concentrations measured prior to chemical injections and/or soil vapor concentrations below NYSDOH guidance values.

NYSDEC BROWNFIELD CLEANUP PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE … Plan.BCP.C130164.2010... · nysdec brownfield...

Documents

Transcript of NYSDEC BROWNFIELD CLEANUP PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE … Plan.BCP.C130164.2010... · nysdec brownfield...